LBO Talk

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Steve Bruns — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:52:22 GMT

That is probably so but I must admit that I do recall fondly the days when you actually could measure driving distances in six-packs. On 2013-05-25, at 11:14 AM, Doug Henwood wrote: > > On May 25, 2013, at 11:12 AM, michael yates wrote: > >> Doug says St. Clair is an Edward Abbeyist. What does this mean? Out here in the sticks, we really like Abbey. > > A serious minority of the U.S. population lives in the sticks. As many people live in NYC as in the 10 smallest states combined - in Brooklyn as the 4 smallest states. You are not the Real America. The Abbey agenda has nothing serious to offer the 80% of the U.S. pop that lives in metro areas. > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

martin schiller — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:40:12 GMT

On May 25, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Doug Henwood wrote: > > On May 25, 2013, at 11:12 AM, michael yates wrote: > >> Doug says St. Clair is an Edward Abbeyist. What does this mean? Out here in the sticks, we really like Abbey. > > A serious minority of the U.S. population lives in the sticks. As many people live in NYC as in the 10 smallest states combined - in Brooklyn as the 4 smallest states. You are not the Real America. The Abbey agenda has nothing serious to offer the 80% of the U.S. pop that lives in metro areas. Does anyone? Occupy? Abbey at least offers a path 'out'.

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Doug Henwood — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:14:10 GMT

On May 25, 2013, at 11:12 AM, michael yates wrote: > Doug says St. Clair is an Edward Abbeyist. What does this mean? Out here in the sticks, we really like Abbey. A serious minority of the U.S. population lives in the sticks. As many people live in NYC as in the 10 smallest states combined - in Brooklyn as the 4 smallest states. You are not the Real America. The Abbey agenda has nothing serious to offer the 80% of the U.S. pop that lives in metro areas.

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

shag carpet bomb — Sat, 25 May 2013 17:48:58 GMT

I'm confused though. Isn't the fact that the *actions* of these parties the practical, embodied reality that does, indeed, through legislation, cause the decline of the working class. Not only do they create legislation and institutions - such as employed provided health care or right to work laws or, recently, a push to make unemployment beneficiaries take drug tests -- they also drag people along into a system of party-based politics where people think political actions consists of voting? And there, in the realm of that political activity - which consists of voting, facebook debates, jpeg meme wars, consuming advertisements, occasionally attending town forums -- the world is effectively created as one in which there are only a few alternatives - democrats or republicans, maybe a libertarian or two and some crackpot on the left or right or in between to pick, where being "political" and having arguments is seen as partisan and a betrayal of what it means to be a good merikun.... how

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

michael yates — Sat, 25 May 2013 15:12:50 GMT

Doug says St. Clair is an Edward Abbeyist. What does this mean? Out here in the sticks, we really like Abbey. He liked the kids too. and they loved him. They're still working hard to save these sticks from all the capitalist predators trying their best to destroy them. Abbey had a lot of guts too. Didn't devote his life to endless self-promotion. And he could write! He was a professor and taught the young how to write and to act. Fought against all the big dams, especially Glen Canyon. Wrote The Monkey Wrench Gang. Desert Solitaire. Waged war against the cattlemen. I'd give my eye teeth to have done what he did. And seeing those whom he inspired continue his work fills me with optimism. And I know it does the same for Jeffrey St. Clair. And Counterpunch/AK Press has just published a book by Doug Peacock, another student of Abbey and another great champion of the Western lands. Doesn't sound like doom and gloom to me.

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Doug Henwood — Sat, 25 May 2013 01:19:24 GMT

On May 24, 2013, at 5:50 PM, Marv Gandall wrote: > Below is a rather overwrought illustration in today's Counterpunch of the idealist pessimism of the US left which I alluded to in my previous post. The cry of despair by the magazine's editor, Jeffrey St. Clair attributes the "somnambulism" of the masses to their "betrayal" by cowardly and wrongheaded liberals and DP-oriented leftists - a favourite theme of Carrol's and others on this and related lists. Liberal ideological hegemony is treated as the cause rather than the consequence of the decline of the organized industrial working class and of the mass international socialist movement which developed within it. There is no reference to the underlying material conditions which have ultimately been responsible for the decline, in particular the technological advances and global spread of capitalism which gave the system a new lease on life in the latter half of the twentieth century. Capitalism's unexpected res

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Marv Gandall — Fri, 24 May 2013 21:50:20 GMT

