recreate democracy

In an article in The San Francisco Chronicle in December 2007, attorney Sean Olender suggested that the real reason for the subprime bailout schemes being proposed by the U.S. Treasury Department was not to keep strapped borrowers in their homes so much as to stave off a spate of lawsuits against the banks. The plan then on the table was an interest rate freeze on a limited number of subprime loans. Olender wrote:

“The sole goal of the freeze is to prevent owners of mortgage-backed securities, many of them foreigners, from suing U.S. banks and forcing them to buy back worthless mortgage securities at face value – right now almost 10 times their market worth. The ticking time bomb in the U.S. banking system is not resetting subprime mortgage rates. The real problem is the contractual ability of investors in mortgage bonds to require banks to buy back the loans at face value if there was fraud in the origination process.

“. . . The catastrophic consequences of bond investors forcing originators to buy back loans at face value are beyond the current media discussion. The loans at issue dwarf the capital available at the largest U.S. banks combined, and investor lawsuits would raise stunning liability sufficient to cause even the largest U.S. banks to fail, resulting in massive taxpayer-funded bailouts of Fannie and Freddie, and even FDIC . . . .

“What would be prudent and logical is for the banks that sold this toxic waste to buy it back and for a lot of people to go to prison. If they knew about the fraud, they should have to buy the bonds back.”1

The thought could send a chill through even the most powerful of investment bankers, including Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson himself, who was head of Goldman Sachs during the heyday of toxic subprime paper-writing from 2004 to 2006. Mortgage fraud has not been limited to the representations made to borrowers or on loan documents but is in the design of the banks’ “financial products” themselves. Among other design flaws is that securitized mortgage debt has become so complex that ownership of the underlying security has often been lost in the shuffle; and without a legal owner, there is no one with standing to foreclose. That was the procedural problem prompting Federal District Judge Christopher Boyko to rule in October 2007 that Deutsche Bank did not have standing to foreclose on 14 mortgage loans held in trust for a pool of mortgage-backed securities holders.2 If large numbers of defaulting homeowners were to contest their foreclosures on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue, trillions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities (MBS) could be at risk. Irate securities holders might then respond with litigation that could indeed threaten the existence of the banking Goliaths.

STATES LEADING THE CHARGE

MBS investors with the power to bring major lawsuits include state and local governments, which hold substantial portions of their assets in MBS and similar investments. A harbinger of things to come was a complaint filed on February 1, 2008, by the State of Massachusetts against investment bank Merrill Lynch, for fraud and misrepresentation concerning about $14 million worth of subprime securities sold to the city of Springfield. The complaint focused on the sale of “certain esoteric financial instruments known as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) . . . which were unsuitable for the city and which, within months after the sale, became illiquid and lost almost all of their market value.”3

The previous month, the city of Baltimore sued Wells Fargo Bank for damages from the subprime debacle, alleging that Wells Fargo had intentionally discriminated in selling high-interest mortgages more frequently to blacks than to whites, in violation of federal law.4

Another innovative suit filed in January 2008 was brought by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson against 21 major investment banks, for enabling the subprime lending and foreclosure crisis in his city. The suit targeted the investment banks that fed off the mortgage market by buying subprime mortgages from lenders and then “securitizing” them and selling them to investors. City officials said they hoped to recover hundreds of millions of dollars in damages from the banks, including lost taxes from devalued property and money spent demolishing and boarding up thousands of abandoned houses. The defendants included banking giants Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Citigroup. They were charged with creating a “public nuisance” by irresponsibly buying and selling high-interest home loans, causing widespread defaults that depleted the city’s tax base and left neighborhoods in ruins.

“To me, this is no different than organized crime or drugs,” Jackson told the Cleveland newspaper The Plain Dealer. “It has the same effect as drug activity in neighborhoods. It’s a form of organized crime that happens to be legal in many respects.” He added in a videotaped interview, “This lawsuit said, ‘You’re not going to do this to us anymore.’”5

The Plain Dealer also interviewed Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, who was considering a state lawsuit against some of the same investment banks. “There’s clearly been a wrong done,” he said, “and the source is Wall Street. I’m glad to have some company on my hunt.”

However, a funny thing happened on the way to the courthouse. Like New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General Dann wound up resigning from his post in May 2008 after a sexual harassment investigation in his office.6 Before they were forced to resign, both prosecutors were hot on the tail of the banks, attempting to impose liability for the destructive wave of home foreclosures in their jurisdictions.

But the hits keep on coming. In June 2008, California Attorney General Jerry Brown sued Countrywide Financial Corporation, the nation’s largest mortgage lender, for causing thousands of foreclosures by deceptively marketing risky loans to borrowers. Among other things, the 46-page complaint alleged that:

“‘Defendants viewed borrowers as nothing more than the means for producing more loans, originating loans with little or no regard to borrowers’ long-term ability to afford them and to sustain homeownership’ . . .

“The company routinely . . . ‘turned a blind eye’ to deceptive practices by brokers and its own loan agents despite ‘numerous complaints from borrowers claiming that they did not understand their loan terms.’

“. . . Underwriters who confirmed information on mortgage applications were ‘under intense pressure . . . to process 60 to 70 loans per day, making careful consideration of borrowers’ financial circumstances and the suitability of the loan product for them nearly impossible.’

“‘Countrywide’s high-pressure sales environment and compensation system encouraged serial refinancing of Countrywide loans.’”7

Similar suits against Countrywide and its CEO have been filed by the states of Illinois and Florida. These suits seek not only damages but rescission of the loans, creating a potential nightmare for the banks.

AN AVALANCHE OF CLASS ACTIONS?

Massive class action lawsuits by defrauded borrowers may also be in the works. In a 2007 ruling in Wisconsin that is now on appeal, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman held that Chevy Chase Bank had violated the Truth in Lending Act by hiding the terms of an adjustable rate loan, and that thousands of other Chevy Chase borrowers could join the plaintiffs in a class action on that ground. According to a June 30, 2008 report in Reuters:

“The judge transformed the case from a run-of-the-mill class action to a potential nightmare for the U.S. banking industry by also finding that the borrowers could force the bank to cancel, or rescind, their loans. That decision was stayed pending an appeal to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is expected to rule any day.

“The idea of canceling tainted loans to stem a tide of foreclosures has caught hold in other quarters; a lawsuit filed last week by the Illinois attorney general asks a court to rescind or reform Countrywide Financial mortgages originated under ‘unfair or deceptive practices.’

“. . . The mortgage banking industry already faces pressure from state and federal regulators, who have accused banks of lowering underwriting standards and forcing some borrowers, through fraud, into costly adjustable loans that the banks later bundled and sold as high-interest investment vehicles.”

