I was just plumbing my memory and logic for when it was we moved from Cohasset to Winchester…probably 1951, because I know in Winchester I entered first grade in Wyman Elementary, and I would have been 7 in ‘51, which would have been 1st grade age. At any rate, the actual thing that started this train of thought was that along the path of childhood in those days, we were indoctrinated with the value of “individuality”. This was the American birthright, a major American value, and a goal for the American personality. And later in life, when I had an extended falling out with my parents, during my Marine Corps enlistment, and then later during my hippie period, there was NO DOUBT that I WAS an individual (in ways that ended up causing me miseries of various sorts, but that’s another story). Yes, friends, I WAS an individual. And to this very day, there’s a powerful drive within me, to PROVE, if you will, my individuality.

OK, so now we go on a sociological and philosophical ride, a ride which, typically, here on the blog, and for me in general, drifting in amorphous, unspecified and unverified visions of persecution (you talkin’ to me? who said? I didn’t do it!), has no particular conclusion, just vaguely related observations:

In my self-discovery studies over the years, especially during the time they became more specifically New Age, and shall we vaguely say, Hindu, the prevailing admonition was “unity”, which is the meaning of the word Yoga, and as a moral admonition, instructs us to to realize that we are all one “spirit”, joined by our humanity, and our residence on planet Earth. And so I have struggled to coordinate my “individuality” with “unity”. And quite often it has not been a happy union. “Unity” advises AGAINST “separation”, or the idea that I am DIFFERENT from others. Any differences in appearance, or membership, or opinion, or, even, egads, philosophy, or, EGADS, intelligence, that I assume as part of “me”, become an affront to “unity”. As my mother once said to me, in her anti-intellectual kind of way, “you’re not that different from everyone else”.

Now in one sense, you could call the above, rather than The Death of Individuality, the idea that Individuality Never Actually Existed.

But if you want EVIDENCE in support of my premise of The Death of Individuality, I offer the following: If you drive down the main street connected to a U.S. highway exit, right now, 2009, in, say, Alabama, and then, say, in Ohio, anywhere outside of a big city, or rural outpost, you will find no fewer than 10 to 15 stores in common, from gas stations to restaurants, to auto repairers. But if you had done the same thing in 1951, you might not have found even one in common. Yes, iconoclasts of the world, the takeover of our lives by big corporations is not just politically and economically significant, it is a major symptom of the death of individuality.

Somewhere around 1997, I once had a conversation with Joanne, whose last name I can’t remember, who was the Human Resources Manager at a Japanese bank I worked at in Los Angeles, which are facts of interest only to the truly metaphysically inclined. But of interest here now, and then there, is an idea that had been on my mind for a while (and I don’t remember saying it to anyone else ever, until here, now, on this blog, what you’re reading at this very moment, LOL) was that if women had been in charge, always, instead of men, the United States would have been a socialist country, not a democratic one, because women don’t really buy into the idea of individuality. Women are natural socialists. I’m not sure that’s true, but it sounds profound, so I thought I would add it here.

OK, that’s about it for now. Comments?

I watched President Obama on the David Letterman show last night, and went through the general train of thought that follows.

He kept explaining the status of things on health care and the economy, dumbing it down, just between you and me tone of voice, mixing the “hard cold reality” of present circumstances, with reports of improvements since “the crash”, and optimistic predictions for what he expects (his administration) to accomplish in the future. AND SO — I thought to myself, having recently realized that Obama has NOT done things that would REALLY reduce debt and mismanagement or establish comprehensive oversight where the economy is concerned, and he has apparently caved in to the pharmaceutical industry where health care is concerned — and so, what do I REALLY think?

And what I think, is, I imagine being President means never being able to tell the whole truth to all the people all the time. And, given that the left and the right, and other sides too, not only do not agree on the issues, but don’t even agree, in certain fundamental ways, on what constitutes fact and reality. So then you end up having to move forward with flawed and bastardized legislation. Yet, if the economy, and health care, and banking and housing all hold up in the near and mid-term future without crashing or turning on the players and users in each area, then he’s done what it once looked like couldn’t be done.