Below is a rather overwrought illustration in today's Counterpunch of the idealist pessimism of the US left which I alluded to in my previous post. The cry of despair by the magazine's editor, Jeffrey St. Clair attributes the "somnambulism" of the masses to their "betrayal" by cowardly and wrongheaded liberals and DP-oriented leftists - a favourite theme of Carrol's and others on this and related lists. Liberal ideological hegemony is treated as the cause rather than the consequence of the decline of the organized industrial working class and of the mass international socialist movement which developed within it. There is no reference to the underlying material conditions which have ultimately been responsible for the decline, in particular the technological advances and global spread of capitalism which gave the system a new lease on life in the latter half of the twentieth century. Capitalism's unexpected resilience is in conflict with Marxist orthodoxy, which had been forecasting th

[lbo-talk] Harvard selling indulgences

Wojtek S — Fri, 24 May 2013 18:47:34 GMT

Scientific racism has no place in 21st-century academia. Yet somehow, in 2009, Jason Richwine was able to successfully defend a dissertation at Harvard University in which he wrote that Hispanic immigrants have a substantially lower IQ than the white native-born population and that, because of the hereditary nature of IQ, this fact should be taken into consideration when designing immigration policy. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/201351582654349181.html [WS:] I am glad I do not have my credentials from Harvard. If I did, I would ask for money back. They really cheapened the brand. -- Wojtek "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Marv Gandall — Fri, 24 May 2013 14:56:41 GMT

On 2013-05-24, at 7:26 AM, Wojtek S wrote: > I think that this is the case of viewpoints that you are debating in this > thread. Your opponents' knowledge is derived from "systemic principles" and > thus independent of facts. If facts support the conclusions derived from > these systemic principles they are seen as corroborating evidence, if they > don't - they are dismissed as irrelevant. In a nutshell, this is how > idealism operates. It's interesting how left-wing idealism expresses itself these days. When the industrial working class was militantly on the rise, left-wing idealists typically exaggerated the capacity of the masses and underestimated the power of the ruling class in keeping with the idea that history was unfolding as predicted and the system was crumbling. Today, given the historic decline of the workers' and socialist movement, pessimism is the underlying mood on the left, despite the temporary excitement and hope occasioned by events like Occupy and the Arab Sprin

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Wojtek S — Fri, 24 May 2013 11:26:16 GMT

Marv: "Not at all. You can discern the political objectives of individuals and groups, not by reading minds, but the public statements" [WS:] I am with you on this, but I would also like to point out that there are two different kinds of "knowledge" in political and public discourse - one that is grounded in factual information and one that is logically derived from principles assumed to be true. You need a right balance of both to form an informed, rational opinion. Obviously knowledge based on factual information is generally superior to that logically derived from principles, but in the world when facts are often manufactured to show what is meant to be seen, you need to balance what you see with logical deduction. Finding this balance is art rather than science or deduction. This was an informed way of reading facts in Eastern Europe. When the media told you, for example, that "everything is peaceful in X and people are going about their daily business" you needed to ask yours

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Marv Gandall — Fri, 24 May 2013 00:38:23 GMT

I'd written: The purpose of the invasion was a) to install a puppet regime under Ahmed Chalabi which would provide the US with basing rights, give preferential treatment to US oil firms, and recognize Israel and b) more broadly, to "shock and awe" states resisting the Empire (chiefly Iran, but also North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba) into bowing to US dictates by demonstrating overwhelming US military power and the will of the new Bush Administration to deploy it wherever and whenever it pleased. In all respects, the occupation of Iraq by US ground forces was a spectacular failure - the "demonstration effect" in fact demonstrating the limited power of the US to impose its will rather what was intended Carrol wrote: > This nicely illustrates why I said we perhaps had no common ground on which > to debate. You are claiming the capacity for reading minds. Not at all. You can discern the political objectives of individuals and groups, not by reading minds, but the public statements of genera

[lbo-talk] new frontiers in capitalist honesty

Eubulides — Thu, 23 May 2013 19:25:36 GMT

[In 2173, when the Pentagon completes the Death Star, Boeing's logo will be visible from earth] http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2021037931_boeingmcnerneyxml.html Originally published May 22, 2013 at 9:38 PM | Page modified May 23, 2013 at 11:16 AM McNerney: Boeing will squeeze suppliers and cut jobs Boeing Chief Executive Jim McNerney, acknowledging that I m sounding like Darth Vader here, touted plans Wednesday to reduce costs by squeezing suppliers hard and cutting jobs across the company. By Dominic Gates Seattle Times aerospace reporter Boeing Chief Executive Jim McNerney, acknowledging that I m sounding like Darth Vader here, touted plans Wednesday to reduce costs by squeezing suppliers hard and cutting jobs across the company. Suppliers that don t agree to cut their prices as contracts are renewed will find themselves on the outside, he made clear. We have no-fly lists across the company, McNerney said. If a certain group is not working with us ... they ll b