The Truth in Lending Act (TILA) is a 1968 federal law designed to protect consumers against lending fraud by requiring clear disclosure of loan terms and costs. It lets consumers seek rescission or termination of a loan and the return of all interest and fees when a lender is found to be in violation. The beauty of the statute, says California bankruptcy attorney Cathy Moran, is that it provides for strict liability: the aggrieved borrowers don’t have to prove they were personally defrauded or misled, or that they had actual damages. Just the fact that the disclosures were defective gives them the right to rescind and deprives the lenders of interest. In Moran’s small sample, at least half of the loans reviewed contained TILA violations.8 If class actions are found to be available for rescission of loans based on fraud in the disclosure process, the result could be a flood of class suits against banks all over the country.9

SHIFTING THE LOSS BACK TO THE BANKS

Rescission may be a remedy available not only for borrowers but for MBS investors. Many loan sale contracts provide by their terms that lenders must take back loans that default unusually quickly or that contain mistakes or fraud. An avalanche of rescissions could be catastrophic for the banks. Banks were moving loans off their books and selling them to investors in order to allow many more loans to be made than would otherwise have been allowed under banking regulations. The banking rules are complex, but for every dollar of shareholder capital a bank has on its balance sheet, it is supposed to be limited to about $10 in loans. The problem for the banks is that when the process is reversed, the 10 to 1 rule can work the other way: taking a dollar of bad debt back on a bank’s books can reduce its lending ability by a factor of 10. As explained in a BBC News story citing Prof. Nouriel Roubini for authority:

“[S]ecuritisation was key to helping banks avoid the regulators’ 10:1 rule. To make their risky loans appear attractive to buyers, banks used complex financial engineering to repackage them so they looked super-safe and paid returns well above what equivalent super-safe investments offered. Banks even found ways to get loans off their balance sheets without selling them at all. They devised bizarre new financial entities – called Special Investment Vehicles or SIVs – in which loans could be held technically and legally off balance sheet, out of sight, and beyond the scope of regulators’ rules. So, once again, SIVs made room on balance sheets for banks to go on lending.

“Banks had got round regulators’ rules by selling off their risky loans, but because so many of the securitised loans were bought by other banks, the losses were still inside the banking system. Loans held in SIVs were technically off banks’ balance sheets, but when the value of the loans inside SIVs started to collapse, the banks which set them up found that they were still responsible for them. So losses from investments which might have appeared outside the scope of the regulators’ 10:1 rule, suddenly started turning up on bank balance sheets. . . . The problem now facing many of the biggest lenders is that when losses appear on banks’ balance sheets, the regulator’s 10:1 rule comes back into play because losses reduce a banks’ shareholder capital. ‘If you have a $200bn loss, that reduced your capital by $200bn, you have to reduce your lending by 10 times as much,’ [Prof. Roubini] explains. ‘So you could have a reduction of total credit to the economy of two trillion dollars.’”10

You could also have some very bankrupt banks. The total equity of the top 100 U.S. banks stood at $800 billion at the end of the third quarter of 2007. Banking losses are currently expected to rise by as much as $450 billion, enough to wipe out more than half of the banks’ capital bases and leave many of them insolvent.11 If debtors were to deluge the courts with viable defenses to their debts and mortgage-backed securities holders were to challenge their securities, the result could be even worse.

PUTTING THE GENIE BACK IN THE BOTTLE

So what would happen if the mega-banks engaging in these irresponsible practices actually went bankrupt? These banks are widely acknowledged to be at fault, but they expect to be bailed out by the Federal Reserve or the taxpayers because they are “too big to fail.” The argument is that if they were allowed to collapse, they would take the economy down with them. That is the fear, but it is not actually true. We do need a ready source of credit, so we need banks; but we don’t need private banks. It is a little-known, well-concealed fact that banks do not lend their own money or even their depositors’ money. They actually create the money they lend; and creating money is properly a public, not a private, function. The Constitution delegates the power to create money to Congress and only to Congress.12 In making loans, banks are merely extending credit; and the proper agency for extending “the full faith and credit of the United States” is the United States itself.

There is more at stake here than just the equitable treatment of injured homeowners and investors in mortgage-backed securities. Banks and investment houses are now squeezing the last drops of blood from the U.S. government’s credit rating, “borrowing” money and unloading worthless paper on the government and the taxpayers. When the dust settles, it will be the banks, investment brokerages and hedge funds for wealthy investors that will be saved. The repossessed will become the dispossessed; and unless your pension fund has invested in politically well-connected hedge funds, you can probably kiss it goodbye, as teachers in Florida already have.

But the banking genie is a creature of the law, and the law can put it back in the bottle. The imminent failure of some very big banks could provide the government with an opportunity to regain control of its finances. More than that, it could provide the funds for tackling otherwise unsolvable problems now threatening to destroy our standard of living and our standing in the world. The only solution that will be more than a temporary fix is to take the power to create money away from private bankers and return it to the people collectively. That is how it should have been all along, and how it was in our early history; but we are so used to banks being private corporations that we have forgotten the public banks of our forebears. The best of the colonial American banking models was developed in Benjamin Franklin’s province of Pennsylvania, where a government-owned bank issued money and lent it to farmers at 5 percent interest. The interest was returned to the government, replacing taxes. During the decades that that system was in operation, the province of Pennsylvania operated without taxes, inflation or debt.

Rather than bailing out bankrupt banks and sending them on their merry way, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) needs to take a close look at the banks’ books and put any banks found to be insolvent into receivership. The FDIC (unlike the Federal Reserve) is actually a federal agency, and it has the option of taking a bank’s stock in return for bailing it out, effectively nationalizing it. This is done in Europe with bankrupt banks, and it was done in the United States with Continental Illinois, the country’s fourth largest bank, when it went bankrupt in the 1990s.

A system of truly “national” banks could issue “the full faith and credit of the United States” for public purposes, including funding infrastructure, sustainable energy development and health care.13 Publicly-issued credit could also be used to relieve the subprime crisis. Local governments could use it to buy up mortgages in default, compensating the MBS investors and freeing the real estate for public disposal. The properties could then be rented back to their occupants at reasonable rates, leaving people in their homes without the windfall of acquiring a house without paying for it. A program of lease-purchase might also be instituted. The proceeds would be applied toward repaying the credit advanced to buy the mortgages, balancing the money supply and preventing inflation.

LOCAL AND PRIVATE SOLUTIONS

While we are waiting for the federal government to act, there are also private and local possibilities for relieving the subprime crisis. Chris Cook is a British strategic market consultant and the former Compliance Director for the International Petroleum Exchange. He recommends getting all the parties to settle by forming a pool constituted as an LLC (limited liability company), in a partnership framework that brings together occupiers and financiers as co-owners under a neutral custodian. The original owners would pay an affordable rental, and the resulting pool of rentals would be “unitized” (divided into unit interests, similar to a REIT or real estate investment trust). Among other advantages over the usual mortgage-backed security, there would be no loans at interest, since the property would be owned outright by the LLC. Eliminating interest substantially reduces costs. The former owners would be able to occupy the property at an affordable rental, with the option to buy an equity stake in it. For the banks, the advantage would be that they would be able to find investors again, since the risk would have been taken out of the investment by insuring full occupancy at affordable rates; and for the investors, the advantage would be a secure investment with a dependable return.14

Carolyn Betts is an Ohio attorney who served in Washington as issuer’s counsel for MBS trusts formed by various federal governmental entities, and represented Resolution Trust Corporation in its auction of defaulted commercial mortgage loans during the last real estate crisis. She proposes a squeeze play by the states, in the style of that brought against the tobacco companies by a consortium of state attorneys general in the 1990s. She notes that at the end of 2007, at least 20% of the funds held by the Ohio Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) were in mortgage backed securities and similar investments. That makes Ohio public money a major investor in these mortgage-related securities. Ohio governments have an interest in not having homes foreclosed upon, since foreclosures destroy local real estate markets, contribute to lower tax revenues and losses on PERS investments, and cause a strain on state and local affordable housing systems. A coordinated series of actions brought by state attorneys general could eliminate the culpable banker middlemen and return the properties to local ownership and control.

Andrew Jackson reportedly told Congress in 1829, “If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning.” A wave of private actions, class actions and government lawsuits aimed at redressing injurious banking practices could spark a revolution in banking, returning the power to advance “the full faith and credit of the United States” to the United States, and returning community assets to local ownership and control.