I keep thinking, hey, we got into Iraq and Afghanistan on false premises, from weapons of mass destruction to the idea that we could and needed to stamp out terrorist headquarter enclaves. AND, not only did we get into those “wars”, but have borrowed to the hilt from CHINA to finance them, adding untold percentage to the national debt. And since the debt is further jacked up by bailout money, then WOULDN’T IT MAKE SOME KIND OF FUCKING SENSE to at least stop the warmaking part of the bleeding. Don’t answer that, cause I’m not through yet.

I was amazed, as the financial crisis evolved, before, during and after the election, that we actually HAD, and could TALK ABOUT, TRILLIONS, that’s right, trillions of dollars, in terms of the size of the federal budget, in terms of available monies to put fixes in on some of these problems, and in terms of our ability to absorb debt in that amount without going bankrupt. The whole thing has shifted in my eyes in terms of pure mathematical “fathomability” if you will. I guess I assumed our national money was only on a lower billions level.

I read somewhere, and it made a lot of sense to me, that the reason we can’t get out of Iraq/Afghanistan is the “embarrassment” factor in terms of admitting that we were WRONG to make the assumptions we made, and WRONG to follow up on them. That once you go on a course of action of that scope, you can’t get out, even if you do realize you were wrong. This is pretty crazy to me, acting upon motivation that has been proved invalid.

I saw this documentary on TV not too long ago, about the status of roads, bridges, levees, energy grids, and other pieces of infrastructure in the U.S. and how behind we are, repairing and building these things. Which means that we have natural disasters such as bridges collapsing, levees failing, transportation of commerce suffering, energy grid failures, and so forth, also breathing down our necks. The scariest scenario was that an earthquake in the right part of San Francisco could knock out certain levees and waterways near San Francisco, which could then destroy the water supply for most of the state of California. Also, China is WAY ahead of us in the excellence of its infrastructure. And surely Obama and lots of other people are aware of the need for shoring up and improving infrastructure. And he did mention on Letterman that attending to certain pieces of this was big on his agenda.

And here of course you have to factor in the influence of the media on public dialogue, because infrastructure doesn’t “sell” for the media, while financial crisis and health care DO sell, which leads to people making noise about things way out of proportion to their actual importance within the total picture. This is something I DIDN’T see Obama mention.

OK, that’s it for now. Comments?

This recession began about a year after DEMOCRATS took control of the nations purse strings. Democrats won majorities in the Nov 2006 elections (with still 2 years of Bush to go), and the no-growth, anti-profit, anti-free market policies of Nancy Pelosi’s 110th Congress put us in this recession by December 2007.

Adding fuel to the recession, the chickens finally coming home to roost from the Carter era  Community Reinvestment Act,to Alan Greenspans loose money policy after 9/11 to, Fannie Mae, who came under pressure from the Clinton administration to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977.[10] Due to the increased ratio requirements, institutions in the primary mortgage market pressed Fannie Mae to ease credit requirements on the mortgages it was willing to purchase, enabling them to make loans to subprime borrowers at interest rates higher than conventional loans. Shareholders also pressured Fannie Mae to maintain its record profits.

In 2000, due to a re-assessment of the housing market by HUD, anti-predatory lending rules were put into place that disallowed risky, high-cost loans from being credited toward affordable housing goals. In 2004, these rules were dropped and high-risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals.All this added air to to the bubble that was ready to burst!

It’s funny how today’s financial malaise runs parallel to FDR’s New Deal. Free-spending Democratic policy back then was NEVER able to bring the unemployment rate under 14% for EIGHT WHOLE YEARS!!! WWII, not FDR and the Democrats, brought this country out of the Great Depression. The villians in this mess are the ones running the show. The muggers have been asked to “help” the victim. Barney Frank WHO FOUGHT ALL GOP ATTEMPTS TO REGULATE FANNIE & FREDDIE is making sure that people who can’t afford it STILL get loans. Health Care idiocy won’t tackle tort reform and over-regulation: the two biggest line items to health care (outside of a naturally-growing demographic of elderly people). Cap and tax, and the biggest tax hike in history are just around the corner. Want misery? Keep voting for Democrats!

President Richard M. Nixon discussed with Brazil’s president a cooperative effort to overthrow the government of Salvador Allende of Chile, according to recently declassified documents that reveal deep collaboration between the United States and Brazil in trying to root out leftists in Latin America during the cold war.