[lbo-talk] Mississippi Could Soon Jail Women for Stillbirths, Miscarriages

123hop at comcast.net — Thu, 23 May 2013 18:16:43 GMT

It's only poor women who will go to jail. If a woman miscarries because her hubby beat her up, nothing will happen to hubby. Women are most likely to get beaten when they're pregnant. Sorry new world.... Joanna ----- Original Message ----- http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/buckhalter-mississippi-stillbirth-manslaughter ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] Mississippi Could Soon Jail Women for Stillbirths, Miscarriages

c b — Thu, 23 May 2013 17:31:47 GMT

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/buckhalter-mississippi-stillbirth-manslaughter

[lbo-talk] Chomsky and other scholars ask NYT public editor to investigate paper's bias on

Julio Huato — Thu, 23 May 2013 13:20:55 GMT

Chomsky and other scholars ask NYT public editor to investigate paper's bias on Honduras and Venezuela: http://www.nytexaminer.com/2013/05/petition-on-venezuela-honduras/

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

Arthur Maisel — Thu, 23 May 2013 12:17:35 GMT

Thanks, WS. It's good of you to contend with---among other things---my impressionistic grasp of all this. This subthread started when I intentionally used the admittedly fuzzy copulative "most resembles," and this last response is very generous (what you could call a "disproportionate response"---hope that's not too tasteless a joke). On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Wojtek S wrote: > Joanna: "1-4, Huh? I cannot be that ignorant of history." > > [WS:] It is not that.

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

Wojtek S — Thu, 23 May 2013 12:02:00 GMT

Joanna: "1-4, Huh? I cannot be that ignorant of history." [WS:] It is not that. This is a wide spread belief rooted in the 19th century bourgeois mythology - predominantly British - portraying itself as harbingers of new brave industrial era, yada, yada, yada. Sort of the Piltdown man of political economy, if you will. Marx fell to it as well, because historical research at his time was not as well advanced as it is today. However, there is historical evidence of organizations having all characteristics of capitalist corporation going back to the 12th century in Europe - although they were not formally called corporations. These included monastic orders, especially Cystercians, that owned property in their own right, used rational management of resources, produced for surplus, reinvested surplus, used voluntary labor, separated office from incumbents, and used collective control of the "corporation." In fact, vows of poverty and chastity were a device to institute corporate contro

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

andie_nachgeborenen — Thu, 23 May 2013 04:44:37 GMT

Most law is state law, not federal law. In the 36 or so states that have elected judiciaries, the judges tend to decide in favor of corporate campaign contributors when these are parties about 3/4 of the time. Sent from my iPad On May 21, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Eubulides wrote: > On 5/21/2013 3:41 PM, Jordan Hayes wrote: >> Max writes: >> >>> The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is >>> decided by the Congress. >> >> It's not clear to me that this is "legal" ... it's a loophole, because >> it takes advantage of a situation that was clearly spelled-out in the >> law -- if you make money, you pay tax on it, unless you pay tax to >> someone else, then we figure out what's fair -- and probably isn't >> exploitable by many. But the sheer size of the dollars involved makes >> it worth it to try, even if your CEO gets put in front of a Senate >> Committee. >> >> The way you can tell how bad this smells is that they are 'warehousing' >> the profits offshore,

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

andie_nachgeborenen — Thu, 23 May 2013 04:41:56 GMT

That's always what corporate lawyers have been paid for. Cornelius Vanderbilt is said to have told his lawyers with some exasperation, "I don't pay you tell me what the law is. I pay you to tell me how to get around it." At the same time, judges are busy, overworked, 300 cases on the docket or more, and have little patience for cleverness. They will look at the controlling statute, case, or contract, and if the key language is clear, they'll say, that's what it says. So ordered, next case. Sent from my iPad On May 21, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Eubulides wrote: > On 5/21/2013 3:41 PM, Jordan Hayes wrote: >> Max writes: >> >>> The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is >>> decided by the Congress. >> >> It's not clear to me that this is "legal" ... it's a loophole, because >> it takes advantage of a situation that was clearly spelled-out in the >> law -- if you make money, you pay tax on it, unless you pay tax to >> someone else, then we figure out what's fai

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Eubulides — Thu, 23 May 2013 00:09:20 GMT