1 Sean Olender, “Mortgage Meltdown,” San Francisco Chronicle (December 9, 2007).

2 See Ellen Brown, “The Subprime Trump Card,” webofdebt.com/articles, June 26, 2008.

3 Greg Morcroft, “Massachusetts Charges Merrill with Fraud,” MarketWatch (February 1, 2008).

4 Henry Gomez, Tom Ott, “Cleveland Sues 21 Banks Over Subprime Mess,” The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, January 11, 2008).

5 Ibid.

6 Marc Dann Resigns as Attorney General,” NBC24 (May 14, 2008).

7 E. Scott Reckard, “California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown Sues Countrywide,” Los Angeles Times (June 26, 2008).

8 Cathy Moran, “And the Truth (in Lending) Shall Set You Free,” mortgagelawnetwork.com (June 11, 2008).

9 Gina Keating, “Mortgage Ruling Could Shock U.S. Banking Industry,” Reuters (June 30, 2008).

10 Michael Robinson, “City of Debt Shows US Housing Woe,” BBC News (December 30, 2007).

11 “Is the Latest Liquidity Crunch in Remission?”, NakedCapitalism(March 26, 2008).

12 See E. Brown, “Dollar Deception: How Banks Secretly Create Money,” webofdebt.com/articles (July 3, 2007).

13 For more on this funding solution and why it would not inflate prices, see E. Brown, “Waking Up on a Minnesota Bridge: How to Solve the Infrastructure Crisis Without Selling Off Our National Assets,” ibid. (August 4, 2007).

14 Chris Cook, “Peak Credit and a Flight to Simplicity,” Asia Times (April 3, 2008).
kitchen gadgets

Should Israel Swap Land for War or Land for Peace?

No Comments

December 22, 2012 at 8:11 pmCategory:Politics

Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) are reportedly looking at swapping land in the West Bank for land in Israel as a means of overcoming the PA’s long standing demand that all 6205 square kms of the West Bank be handed over to the PA by Israel as a necessary precondition for peace.

In the best traditions of a Middle East bazaar it seems a great idea for Israel to horse trade 500 sq kms of vacant Israeli land for 500 sq kms of land heavily populated by Jews in the West Bank.

Land swaps are not unknown in the Middle East. In 1965 Jordan exchanged 7000 sq kms of inland desert for 6000 sq kms of Saudi Arabian land fronting the sea shore.

The announcement of a planned land swap to be negotiated within a time frame of six months would certainly go down well at President Bush’s international meeting next month and probably be hailed as a major breakthrough in resolving the 130 years conflict between the Jews and the Arabs over the former territory once called Palestine.

It might also just act as the fig leaf necessary to persuade Saudi Arabia to attend the meeting even if the more contentious issues – Jerusalem, water and permitting millions of Arabs to emigrate to Israel – are put on the diplomatic backburner.

President Bush desperately needs a lifeline to prevent his two state vision disappearing forever into the quicksand stirred up by totally inflexible and intransigent Arab negotiating positions.

Certainly the resolution of the territorial dispute over the proposed land to comprise the future Palestinian State would be a notable achievement.

It would herald an important change in the present racist stance of the PA and the Arab League that demands the West Bank be ethnically cleansed of all its Jewish residents – that Jews be tossed out of their homes in breach of international humanitarian law as encompassed in a number of United Nations Conventions.

It would signify the first crack in the negotiating stance of the Arabs that has remained unchanged for the last 40 years – showing a willingness to now be prepared to give something and not demand everything.

Unfortunately the announcement and eventual resolution of such a proposed land swap will not resolve the conflict unless all the other outstanding core issues – Jerusalem, refugees, water, – are also resolved.

Even if such issues were miraculously settled, what guarantee could then be given to Israel by the PA that the border between Israel and the newly created State would become a no go zone for Hamas, Hezbollah and the myriad other terrorist groups hell bent on Israel’s destruction – having already unanimously indicated their violent opposition to any proposed settlement with Israel other than its total dismantling?

What guarantee would there be for Israel that those parts of the West Bank accepted by Israel in the land swap deal would not come under mortar fire and rocket attacks from within the borders of the new Arab State as emanated from Gaza virtually without respite when the PA ruled there?

The reality is that until any PA agreement with Israel is endorsed by Hamas, Hezbollah , Islamic Jihad and the Arab League, that agreement runs the risk of being abrogated overnight by the actions of well armed and trained terrorist groups whom PA President Abbas has been too weak to oppose or control in the past.

The risks of continued dealing with the PA alone are therefore so great that any responsible Government in Israel would be putting the lives and security of its citizens at grave risk unless these other belligerent parties were signatories to any peace agreement.

The position would be entirely different if the West Bank was divided between Jordan and Israel – two sovereign countries already possessing a peace agreement that has proved its resilience for the last 12 years.

Land swaps would only be necessary as a last resort if dividing some relatively small areas of the West Bank between Jordan and Israel could not be amicably resolved. A lease to Israel of some Jordanian land as part of their peace agreement shows what can be achieved.

It would not be in Jordan’s national interest that any terrorist groups be allowed to flourish in Jordan’s newly acquired West Bank territory since they could represent a threat to the Hashemite regime ruling in Jordan. These groups might be tempted to try and overthrow Jordan’s King Abdullah if allowed to develop a formidable military infrastructure in the West Bank.

The attempt by the PLO to do just that in 1970 is deeply ingrained in the Jordanian psyche. Jordan has a well trained and disciplined Army and police force – unlike the PA’s forces – to meet any such new threat.

Jordan is not faced with the political problems arising out of the falling out between Abbas and former Prime Minister Haniyeh that has split the PA and Hamas into two bitterly opposed factions – destroying any semblance of unity between the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza. Jordan’s close ties with West Bank Arabs would be a unifying factor of enormous significance in countering terrorist activities.

The path to resolution of issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and water are already sign posted in the existing peace treaty between Israel and Jordan.

The return of Jordan to rule the Arab sections of the West Bank would recognise the status quo that existed in the Arab occupied areas between 1948-1967. It would bring the hope of stability to the region rather than the chaos and uncertainty that the PA currently represents as one of the principal players responsible for the slide into despair that has befallen Jordan’s Arab brothers in Gaza.

Any belief that an agreed land swap involving the PA will be a step on the road to peace is yet just another mirage like so many others that have marked politics in the Middle East since the euphoric endorsement of the Oslo Accords 14 years ago by most of those countries assembling at President Bush’s meeting next month.

How wrong they were then and how wrong they will be next month if they rapturously endorse the announcement of this “historic breakthrough”.

Land swaps with the PA is a recipe for war. Land swaps with Jordan is a recipe for peace.

Which one Israel chooses will make a huge difference to millions of Jewish and Arab lives.

sweet 16 favors

Is Germany in Danger of Backsliding?

No Comments

December 21, 2012 at 1:08 amCategory:News And Society

Germany’s “conversion” from Nazism to democracy was forced on it by the victors of WWII.

We left it up to the Germans to “deNazify” their country! Now Germany appears to be backsliding as the Nazi German spirit is beginning to stir again, getting ready to break free from imposed shackles with a fury, and come back with a vengeance from the abyss, threatening to wreak havoc upon the world.

This is documented within GERMANY AND THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE.

It appears mankind continues its march of folly and refuses to learn, and rejects the biblical principles of strong leadership as manifest in great British-Israelite heroes like Winston S. Churchill.