Here

If you haven’t seen this, attend.  An insider lays out how the medical insurance industry operates its PR divisions in order to paint a benevolent and caring picture of themselves while covertly spending multi-millions to obstruct and thwart any change to the status quo which might do damage to their bottom line.

And Potter on CNN… watch here

Paul Krugman (and others) have noted recent income inequality figures from  Emmanuel Saez at Berkeley.    Here is the historical perspective graphed…

Two major trends are immediately evident – downwards from the 20s and then upwards from the the mid-70s.  We know what brought the trend down from “the guilded age” but what brought it back up?

I’ve previously noted here Lewis Lapham’s essay “The Tentacles of Rage”. What Lapham describes in this essay matches yjod rise and does so far better than any particular individual or party holding the Presidency or the inititation of any particular policy or the establishment of or dismantling of any particular institution related to governance in the US.

Further, one can see quite clearly how what Lapham describes is presently in full bloom in the broad campaign underway to kill healthcare reform in the US and to bring down a President who likely will, if he is able, move the country back towards the sorts of regulations and perspectives which caused or facilitated the downward trend mentioned above.

I encourage everyone to read the essay with care and with attention to the correspondences between the timeline demonstrated in the graph and the correspondences between the thesis Lapham advances with what we have all experienced since the mid 70s and are still experiencing now.

role of Pharma

citizen participation, education, knowledge, influence

best solution vs. action per se

quantification? budget….health care as percentage of budget

primary care physician, doctor burnout

public debate/dialogue vs. reasoned and balanced discussion

way to understand, interpret and accurately evaluate NEED for health care change/overhaul/etc.

single payer defined

public option defined

positional and institutional (including business and pharma) position maintenance and advancement

racism, anti-semitism, nationalism movement as absorbed/embraced by opposition to health care

democracy, status quo, public opinion, power blocs, intellectual idealism

OK. Health Care……Ouch!

If any issue ever demonstrated the truth about Politics, The Economy, and American Culture, this is it. Some of the truths that are grossly obvious: campaign promises mean nothing (and have always meant nothing), special interests are in power, and most citizens and voters are a) not well-informed and b) don’t think clearly.

Now, I don’t say these things with any bitterness, recrimination, or intention to “correct”. Indeed, now I can accept what I have always seen, with a minimum of ambiguity. I mean, whatever ends up happening with health care, I can only guess what was at the center of the “disagreement”, and suggest a few points in the way of general understanding, including mine. Actually, as I discuss later, it’s oversight (AND understanding and DISCUSSION of “best” solutions) that is missing from any public dialogue. Finger-pointing, especially the kind that demeans the character and intentions of the opposition, is the enemy of progress. Even though that’s obvious, nonetheless it continues. I COULD get really pissed about that, but we’re all helpless in the face of it.

Now, for what it’s worth, I think that this blog gives me more influence in public dialogue than I had without it, and as much influence as is available to any non-activist, or to any non-”monied” citizen. Of course my blog right now is only a nanosecond away from total non-entity status and utter absence of influence, because I have no readers. Well now, wait a minute– apparently, certain WordPressers do scan WordPress blogs for key words and such, and seeing these key words or phrases, have given me the 146 hits I have had so far.

But let’s theorize as to a future, where the blog is open to the public, and, say, read by 200 people each day, and I have one or more political or economic posts per day. How much influence does that give me? Anyway, my heart is in philosophy and art.

As for now, my blog’s near anonymity is of my own doing. I could have “released” the blog to various “hounds”, such as friends and relatives. And I could marketed, networked and generally put my blog before multiple and sundry eyes, without raising too much of a sweat. But, the reason I haven’t done any of that is because I don’t think the blog is yet 1) sufficiently professional, 2) sufficiently developed and defined, and 3) sufficiently “firewalled” to protect my identity and cover my ass.

You needed to know that, right? LOL

At any rate, back to health care. Or is this about the blog? LOL

As I read things these days, the administration health care initiative looks likely to go down the tubes. AND, it seems there is new sentiment to the effect that we can’t afford any more major “stimulus” payouts right now. And if the latter turns out to be the accepted and controlling truth, that would be the perfect “bailout” for health care and its current players–shelter from the storm AND face-saving.