On 5/22/2013 6:38 AM, Wojtek S wrote: > [WS:] It certainly was not. Transfer pricing is a standard accounting > procedure in multidivisional corporations and it has been in place since > the 1930s. Its main function is to allocate resources within the > corporation rather than merely to evade taxes. If it is used that way, it > takes advantage of some enabling mechanism, such as tax laws or loopholes > in it. > > The problem with Apple was not that they relocated their operations to a > lower tax jurisdiction, but that they failed to declare any jurisdiction as > their residence for the sole purpose of tax evasion. This failure may be > criminal. Moving operations to another location is typically justified on > business grounds of which lower taxes are a part, but failure to claim > residence serves no business purpose other than tax evasion. They deserve > justice China-style - death penalty, and make them pay for the bullets. > ========================== [And then again, the so

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

Marv Gandall — Wed, 22 May 2013 22:00:03 GMT

I'm with Joanna, though be warned that the last thing I want to do is jump into an interminable and inconclusive discussion about "stages" and "surplus value". :) On 2013-05-22, at 4:20 PM, 123hop at comcast.net wrote: > 1-4, Huh? I cannot be that ignorant of history. > > Corporations were first granted special status in 16th century, on the premise that they were providing a social gain. > > The feudal mode of production can continue without surplus > > Public good in neo-liberal corporate capitalism, really? > > That centralization might have occurred under feudalism, maybe. But that was not the aim of the system. > > I'm not arguing for stages, but I do care about accurate use of terms of the art. > > Joanna > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > I do not think you are correct. > > Re. 1 Corporatism and feudalism existed side by side for some time in the > middle ages. > Re. 2 Not true. Both aim at surplus extraction, but by different means. > Re 3. Not true. There is public good in

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

123hop at comcast.net — Wed, 22 May 2013 20:20:53 GMT

1-4, Huh? I cannot be that ignorant of history. Corporations were first granted special status in 16th century, on the premise that they were providing a social gain. The feudal mode of production can continue without surplus Public good in neo-liberal corporate capitalism, really? That centralization might have occurred under feudalism, maybe. But that was not the aim of the system. I'm not arguing for stages, but I do care about accurate use of terms of the art. Joanna ----- Original Message ----- I do not think you are correct. Re. 1 Corporatism and feudalism existed side by side for some time in the middle ages. Re. 2 Not true. Both aim at surplus extraction, but by different means. Re 3. Not true. There is public good in the corporate capitalism but not necessarily defined in terms of real estate (commons) RE 4. Centralization occurred under feudalism as well. I do not have time to elaborate but I think we should avoid a linear "stagist" interpretation of history i.e. one stage re

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 19:56:16 GMT

I do not think you are correct. Re. 1 Corporatism and feudalism existed side by side for some time in the middle ages. Re. 2 Not true. Both aim at surplus extraction, but by different means. Re 3. Not true. There is public good in the corporate capitalism but not necessarily defined in terms of real estate (commons) RE 4. Centralization occurred under feudalism as well. I do not have time to elaborate but I think we should avoid a linear "stagist" interpretation of history i.e. one stage replacing another but rather think cycles and different organizational forms coexisting in time. On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:27 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote: > I think this subject deserves more/better discussion. I think at least the > following issues need to be addressed: > > 1. Apples/Oranges: Feudalism was an economic/political system; the > corporate model depends on an underlying capitalist economic/political > system. So it's not quite right to compare corporatism to feudalism. > > 2. Feud

[lbo-talk] Coporate rule vs feudal rule

123hop at comcast.net — Wed, 22 May 2013 19:27:21 GMT

I think this subject deserves more/better discussion. I think at least the following issues need to be addressed: 1. Apples/Oranges: Feudalism was an economic/political system; the corporate model depends on an underlying capitalist economic/political system. So it's not quite right to compare corporatism to feudalism. 2. Feudalism does not aim at creating surplus value. 3. Under Feudalism, there is the recognition of the right of the people to a "commons" -- be it of woods, land, rivers, sea, etc. There is no recognition of a commons under capitalism. 4. Feudalism, if anything, tended toward decentralization/fragmentation of power; corporatism aims toward the consolidation of centralized power. It seems that when people compare Corporatism to Feudalism, what they mean is that capitalism has reached a stage where it can no longer afford any vestige of democracy (or a "middle" class). But I am a poor student of history and political economy, and I am willing to stand corrected if others