For the record, I’ve been throughout Germany four times and have had German roommates while serving as a volunteer in various kibbutzim in Israel, and have nothing against individual Germans and believe their country is very beautiful, and am definitely German-American, in large part.

I love the German people enough to help warn them to be very wary of any crisis that will tempt them to just blindly follow the leader about to emerge, who will be presented as Europe’s savior from nuclear Islam, by none other than the pope and the Vatican’s political puppets. Yes, beware the beast! The Bible exposes Europe will experience another wannabe divine emperor.

I believe that most Germans are merely naive or ordinary citizens (like this country), but that the powers that be behind the scenes, the real rulers of Germany, are intent on misleading and manipulating the German army and people again to form their final and Fourth Reich, just as Bible prophecy warns.

Growing evidence of this troubling trend was clearly manifest in the Balkans, where Germany led the assault against our faithful WWII allies, the Serbs, and raped and destroyed Yugoslavia and slaughtered the Orthodox, all as groundwork for their unholy Roman Empire?of the German Nation.

How did Germany do this when the German constitution forbids it? The United States were useful idiots for Germany and the bloody Vatican under our shameful president, Bill Clinton, and helped to do their dirty work for them in lockstep with NATO (the same NATO/UN/EU forces about to be used and abused in the Middle East, wolves in sheep’s clothing, “peacekeepers” with their evil eye on Jerusalem).

By foolishly aiding and abetting German hegemony throughout Europe, we are actually helping to create the Frankenstein Monster that will destroy us! Margaret Thatcher couldn’t have been more right.

“Germany Behind the Mask: Monster or Marshmallow?” exposes all is not quiet on the continent, although Germany puts up a front…for now.
bike reviews

The Institution of Chieftaincy: the Last Bastion of Underdevelopment in Sierra Leone

No Comments

December 14, 2012 at 7:46 amCategory:Politics

The role of the institution of Chieftaincy in the management of local administration and development and in the broader body-politic of Sierra Leone requires a critical unbiased introspection and analysis as to its continued relevance and centrality in the lives of our peoples.

The schisms that have plagued our nation’s socio, political and administrative structures, resulting in the decadent path traversed for so long only seem to continue if we again fail to put forth bold and visionary ideas in establishing local administrative entities separate and apart from the traditional chieftaincy model.

Modern Sierra Leone has more than 4/5ths of her land mass and population under the direct hegemony of Paramount Chiefs, most of whose members are selected and or elected from a very small undemocratic pool of “chieftaincy families”, so designated by the British colonial administration from compliant families, as they sought to pacify the hinterland and protectorate into vassal areas in the 18th and early 19th centuries.

The inordinate concentration of such socio-economic, political and administrative decision making powers in the hands of the Paramount Chiefs has not always been used as a force for good or development in the chiefdoms throughout the country. Rather the institution and its protagonists have allowed themselves to be misused by governing political parties and politicians and as tools for perpetuating their governance especially during elections.

In the period immediately after independence the central government in Freetown sought to utilize and harness for it’s own political supremacy the enormous colonial era powers the Paramount Chiefs enjoyed among their subjects. This resulted in the enactment of laws ensuring that Paramount Chiefs subsequently became unelected members of the Parliament in the period prior to the 1967 elections and the dethronement of those not compliant with the government’s dictates.

This trend in the central role of Chiefs, in ensuring block voting culminated with most parliamentary Paramount Chiefs in the wake of the inconclusive general elections of 1967 declaring for the SLPP party in power at the time, even though the party had clearly lost the majority of the Sierra Leonean electorate.

The role of most Paramount Chiefs in the recent 2007 elections is also highly instructive as chiefs throughout the country were used mostly as surrogates of the ruling SLPP party bent on ensuring its continued rule despite the majority of the electorate having already decided on the need for change of administration.

As an active participant in the recent 2007 elections in the battleground areas of the south and eastern provinces, I witnessed first hand some of the undemocratic tactics used by Chiefs in areas so underdeveloped and neglected that one wondered why so much effort was being made by the chiefs to maintain a government that had essentially abandoned their people to doom and underdevelopment. It was not uncommon for chiefs in places like Sahn Malen, for example, where the Paramount Chief, Brima Victor Sidie Kebbie went to such extent as to even ban gatherings by the opposition PMDC and condoned the burning and pillaging of homes and properties of PMDC members all designed to intimidate and ensure that the SLPP maintained political power or in Bo where Chief Rashid Kamanda-Bongay did all within his power to thwart the citizens genuine aspirations for positive change through intimidation.

The near 30-year reign of PC Kebbie in the Pujehun district for example is a classic study of how most Paramount Chiefs in Sierra Leone have abdicated their roles as catalysts and agents of development and change and why the district remains the least developed in Sierra Leone and by extrapolation the least developed region in the world. As an example, with a functioning palm oil mill located in Sahn Malen and palm oil cultivation hitherto the primary business activity in the region, PC Kebbie has however overseen the complete demise of the palm oil industry in the district, despite the still high demand for the product not only nationally but worldwide. His inability to innovate and attract new investments into the maintenance and production of this very vital jobs and revenue generating infrastructure located in his chiefdom’s headquarter town speaks volumes in the management or lack thereof of local administration in Sierra Leone.

The APC opposition party upon gaining political power in 1968, most likely out of poor policy judgment, embarked on a systematic centralization of local administration throughout the country. As a contemporary Sierra Leonean political analyst and commentator of this period, it is my hypothesis that the suspension and subsequent dismantling of the town, district and municipal Councils and the radical diminishing of the authority of Paramount Chiefs was a direct consequence of the perception held by leadership of the party that the unelected chiefs were responsible for their not gaining power immediately following the 1967 elections.

In an effort thus at asserting their power and authority over institutions viewed as potential rival centers of power, the Siaka Stevens APC government resorted to their dismantling without cognizance to the plethora of problems and probable unintended consequences and ramifications that subsequently ensued.

One such consequence of this policy was the creation of a void in the machinery of local government administration and development with its resultant lack of accountability to the local people. Local government functions such as trash collections, sanitation, road maintenance, public education, local taxation, town and city planning and budgeting were essentially left unattended to or responsibilities shifted to civil servants in the mammoth and inefficient Freetown based bureaucracy. Locally generated revenues which essentially had paid for such services were forwarded to the central government treasury and appropriations for developmental projects and basic services subjected to the whims and caprices of central government politicians and corrupt civil servants.

It is worth noting that this era lay bare the utter impotence of the once revered traditional chieftaincy institution which failed to challenge not only the centralization policies of the government in the face of usurpation of their institutional authority, but it also show-cased the institutions collective total lack of initiatives and vision , as to how to administer a modern community by administering to its economic developmental needs.

With the return of the SLPP administration in 1996, the Kabbah government embarked on reconstituting the town, city, district and provincial councils with a view of promoting decentralization. The problem however still dogging this experiment is that the role of Paramount Chiefs in identifying, attracting and effectuating development in their various chiefdoms have as yet to be appropriately defined.

For example, as custodians of their chiefdom resources including lands and mineral rights, chiefs have tended to view these community resources as theirs with all remuneration inuring for their sole benefits. The new reform compact being proposed will clearly mandate that all community property and resources including revenue derived thereof must be used for the larger community ‘s development and not just for the Paramount Chiefs. This way, repairs of potholes, management of communal infrastructure amenities and local health will remain within the local administration’s purview.