What this might say about Monsieur Obama, his campaign promises, his effectiveness, and the country’s prospects for the future, well, THAT’S certainly relevant. Then again, Clinton couldn’t handle health care, Bush didn’t try, and now Obama is stuck, so maybe the issue just can’t be handled. Maybe the public is just too polarized. My hopes that Obama’s would establish something like a bipartisan administration are long gone. And perhaps bipartisanism is just plain impossible right now, as mirrored in the health care debate.

In my previous post on this subject I suggested that establishing oversight “over” the whole health care system, was the key thing needed. And, funny, much high tone sounding rhetoric as I find on any side of the issue now, that’s one thing I DON’T see mentioned. The ones who speak to “alternative solutions”, push for “preventative” health care measures, dieting, nutrition and self-education, so that people don’t get as sick as much, can better deal with their own health “care”, and costs are reduced in this way. Which is something OTHER than oversight over the health care SYSTEM, but not completely irrelevant. And, he said quietly to himself, I wonder how we are doing with oversight over the American and World economies?

Hovering over the whole health care issue, like a voracious succubus, is the pharmaceutical conglomerate, controlling and even ratcheting up health costs through calculated misinformation and marketing within the medical community, encouraging and even paying doctors to prescribe pharmaceutical solutions to many patients who are questionable candidates for such solutions. And, the Pharmas then sit there and deadpan in response to anyone who dares to point out that in this way, they are coopting the medical community in developing medical policy, just to feed themselves. An interesting phenomenon in terms of how public dialogue REALLY takes place AND how decisons are really made. It’s another fact needing oversight, that business entities are pretty much forced to maintain size and influence, by the rules of business.

I rarely take pharmaceuticals and have no refilling prescriptions. Do you?

OK, I don’t want to overload the reader with word count, and that’s a logical stopping point for now, since I’m looking for readers who want to take my words as input to their own analyses, rather than as reliable or usable truth.

Later…

Looking at the whole health care thing, and lord knows I’m not unduly knowledgeable about the ”issues” therein, cause that’s a loser’s game anyway, since what ends up happening with health care, will create issues that didn’t exist before, and make irrelevant issues that did. 

However, tying health care together with the economy, and generally spouting off as I am wont to do, this is what I see: 

Obama is saying the “stimulus” stuff has worked.  I just read that in a headline today on USA Today or AOL.  I know it was one of those two, because those are the only places I get my news these days, outside of dribs and drabs when I watch news on TV.  This is generally whenever my wife watches TV AND I’m not blogging, cause mostly to me TV news is boring, certainly compared to movies and sports and Jeopardy and other stuff.  But, I digress, or, do I neurose?  mwaaahaha

Whichever, if the stimulus stuff really has worked, it is because (Ben said, channeling Great Grandpa Ezekiel) if you get enough money moving far and wide, you can always dip into the general fund and take out whatever you need to put gas in the car, keep the engine running, and replace parts as needed.  Grandpa Ezekiel also says that this stimulus thing is clearly some kind of MODERN economic theory, because the OLD SCHOOL had it that you had to have income exceed expenses, and pay your bills, and on time.  

But let’s for argument’s sake say that the stimulus theory is working in some elementary sense, where doing nothing would continue the rise of abject poverty and financial ruin, and being hard line about accountability would cause too many suicide leaps out of high rises. 

But then, the thinking goes, the other big problem is regulation, fair dealing, and OVERSIGHT.  Certainly that’s the naive expectation for a lot of us, having been educated by our educational system, and growing up hearing the benevolent admonishments of platitudians throughout society.   And here is where we DO tie the economy together with health care, cause in both the economic and the health care crises, LACK of oversight, and the FAILURE to root out inefficiency and fraud (HOWEVER ethically mediated by ignorance and denial), and coming up with a way to KEEP OUR EYES ON both the players and the organizational entities, would seem to make a lot of sense, would it not? 

Whatever Obama HAS done, and has been doing, one doesn’t yet get the sense that “oversight” has been a big part of the deal.  Getting rid of some high visibility benefactors of the previous way of doing things, and (temporarily?) bulldozing major old pathways of public access to finance, is as far as this administration has gone.  NOT that I am asking for anything like what we had in the previous administration.  Then again, some of what we HAVE right now is unchallenged direct inheritance FROM the previous administration, especially the ultimate money succubi, the wars in Iraq and now Afghanistan. Unless, in a kind of unseen big brotherism, that too is meant to function as economic stimulus.  But let’s not go there, OY!