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 18:21:13 GMT

Arthur: "Would you do me a favor and explain in what ways feudalism and corporate structure are polar opposites?" [WS:] To make a long story short, corporate structure is based on formal bureaucracy which separates office from office holder, and subjects the holder to some form of collective control (it does not have be fully democratic, a select group like cardinals in the Catholic Church, electoral college in the US, or stockholders will do). Feudalism is based on power structure vested in particular individuals and thus inherited and not subjected to any collective control. This is classical Weber. Wojtek On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Arthur Maisel wrote: > WS---I think if we seem to disagree at all---aside from the bit about > feudalism---it is probably only the result of my lack of a systematic > theoretical framework (my degree is in music) combined with the struggle I > have to engage in to try to make myself clear. > > Would you do me a favor and

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Arthur Maisel — Wed, 22 May 2013 17:44:13 GMT

WS---I think if we seem to disagree at all---aside from the bit about feudalism---it is probably only the result of my lack of a systematic theoretical framework (my degree is in music) combined with the struggle I have to engage in to try to make myself clear. Would you do me a favor and explain in what ways feudalism and corporate structure are polar opposites? On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Wojtek S wrote: > Joanna: "As a friend once put it: "It takes a long time to become little > and stupid, and a great deal of collaboration."" > > [WS:] Very true, indeed. Parents are willing collaborators. > > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:36 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote: > > > Woj sez: > > > > Stupidity is not natural - it is learned and right now the captains of > > industry work very hard to run crash courses in stupidity for the masses. > > ----------- > > > > As a friend once put it: "It takes a long time to become little and > > stupid, and a great deal of col

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:42:01 GMT

Joanna: "As a friend once put it: "It takes a long time to become little and stupid, and a great deal of collaboration."" [WS:] Very true, indeed. Parents are willing collaborators. On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:36 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote: > Woj sez: > > Stupidity is not natural - it is learned and right now the captains of > industry work very hard to run crash courses in stupidity for the masses. > ----------- > > As a friend once put it: "It takes a long time to become little and > stupid, and a great deal of collaboration." > > Joanna > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk > -- Wojtek "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

123hop at comcast.net — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:36:09 GMT

Woj sez: Stupidity is not natural - it is learned and right now the captains of industry work very hard to run crash courses in stupidity for the masses. ----------- As a friend once put it: "It takes a long time to become little and stupid, and a great deal of collaboration." Joanna

[lbo-talk] Blog Post: Gas "Frackers" Come to a School District's Rescue?

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 14:47:28 GMT

There is even more "ingenious way" to solve the local budget problem - federal funding of education, as most developed countries do. But this is so un-American. With this in mind, I have to say that every nation gets what it deserves. Europeans with the their willingness to have publicly funded services will pay less for these services, enjoy cleaner environment, and less corporate meddling in their communities. Americans, otoh, with their knee-jerk hatred of "big government" and public funding will get what they ask for - "small government" and big corporations owning their communities, polluting them and charging monopoly prices for the services. -- Wojtek "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 14:29:16 GMT

Arthur: "system that most resembles corporate structure, i.e., feudalism." [WS:] Corporate structure and feudalism are on polar opposites, but that is academic hair splitting. More to the point, we need to look at mass literacy in connection with the mode of production. With the advent of corporate capitalism, mass literacy was a requisite to produce an army of white collar workers in the corporate structures. This is still a requisite, but the cognitive skills required for these jobs have been changing. Computerization allows automation and taylorization of the white collar jobs, so the requirement is no longer to "solve problems" (which requires critical thinking) but operate software (which is basically point, click, no think). This indeed leads to a society with a small number of highly trained individuals designing machinery and software that runs it, and semi-literate masses that push the buttons. We already have a situation of "smart" phones in the hands of dumb people who

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Arthur Maisel — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:42:13 GMT

Deskilling and hyperexploitation strike me as evidence that we are headed "back" toward the historical system that most resembles corporate structure, i.e., feudalism. It would not be a matter of consciously seeking an unprecedented mass idiocy so much as consciously seeking to *restore* it. I have to admit a prejudice: I'm thinking of all those engineers who are also fundamentalist Christians. Technical skill and philosophical idiocy may not always be mutually exclusive. During the transition, however, deskilling may be able to go farther than we like to believe if the customers can be led to expect less and less. This is often presented as giving them "more choice." On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Wojtek S wrote: > Joanna: "I'm guessing this is a historic first yes? I mean no previous > civilization has consciously sought mass idiocy." > > [WS:] How about the idiocy of the rural life bemoaned by the Old Man ;)? > > More seriously, I take your point that unpaid