A singular failure of the centralization policies and the arms length attitude of the Paramount Chiefs became glaring to me as a young man in the 1970′s when a pipe borne water supply system built by the French Degremount company for the community in Potoru was abandoned into disuse simply because a basic spare parts could not be replaced by the ministry in Freetown. Despite being beneficiaries of the clean pipe borne water supply, the chief and town authorities could not muster among themselves the vision and wherewithal to purchase the spare parts but remained waiting for the ministry in Freetown to replace this spare parts to this day.

As one who for long has espoused and advocated the concepts of “Pan-Africanism” with its emphasis on strong ties to our culture and traditions, the institution of chieftaincy remains the essential cog and focal point of this cultural and traditional identity. What I am however advocating in this piece is not the abolition of the institution of chieftaincy, as some have eloquently articulated, rather it is the belief that for the institution to remain relevant in the 21st century, a radical new political compact needs to be adopted clearly delineating the election and governance roles of chiefs along the below mentioned lines:

The compact must ensure that the institution of chieftaincy is modernized to essentially function more in tune with the modern developmental aspirations of the local citizens. For as the most visible governmental authority at the local level, Chiefs together with elected village councils must be empowered with responsibilities for ensuring development programs and jobs are for their localities.

A transparent and much more democratic decision making process encompassing the talents of the educated and uneducated must be brought to bear in this process.

Term limits and or elections after every five years, along lines as parliamentary and presidential elections, should be enacted in the new compact to provide an orderly process whereby incompetent and unprogressive chiefs can be replaced.

The election of paramount chiefs must be participatory by the entire chiefdom electorate, rather than the current narrow Tribal Authorities, who have been known to cast ballots mostly for the highest bidder with no regard to the interests of the general electorate.

The pool from which chiefs are selected/elected must be enlarged to encompass a broader participation of the citizens.

Accountability and transparency must be enshrined as a tool for good governance .

Finally, it must be acknowledged that the governmental units, particularly at the local levels, today have not brought about any enlightened developmental innovations and programs that have in any effective manner impacted the economic welfare of the people.The continual relevance of the institution of chieftaincy itself as representing the political, cultural, socio-economic and administrative aspirations of the local people seems to have been greatly undercut in the current modern political dispensation. The caliber and socio-political sophistication and acumen of the candidates for chieftaincy the “chieftaincy families” are offering our localities is not only lamentable but is a recipe ensuring continued underdevelopment.

It is thus against this backdrop and realization that the institution of chieftaincy, the cog around which local government has for ages operated, seems totally out of touch and outdated not only with modern concepts of governance and administration, but rather appears to be a regressive bulwark against the modernization and structural changes required and hence the need for reform of this venerable institution.

wedding countdown timer

Fun Facts About Iraq – Home of Ancient Civilizations

No Comments

December 3, 2012 at 8:32 amCategory:Reference And Education

History

Did you know…Present-day Iraq was home of the ancient Mesopotamian civilization, which had been located in the Tigris-Euphrates river valley.

Democracy

Did you Know…After several decades of tyrannical rule, Iraq has made substantial progress in political reforms. In the key October 2005 referendum, a new constitution was adopted — the first democratic constitution in 73 years — and a new Parliament (a 275-member Council of Representatives) was chosen in elections. Meanwhile, Ibrahim al-Jaafari assumed power in the country. He was the country’s first pro-democratic leader to take up the post of Head of Government; then al-Jaafari was succeeded by Nuri al-Maliki. The new government has been recognized by several nations of the world. The country was one of the world’s worst dictatorships from 1979 until 2003 when Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

Geography

Did you know…The Arab country is the 65th largest nation on Earth, ahead of Japan, Germany and Norway. It — 168,754 square miles– is about the size of California.

Olympic Games

Did you know… Six athletes competed for Iraq, a war-torn country since 1990, at the Summer Olympic Games in the People’s Republic of China. During that time, the Iraqi Olympic Committee had their hopes pinned on Ali Adnan, an archer. Before the 2008 Olympics, Adnan had trained in the Republic of Korea, the world’s Olympic archery superpower.

Economics

Did you know… . In the 1950s, Iraq had a relatively high GDP per capita in comparison to most Asian nations, including South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan.

The Mother Teresa of Iraq

Did you know…The country’s idol Madeeha Hasan Odhaib, a former seamstress, was named one of “Time” magazine’s 2008 100 Most Influential People in the world.In the last years, she backed up a host of women and children in the Arab nation. “Iraq is suffering one of the worst humanitarian crises we have ever seen. While Madeeha rightly makes Time’s list, women like her are found throughout Iraq, sewing hope one stitch at a time. Through Madeeha we celebrate all of Iraq’s courageous women, whose resilience and resourcefulness hold the promise of a new dawn”, said Rania, Queen of Jordan, of Madeeha.

Universal Wonders

Did you know…The California-size land boasts three UNESCO World Heritage Sites:

- Hatra
- Ashur
- Samarra Archaeological City

Soccer

Did you know…In 2004, the national team finished fourth in the Summer Olympics in Athens, Greece, behind Argentina, Paraguay and Italy and ahead of South Korea and Australia. Exactly three years on, the Iraqi men’s soccer national squad won the Asian Cup in 2007 (the winners of the regional tournament are often seen like the favorites to qualify for the FIFA World Cup). The award had been a long time in coming. In a country that’s sometimes been unfairly viewed as one of the world’s worst Olympic nations, this victory became an example for many impoverished countries in the Third World. Since then, Iraq’s victory set off a wave of euphoria across Baghdad and Arbil, as well as Mosul and other Iraqi metropolises. The war-torn country of Iraq had never won an international tournament of such standing before.

Ancient Wonders

Did you know…Modern-day Iraq was the site of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. These gardens were built by King Nebuchadnezzar II about 600 BC. Like the Colossus of Rhodes and the Statue of Zeus at Olympia, the gardens were destroyed by time.

International Organizations

Did you know…The country of Iraq is a full member of the United Nations as well as the League of Arab States and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (also known as OPEC ). On December 21, 1945, the Arab nation was endorsed by the UN. In the early 1980s, Iraq’s ambassador Ismat Kittani became President of the Assembly of the United Nations in New York City, NY.

Independence

Did you know…The gradual introduction of reforms in the 1920s led to independence from Britain in the early 1930s, following the World War II , and Iraq became a modern monarchy.

Iraq in Miss Universe

Did you know…Inspired by Georgina Rizk’s victory in Miss Universe 1971, the Arab nation sent a contestant to the Miss Universe Pageant in San Juan de Puerto Rico in July 1972. Miss Iraq Universe, Wijdan Burham El-Deen Sulyman , arrived on Puerto Rico to an enthusiastic welcome, but she was eliminated in the first round. No other Iraqi woman had ever participated in it before.

Authors

Did you know…Feisal II, former King of Iraq, published “How To Defend Yourself “, a book on judo.

National Icons

Did you know… After winning the 2007 Asian Cup and other awards, Younes Mahmoud became the toast of his homeland. In Italy, in November 2007, Iraq’s soccer player Younes Mahmoud won the “Facchetti Award”, a prize in memory of Giacinto Facchetti, one of Europe’s most popular soccer players in the past century. Facchetti’s son Gianfelice has said of Younes: “I thought of Younes, because he, like my father, has left a beautiful legacy. He has given his fellow-countrymen hope and optimism with the goal which enabled Iraq to win the Asian Cup in the final against Saudi Arabia. He is the athlete who triggered the first real celebration in his country after years of horror. He has proved that the will of man is stronger than a war which started with a lie and which has never been explained”.