[lbo-talk] Blog Post: Gas "Frackers" Come to a School District's Rescue?

michael yates — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:39:54 GMT

Full at http://cheapmotelsandahotplate.org/2013/05/22/gas-frackers-come-to-a-school-districts-rescue/ Two schools, one a vocational technical high school and the other an elementary school, sit on tracts of land a few blocks from the house in which I grew up, in Ford City (Armstrong County), Pennsylvania.* The communities served by them are, for the most part, not particularly prosperous. Household incomes, wages, home prices, rents, and levels of education are below the state average; while poverty, unemployment, and air pollution are above it. Many property owners in the area are elderly women, living on small pensions and social security. Their property taxes finance the schools, and as these rise, the tax burden can be considerable. This encumbrance is made subjectively worse by the fact that these older taxpayers no longer have children in school. For the local school board, rising costs including those for the ever growing number of administrators and a limited and potentially re

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:38:49 GMT

Arthur: "It even has a name: *transfer pricing. *I don't think it was *invented* to evade taxes" [WS:] It certainly was not. Transfer pricing is a standard accounting procedure in multidivisional corporations and it has been in place since the 1930s. Its main function is to allocate resources within the corporation rather than merely to evade taxes. If it is used that way, it takes advantage of some enabling mechanism, such as tax laws or loopholes in it. The problem with Apple was not that they relocated their operations to a lower tax jurisdiction, but that they failed to declare any jurisdiction as their residence for the sole purpose of tax evasion. This failure may be criminal. Moving operations to another location is typically justified on business grounds of which lower taxes are a part, but failure to claim residence serves no business purpose other than tax evasion. They deserve justice China-style - death penalty, and make them pay for the bullets. -- Wojtek "An anarchi

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:24:49 GMT

Eubulides: "In the next 20-30 years I'd be willing to wager that the legal nihilism that has ensconsed itself in the former USSR will become ever more fashionable in the US." [WS:] Who knows, but I doubt. A predictable legal system functioning independently of who the incumbents are is perhaps the most fundamental requisite of market economy i.e. capitalism. Having the Soviet-style "telephone justice" is simply unacceptable in an advanced capitalist state like the US. "Telephone justice" refers to phone calls that the judges, and for that matter most officers of the administration, would receive from the Communist Party headquarters to inform them what outcome of a case is "expected." In the US, it works rather differently - we have a fairly predictable and independent of who the incumbents are judicial system, but the laws themselves are written to favor capitalists and property owners, so there is no need to use "telephone justice." On the other hand, the recent "scandal" involvin

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Arthur Maisel — Wed, 22 May 2013 13:05:47 GMT

I was amused that the U.S. Senate sprung into action against Apple after Google's identical (or very similar) practice was criticized in the English Parliament. I believe this practice is not limited to Apple and Google but is common among large corporations doing business in several nations. You find the nation with the lowest tax rate and then your subsidiary in that country buys the goods and services from the subsidiary in the high-tax country and sells them in the low-tax country. The profits are therefore "made" in the low-tax country. It even has a name: *transfer pricing. *I don't think it was *invented* to evade taxes but to allow for a reasonable accounting of a multinational's profits---but you know how these things go: Invent the golf club and soon someone is using it to jimmy open someone else's front door. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Eubulides wrote: > On 5/21/2013 3:41 PM, Jordan Hayes wrote: > >> Max writes: >> >> The crime is what'

[lbo-talk] technical question

Wojtek S — Wed, 22 May 2013 12:50:24 GMT

Thanks, that was helpful. I know this in excel but I did not think of it as "universal." My expectation is that nothing is universal in this technology, everything is proprietary ;) -- Wojtek "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Eubulides — Wed, 22 May 2013 03:34:11 GMT

On 5/21/2013 3:41 PM, Jordan Hayes wrote: > Max writes: > >> The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is >> decided by the Congress. > > It's not clear to me that this is "legal" ... it's a loophole, because > it takes advantage of a situation that was clearly spelled-out in the > law -- if you make money, you pay tax on it, unless you pay tax to > someone else, then we figure out what's fair -- and probably isn't > exploitable by many. But the sheer size of the dollars involved makes > it worth it to try, even if your CEO gets put in front of a Senate > Committee. > > The way you can tell how bad this smells is that they are 'warehousing' > the profits offshore, hoping for a 'repatriation discount' -- the money > is truely no good to them where it is, and they know it. And they know > that if they bring it back to the US, where it could at least be used to > repurchase stock, or pay a dividend (not that either of those things is > any good for the rest of us), they will get taxed