Iraq’s Capital

Did you know…Baghdad is one of the oldest metropolises in the world. Apart from that, from 1932 to 1955, it was one of Arab’s most important cities, along with Cairo, Alexandria, Casablanca, Tehran and Karachi.

History

Did you know…Between 1932 and 1947, despite being made up of more than 10 ethnic groups, Iraq was one of the most stable and peaceful nations in the Middle East. During that time, it had not had wars, conflicts, coup d’ etats, Marxist revolutions, and terrorism. The Asian nation had been put on the tourism map: it was well-known for its historical buildings, archaeological sites and Arab markets, as well as exotic dancers and friendly people.

Famous Women

Did you know… The California-size land is home to a number of notable women: Sabiha Al-Dabbagh, doctor; Sabiha Al-Khated, feminist; Intisar Shaker,athlete; Take Zaha Hadid, achitect; Queen Aliyah; Nzik Al-Mala Ikah, author; Suad Abdallah, performer; Hanaa Busha, feminist.

Ancient Empires

Did you know…Modern-Iraq was part of the Ottoman Empire.
birthday party favors

What is a Democrat

No Comments

December 3, 2012 at 6:50 amCategory:News And Society

When it comes to the political parties many individuals choose either Republican or the Democrat side. If you are wondering which side you should choose and you have already read about the Republican Party then you will be happy to know that this article will be telling you all about the Democrat Party.

First we would like to start by telling you that Democrats have been around for a very long time now. In fact, the Democratic Party is known for being around the longest in the United States of America. You see the Democrat Party is pretty big because it just so happens to be one out of two of the major political parties to be found in the United States of America. The other party that follows behind the Democrat Party is known as the Republican Party.

If you try to trace the origins of the Democratic Party then you can trace it back to the Democratic-Republican Party. This party emerged in the year 1792. The Democratic-Republican Party was founded by a number of Federalists such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. When the division of the Republican Party came out in the year 1912 the Democratic Party has been positioned to the left when it comes to the economic views along with the social matters. Since the year 1932 the one individual that has shaped the Democratic Party the most was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Then in the 1960′s we had the civil rights movement and that seemed to make the Democratic Party stronger.

In the year 2004 the Democrats were more popular than the Republicans. This is because there was seventy two million individuals registered to vote under the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is currently known to be the majority party when it comes to the 110th Congress. The Democratic Party currently holds the majority when it comes to the House of Representatives along with the Democratic caucus. Also holding the majority when it comes to the state governorships is the Democratic Party. For the year 2008 we have a Democrat running for president and that is Senator Barack Obama. Barack Obama is from Illinois and it looking to be president of the United States of America on the Democrat side.

Have you ever wondered who is the one’s responsible when it comes to promoting the champaign activities on the Democrat side? It is the Democratic National Committee or DNC. Currently the Democratic National Committee is being chaired by Howard Dean and he was the former Governor of Vermont. Have you ever noticed how we are being separated by political parties? The individuals who are Republicans are constantly downing the Democrats while the Democrats are downing the Republicans at the same time.
wine reviews

Post-capitalistic Free Market Society, How Can US Be Rescued (Part V) – Economy, Work and Retirement

No Comments

November 27, 2012 at 2:25 pmCategory:News And Society

Here is how a technological democratic society operates. We will be looking into the application of equality of opportunity in four areas of capital, labor, state and technology. This is the heart of democracy, because, there cannot be any kind of real democracy without having economic democracy.

A. Capital

To democratize the ownership of capital, the principle of equality of opportunity prohibits unjust enrichment. It simply means that no person receives property without giving in return a comparable compensation. This is known as the principle of unjust enrichment. Its application establishes the property ownership and relationship in a democratic society with the following consequences:

1. Inheritance. Inheritance is the highest cause of inequality of opportunity. It leads to class stratification. It is the first factor in creating an unjust society. Since anything received through inheritance is free and without comparable compensation, it amounts to an unjust enrichment. If it elevates the opportunity of the beneficiaries to the extent that it creates unequal opportunities, it cannot be allowed under the principle of equality of opportunity. The proceeds from inheritance go into the Public Consumption Fund, a public organization, to be spent in providing vital services to society such as education and health care. The result is that as the rich individuals die, their wealth, to the extent allowed by the principle of equality of opportunity, is transferred to this organization and used for public good. Gradually wealthy families, which enjoyed a very high opportunity under capitalism, disappear while their riches are used to enrich and enlighten the masses as a whole. In a span of a few decades, society ceases to have any super rich. The ruling capitalist elite dies and with it disappears its dominating economic and political powers.

Fortunately, the U.S. Constitution embodies the concept of equality of opportunity. It only needs to be specified to apply to economic and social aspects of life. The process of transition will be peaceful. It requires Congress to propose a proper amendment to the U.S. Constitution clarifying the application of equality of opportunity to economic, political an social aspects of life. Since the amendment, if ratified, would prohibit inheritance, for the stage of transition, Congress should specify a figure for maximum inheritance such as $5 million. This will insure the ratification of the amendment since only 0.7percent of population has wealth in excess of this amount. The result will be equalization of the wealth within the limit of $5 million. Decades later when minimum national inheritance level will increase disparity will be negligible or may be readjusted then to guarantee full equality of opportunity. [1]

2. Profits. As presented before, as globalization progresses, free trade market economy causes the kind of keen competition that continually cuts down the profit margin leading to its virtual elimination.[2] The profit motive remains still there but rarely materialized. At this stage, estimated to materialize in four to five decades, the society’s levers of power- the multinational corporations, the military and their politician and bureaucrat supporters and collaborators- are eliminated from power status. By the coordinated efforts of local groups all over the country, equality of opportunity prevails, the economy and social structure are reconstructed for efficiency and justice. The production in a cooperative way focuses primarily on people’s primary needs. Every able person participates whether in neighborhoods, communities or work places. People work for a few hours a day having ample time free for leisure, art, music and other creative work and enjoyment.

3. Labor. Regarding labor and workforce, there is a very basic distinction between capitalism and technological democracy. Under capitalism, the capitalist controls land, capital and technology, and employs labor from the market. Under technodemocratic economy, the workers own and control the capital and all other means of production. The principle of equality of opportunity controls the process of ownership of capital and prescribes its democratization. It materializes the total private ownership of the means of production and distribution to the extent never achieved before. It prescribes that the ownership of capital be gradually and systematically transferred from the capitalist to the workers. For clarification, it must be noted that the term worker in this concept embodies any person working for the capitalist from top management and professionals down to the unskilled workers. Under this concept, while each worker receives a regular wage, he is also given a certain specified amount of shares of the firm where he works. Thus from the time he receives his first pay, he starts to become a part owner of the firm. As the years pass, the worker continues to accumulate capital and increase his share of ownership. As the big capitalists die, their share of stocks revert to the Public Consumption Fund and from there is placed in the stock market for sale. These shares are purchased by different institutions, public institutions in particular, and gradually transferred to the workers including public employees along with their monthly pay. Some is also purchased by individual. [3]

After four or five decades, the capitalist class as we know today, disappears and the ownership as well as control of capital and production firms become wholly transferred to a new capitalist class the same as the working class. From there on as the retired workers die, their share of stocks go to the Public Consumption Fund and placed in stock market and finally purchased by different institutions and gradually transferred to the new generation of workers along with their pay. For the shares that each worker owns, he receives dividend which continues to increase as he continues to accumulate more and more stocks. Each worker is entitled to full benefit of ownership of his stocks except that they are not transferable to others but can be exchanged with other non-transferable stocks of other institutions on the stock market for the purpose of diversification of their ownership. This non-transferability of the stocks is prescribed by the principle of equality of opportunity and, as it will be presented later on, income from these stocks takes the place of social security and old age benefits for the owner during the retirement period since under technological democracy there are no public welfare programs such as social security, medicare or food-stamps or else. Health care and education are the only programs available free for all, funded by the Public Consumption Fund and not the government.