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Carrol Cox — Wed, 22 May 2013 03:16:30 GMT

"What's legal" is ultimately decided by a judge & jury. (Assuming it's pushed that far: as a 19th-c proverb had it, there's many a slip twixt cup & lip. Carrol

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Max Sawicky — Wed, 22 May 2013 02:01:54 GMT

It's legal if they aren't in jail. Innocent until proven guilty. As you probably know, dodgy returns are routinely filed by power players with full knowledge that the IRS, for lack of resources, will be forced to negotiate some "offer in compromise," rather than pursue criminal penalties. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Jordan Hayes wrote: > Max writes: > > The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is >> decided by the Congress. >> > > It's not clear to me that this is "legal" ... it's a loophole, because it > takes advantage of a situation that was clearly spelled-out in the law -- > if you make money, you pay tax on it, unless you pay tax to someone else, > then we figure out what's fair -- and probably isn't exploitable by many. > But the sheer size of the dollars involved makes it worth it to try, even > if your CEO gets put in front of a Senate Committee. > > The way you can tell how bad this smells is that they are 'warehousing' > the profits offs

[lbo-talk] technical question

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 21 May 2013 23:21:49 GMT

not much of a gmail user, but the standard shortcut keys might help. i was thinking you knew them since you are such a power excel user, but just in case you don't know them. instead of scrolling while holding down the mouse and manual scanning down each line with the mouse, use the keyboard. 1. place your cursor where you want to start cutting 2. press shift 3. press the down arrow to select all the lines. the lines will highlight, one by one, as you move down the page OR 1. place your cursor where you want to start cutting 2. use your mouse only to navigate to the place where you want to end the cut 3. click shift and place your mouse where you want to cut 4. the area you want to cut should now be highlighted. At 05:15 PM 5/21/2013, Wojtek S wrote: >I am trying to be a good lbo-ster and delete the trails from emails to >which I respond. However, Gmail made this task rather difficult. First I >need to click on three dots at the bottom of the email to show the quoted >text. Then co

[lbo-talk] draft

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 21 May 2013 23:11:20 GMT

Thanks! That is exactly what I was looking for. At 09:11 PM 5/20/2013, Carrol Cox wrote: >Thanks, Michael. I seem to have had everything wrong except the bare fact >that the article existed. > >Carrool > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] > > On Behalf Of michael yates > > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 5:26 PM > > To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org > > Subject: [lbo-talk] draft > > > > Check out http://libcom.org/history/vietnam-collapse-armed-forces. This > > posts the 1971 report of Marine Colonel Robert D. Heinl Jr., published in > > Armed Forces Journal, June 7, 1971. > > ___________________________________ > > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk > > >___________________________________ >http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk -- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Jordan Hayes — Tue, 21 May 2013 22:41:06 GMT

Max writes: > The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is > decided by the Congress. It's not clear to me that this is "legal" ... it's a loophole, because it takes advantage of a situation that was clearly spelled-out in the law -- if you make money, you pay tax on it, unless you pay tax to someone else, then we figure out what's fair -- and probably isn't exploitable by many. But the sheer size of the dollars involved makes it worth it to try, even if your CEO gets put in front of a Senate Committee. The way you can tell how bad this smells is that they are 'warehousing' the profits offshore, hoping for a 'repatriation discount' -- the money is truely no good to them where it is, and they know it. And they know that if they bring it back to the US, where it could at least be used to repurchase stock, or pay a dividend (not that either of those things is any good for the rest of us), they will get taxed on it. So they are in effect holding out for a better deal. Which doesn't mak

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Max Sawicky — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:28:49 GMT

The crime is what's legal, and what's legal is decided by the Congress. As far as Apple goes, you might as well denounce mosquitoes because they're always biting people. On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Wojtek S wrote: > The report says Apple capitalises on a difference between US and Irish > rules regarding tax residency. > > In Ireland, a company must be managed and controlled in the country to be a > tax resident. Under US law, a company is a tax resident of the country in > which it was established. > > The subcommittee said Apple's strategy of not declaring tax residency in > any country could be unique among corporations. > > "Apple wasn't satisfied with shifting its profits to a low-tax offshore tax > haven," Senator Carl Levin, the subcommittee's chairman, said in a > statement. > > The subcommittee report also noted that Apple has been setting aside > billions for tax bills it may never pay. > > As previously reported by the AP news agency, the overlooke

[lbo-talk] technical question

Wojtek S — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:15:57 GMT

I am trying to be a good lbo-ster and delete the trails from emails to which I respond. However, Gmail made this task rather difficult. First I need to click on three dots at the bottom of the email to show the quoted text. Then comes the selection. If the quoted text is short - no problem, but if it is long, then scrolling down to the end if fucking painfully slow - it takes forever. An alternative is to keep selecting and deleting only the visible parts of the text until the whole thing is deleted. If this is the best that this self-styled vanguard of technological progress can come up with, then fuck their "progress." Is there a better way of dealing with it, other than going back to M$ Outlook? -- Wojtek "An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."