4. Position Classification. Position classification is a technology developed for organizing, classification and equalization of similar positions. It describes the responsibilities of each position and corresponding financial compensation range. Under this technology, positions are classified vertically as well as horizontally. This system is applied nationally and universally to all available positions. Horizontal positions are those requiring similar levels of skills to carry out job requirements. However, these positions may not be similar in the kind of functions and skills they require. For example, medical doctors, lawyers, and top administrators all require a high level of professional skill, while functionally they are quite different from one another. They may be placed horizontally in one category and entitled to the same range of compensation. The same applies to clerical or other class of worker. Vertical positions are classified from the lowest to the highest.

Technology of position classification was created primarily for the purpose of increasing and controlling productivity as well as providing equitable pay systems, similar pays for similar jobs. This technology is not new; it has been used in every industrialized society by its public sector and by all major, medium size and some small private institutions. However, each institution has its own independent position classification and corresponding pay system. The national government, each state government, major city governments and giant corporations each has a position classification of its own. There is no uniformity among these systems and there are injustices. Furthermore, a great variety of small businesses do not have a classification system yet these are the institutions employing the majority of the working class people who are not subject to any standard of pay and are generally exploited. Under technological democracy all these systems are brought under one umbrella with the same standards of positions and corresponding pay system. However, such a monumental classification is not done in detail by a central office. This would be an impossible task. The national government through the Position Classification and Pay Commission, a branch of the National Economic Council, establishes a general classification of positions, a system somehow similar to the present national classification. Then it requires each institution , private or public, large or small, to establish its own position classification and pay system within the framework established by the national classification and pay system. A copy of this classification by each firm is entered in Technodem website available to everyone including every employee in the institution. The Technodem will check this classification against the national system and will inform the institution about discrepancies for correction, if any. This classification is put into operation by the corresponding institution until it is objected by the Technodem or the regional classification council.[4]

The systems are reviewed each year by each institution as new technologies develop, certain positions are abandoned, new positions are created or functions of some positions are modified or changed. Position classification under one national model system has several benefits.

1. It harmonizes and standardizes all available positions, private or public.

2. It equalizes the pay system, similar pay for similar jobs, regardless of race, color, sex or whether a worker is a union member,

3. It eliminates the union bargaining and thus eliminate unionization for economic purposes.

4. It simplifies position and pay classification at the institutional level following a standardized and updated national model.

5. It democratizes the work system by providing equality of opportunity in similar positions with similar pay.

6. It allows regional agencies, through Technodem technology, to supervise the proper and uniform application of national standards.

7. It allows discretion in each institution to proceed with its own position and pay classification.

8. It gives each employee an opportunity to evaluate his position requirement and pay level in comparison with the national standards and, in the case of discrepancy, petition first his institution and then file his petition with the Technodem which will examine the complaint instantaneously and respond to it. If the institution did not resolve the issue according to the Technodem advice, he then can petition the regional classification council which will usually go along with the Technodem finding. By this way position classification in each institution is scrutinized by its employees and brought to the level prescribed by the national standards.

5. Shared Opportunity and Full Employment. This is a very important principle of democratic employment opportunity. The application of the principle of equality of opportunity requires that those having a higher level of employment opportunity share it with those lacking such opportunity at the same position level. This refers in particular to unemployed workers seeking employment. Of course, at every skill level, those employed have a higher opportunity than those unemployed. The principle of shared opportunity is employed to equalize the situation. It requires that those who have employment, in order to provide for equality of opportunity, forgo a small part of their employment opportunity by giving up a small part of their work, say one hour per week, and thus provide employment opportunity for their unemployed fellows.

For example, if there is a 100 million work force and each worker gives up one hour of his weekly work, nationwide 100 million work-hours amounting to 2.5 million full time positions will become available to those unemployed or new comers. [5] It needs to be noticed that unemployment in technological democracy has a different character. Everyone starts working part-time when he reaches 15 years of age and completes his professional or technical education while working. So work under technological democracy has a transitory character and is an individual right. Sharing opportunities provides for continuous employment, causing stability in the market and thus eliminates a major cause of recession by providing job security for working years. The inflationary process will also be prevented since there will be no monopoly firms, no price increase to maximize profits. Giant corporations will automatically divided into many smaller firms, and competition in the market will be tense, more realistic and free. This decentralization and dispersal will take place because once workers receive controlling shares of a giant firm they will tend to eliminate the superstructure of the corporate bureaucracy which did not produce anything and had also lost its unproductive use. Then, workers’ desire to have voice in the production process will tend toward dismantling the giant corporation into smaller entities in which the policy-makers will be directly attached to the operation of production and each worker can feel his voice and power over his institution. The same will happen to the branches or affiliated firms abroad. They would want to be independent especially when the superstructure in domestic country becomes abolished. Thus the era of giant multinational corporations will become history as a stage of transition from monopolistic international capitalism to competitive technodemocratic economy. The old motto that “small is beautiful, controllable, more democratic,” will become materialized.

6. Old Age Benefits: Unlike the welfare programs instituted under the existing capitalistic and socialistic systems, there will be no retirement or general welfare programs under the technological democracy. First, each individual will start part time work at the age of fifteen. His income from the work will be sufficient to pay for his living expenditures, since he will have no education expenses because it will be free for everyone at all levels. By the age 21 he will finish his college education (exceeding in value over an M.A. degree at the present) and will be employed full time. Each individual will be required to work for at least 30 years in order to provide a sustained and sufficient income for his old age period. It is estimated that if each worker receive the company stock equal to 25% of his pay, after 30 years, when he retires at the age 52, he will accumulate enough capital from the stocks and their accumulated returns to receive an income of around $30,000 to live modestly but comfortably considering that health care and education will be free and individual taxes will be very small. Most of taxes will be collected from production firms. However, while the individual retires from the official workforce, he does not retire personally. Being only 52 years old he has many years of active life to contribute and be productive in social, political and economic fields. These could be either voluntary or income producing. This retirement after 30 years of service is mandatory in order to maintain equality of opportunity in workplace, and in no way deprives individuals from pursuing productive activities of their liking. It has also several important benefits: first, it provides vacancies to new workers entering the market, second, provides the retired workers with many years enjoyable and intellectually productive life; third, provides for participation in the political process where required qualifications for election is high and the service is temporary. At retirement, each individual would possess knowledge in humanities and social sciences far above the present Ph.D. level as a result of over thirty years of continuous graduate education, making him highly qualified to hold public or elective offices. Beside this, every person has also over Ph.D. level knowledge in his technical or professional field.[6]

Thus this required retirement is technical rather than real. The individual who is highly educated and experienced at this stage of life, may get engaged in many different kinds of work such as art, music, creative writing, counseling, political or economic activities individually or in partnership with other retired persons. Since top policy making positions in regional and national government are temporary with four to six year terms, it will be an excellent opportunity for the post-retirement life. Under technological democracy the individual worker is made responsible to hold and take care of his own retirement stocks. That is why the stocks he receives monthly from his firm are non-transferable, while he can exercise all other benefits of ownership including annual returns from them during his lifetime. Particularly, that working people would be hesitant to run for political offices since this would interrupt their working process and financially have negative effect on their future promotions as well as their retirement benefits.
.