[lbo-talk] There Are No Unskilled Jobs: The Bike Shop

Wojtek S — Tue, 21 May 2013 21:06:28 GMT

Joanna: "I'm guessing this is a historic first yes? I mean no previous civilization has consciously sought mass idiocy." [WS:] How about the idiocy of the rural life bemoaned by the Old Man ;)? More seriously, I take your point that unpaid internship is hyperexploitation rather than deskilling, but as such it has historical precedence (apprenticeship). The way I look at this is that these processes are relative rather than absolute. Deskilling of white collar jobs can go only so far - you cannot hire complete ignoramuses to do these jobs effectively. You need so minimum skill level. Instead, these efforts aim at removing workers' autonomy that is rather high in many white collar occupations. You still need to have some level of skills, but by dividing jobs into simpler routines the control is shifted upwards to the management. This is particularly evident in teaching -where direct service providers (teachers and adjuncts) lost control over two most important aspects of these jobs

[lbo-talk] Apple CEO rejects 'tax evasion' charges

Wojtek S — Tue, 21 May 2013 20:52:16 GMT

The report says Apple capitalises on a difference between US and Irish rules regarding tax residency. In Ireland, a company must be managed and controlled in the country to be a tax resident. Under US law, a company is a tax resident of the country in which it was established. The subcommittee said Apple's strategy of not declaring tax residency in any country could be unique among corporations. "Apple wasn't satisfied with shifting its profits to a low-tax offshore tax haven," Senator Carl Levin, the subcommittee's chairman, said in a statement. The subcommittee report also noted that Apple has been setting aside billions for tax bills it may never pay. As previously reported by the AP news agency, the overlooked asset that Apple has been building up could boost its profits by as much as $10.5bn. http://www.aljazeera.com/business/2013/05/201352165831522483.html [WS:] Yet another reason to hate Apple - not only sweat shop drivers but also the largest tax dodger. -- Wojtek "An anarchist

[lbo-talk] draft

Carrol Cox — Tue, 21 May 2013 01:11:53 GMT

Thanks, Michael. I seem to have had everything wrong except the bare fact that the article existed. Carrool > -----Original Message----- > From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] > On Behalf Of michael yates > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 5:26 PM > To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org > Subject: [lbo-talk] draft > > Check out http://libcom.org/history/vietnam-collapse-armed-forces. This > posts the 1971 report of Marine Colonel Robert D. Heinl Jr., published in > Armed Forces Journal, June 7, 1971. > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] draft

michael yates — Mon, 20 May 2013 22:25:40 GMT

Check out http://libcom.org/history/vietnam-collapse-armed-forces. This posts the 1971 report of Marine Colonel Robert D. Heinl Jr., published in Armed Forces Journal, June 7, 1971.

[lbo-talk] draft

Carrol Cox — Mon, 20 May 2013 22:06:04 GMT

I don't recall any specific document on the draft, but there _was_ a paper published in some military journal by an army captain, entitled something like "The Breakdown of the Army in Vietnam" (something roughly like that). That probably affected views on the draft. Carrol > -----Original Message----- > From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] > On Behalf Of shag carpet bomb > Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:24 AM > To: Lame Brained Onanists > Subject: [lbo-talk] draft > > Isn't there some well known document issued by the military or some sort of > government body which outlines why we'll never have a draft again (at least > in terms of military brass's opposition to drafting the military) > > I vaguely recall some document that circulated here. Although.. maybe it > was a document about fragging? > > > shag > > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] Iraq war (was: stupidity is most dangerous in people with high IQ)

Carrol Cox — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:58:59 GMT

> But the specific issue raised by Carrol, which I chose to address, was whether > the LAND WAR IN IRAQ was a success or not. Measured in terms of the ***Bush > administration's objectives*** - a swift and relatively bloodless invasion. . . . This nicely illustrates why I said we perhaps had no common ground on which to debate. You are claiming the capacity for reading minds. A quick and bloodless victory has been the pre-war label for almost every war in history. No rational discussion can be held on this premise. Carrol