References:

1.Reza Rezazadeh, Technological Democracy: A Humanistic philosophy of the Future Society, 1990, pp. 192-194

2. —————-, “Globalization and the End of Capitalism,” http://www.democracywhere.com also in http://www.ezinearticles.com

3.—————-, Technological Democracy, opp. cited, pp.194-198

4.—————-, Technodemocratic Economic Theory: From Capitalism and Socialism to Democracy, 1991, pp. 184-186. http://www.democracywhere.com

5.Ibid., pp.186-188, 205, 235.

6. Ibid., pp. 188-190, 219.

Dr. Reza Rezazadeh

1080 Eastman Street, Platteville, WI 53818

Phone: (608)348-7064
kayaking

Fun Facts About El Salvador

No Comments

November 18, 2012 at 8:55 pmCategory:Travel And Leisure

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

El Salvador hosted the 2002 Central American and Caribbean Sports Games. More than 2 million tickets were available for the 2002 Central American and Caribbean Games.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

El Salvador´s flag was adopted in the 1910s. The blue stripes represent unity. The white one symbolizes peace.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

Rosemary “Rosie” Casals, who was one of the best tennis players in the 1960s, has Salvadoran ancestry…

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

Different from Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea, El Salvador is currently a democracy. Like South Africa, Botswana, Costa Rica, South Korea and Taiwan, El Salvador has one of the best democracies in the Third World.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

El Salvador qualified for the 1982 FIFA World Championship.Surprisingly, El Salvador beat Mexico in the World Cup qualifiers.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

The Joya de Ceren is one of the most important archaeological sites in Latin America.It was declared as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1993.Like Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan (Mexico) and Great Zimbabwe National Monument (Zimbabwe), Joya de Ceren is considered among the wonders of the world.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

Miss El Salvador 1955, Maria Isabel Arrieta Galvez, best known as Maribel, is considered by experts as one of the most beautiful misses of all times. Miss El Salvador , Maribel Arrieta, was the 1st runner-up at the Miss Universe 1955.However, she was crowned Miss Amity 1955.She was a big favourite last minute.Maribel looked like Marilyn Monroe, one of the most beautiful actresses in the history of Hollywood.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

Christy Nicole Turlington, who is an American supermodel, has Salvadoran ancestry…

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

Maureen Kaila Vergara was one of the best cyclist in the Third World. She won many international tournaments. Maureen Kaila Vergara is an Salvadoran icon.

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

San Salvador, El Salvador´s capital, hosted the Miss Universe 1975. El Salvador became the second Latin American country to host the Miss Universe pageant. The winner was Miss Finland, Anne Pohtamo. The judges were: Leon Uris (writer), Ernest Borgnine (actor), Jean Claude Killy (sportsman), Peter Lawford (actor), Maribel Arrieta (baronesa de Thuret), Aline Griffith (countess), Sarah Vaugan (singer), Luz Marina Zuluaga (former Miss Universe), Susan Strasberg (actress), Max Lerner (journalist), and Kiyoshi Hara (businessman).

DID YOU KNOW THAT…

In 1983, Pope John Paul II visited El Salvador
…
DID YOU KNOW THAT…

El Salvador has many famous people:Claribel Alegria (writer), Alvaro Torres (singer), Muriel Hasbun (photographer), Carmencita Rios (actress), Maria CristinaVilanova Arbenz (former first lady of Guatemala), Oscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdamez (priest), Adam Oliver (sportsman), Maureen Kaila Vergara (sportswoman), and Paulina Margarita Galvez Piñeda (Miss International 1999).
About the Author:

Check out more information on

Ancient Greek, Roman Contrasts – Democracy With Alexander, Emperor With Julius

No Comments

November 10, 2012 at 5:10 pmCategory:Arts And Entertainment

Ancient Roman history books tell us about the single minded ambition and powerful physical presence of Julius Caesar, the greatest of any Caesar. Julius took his Roman legions far beyond the boundaries of Rome and created the Roman Empire, with him as the first dictator, or single ruler.

For this, of course, he was to pay for his life, and even then, a series of others who would call themselves Caesar continued the rule by leader, no longer the council of equals that the Senate and Forum had been.

The early Roman model had followed that of Greece, which had created the first modern example of honest rule by all through the equal power of their individual vote on any issue of urgency or efficiency: all had their say.

To begin his triumphal return to Rome, Julius Caesar came to, and then crossed the Rubicon River. He had hesitated, history understands, but not for long, as this plan had been building in the masterful mind and ambitious heart for years.

It was said of Julius as he rose that he would rather be first in any village than second in Rome. And so he became the first in every village he conquered, one by one, until he reached the Atlantic and had no more villages to gather up into the family of Rome.

But after his conquests, he and his men secured what they had established, began the building of roads and forts and the exchange of young sons between villages to work with them in far away lands, in the customary divide and rule. The new lads would become loyal soldiers for Rome once they were a thousand miles from their native village. It worked very well, and has been used by canny dictators since. But it was Julius Caesar, the Father of the Fatherland, who brought civilization to savage Europe.

Now long after Rome has faded as a power, the sense of a united Europe continued, even as languages diverged and now many versions of Latin are spoken between Portugal to Spain to France to Belgium to Italy and as far as Romania and beyond, and Christian all over. Yon Cassius did have a lean and hungry look, but all people prefer they get a vote, and a chance to express their deepest thoughts freely.

In his way, Julius gave his life to ensure that a civilized people could get along, and perhaps who was first in the village was not all.

At his Rubicon, the Indus, the soldiers of Alexander voted to go home, and they did. One man rule with Julius, or a Senate like Greece? We will discuss this further: this was the defining era that defined nation states to empires for more than the next thousand years. It is not a battle completed yet.
bike reviews

Why the Obama is Giving Scholarship for Poor Mothers?

No Comments

November 6, 2012 at 11:29 amCategory:Education

What comes to your mind when you hear the words “scholarship for moms”? Maybe you would wonder why it is being offered for moms to think that there are several young students needing scholarships to finish their studies. Well, the government has sensible reasons for it and it boils down to one thing, helping poor moms with their families live in a healthier way.

We cannot get away with poverty and it holds true to almost all the countries around the world. There are few privileged people enjoying many blessing in this life while there are many who are struggling to make ends meet. Education is one of the many things we should be grateful if we have the opportunity to get hold of it. Through education, you can realize your dreams and have what you desire in life with hard work of course.

With studies and statistics, it shows that young women, who cannot afford to pay for college, choose to have their own family at a young age after completing high school. They probably think that they will go nowhere anyway. Moms who weren’t able to finish their studies are mostly living below average with their families and the number of these cases is constantly increasing that is why the government thought that they should do something about it.

President Obama and his administration that by sending moms to college and helping them earn a degree, it would be a great initial step to help them get them out of poverty. How? Most better and high paying jobs require formal training or education as the main qualification. Employers perceives that hiring someone who has earned a degree would be more beneficial to them since they have the proper training and they were educated accordingly. Having an education will qualify you to more opportunities.

Unlike if you are not able to finish your education, and aside from staying at home to take care of your kids and chores at home, there may be a need for you to work to earn some income for your family especially if your partner’s salary is not enough. You do not have a choice but you will be forced to work in some low paying job with stressful working condition and sometimes with unfair benefits. Situations are really far different if you hold a college degree.

The main purpose why Obama is urging moms to go back to school is for their own good and to have a much better life than what they actually have at the moment.
graduation favors

Older Entries