By Abel Collins
With all the commotion last month surrounding Massachusetts’s election of Scott Brown, it was easy to lose track of a story whose implications may be far more important. On January 26 in Oregon, an historic vote was cast in which the people supported two tax increases; one, an income tax increase on the wealthy, and a second on corporations. It was the first time the voters of Oregon enacted an income tax increase since the Depression. Yeah, that’s a long time, and it indicates that something monumental is happening in the country.
Ironically, the populism that Brown rode to victory in Mass. and that Republicans hope will return them to power was evident in Oregon’s vote to raise taxes, a distinctly un-Republican initiative. The people are acting to change a system that has come to disproportionately benefit corporations and the wealthy and that isn’t good for Democrats or Republicans. People are demanding change, and they are demanding fiscal responsibility so they don’t get stuck with a bigger bill down the road to see it happen.
What this vote shows is that the people understand the need to raise revenues to pay for social services, and they are willing to raise taxes to do it. For decades, the dirty word that politicians and policymakers have been scared to even mouth is taxes, considering it the equivalent of political suicide. Yet, the people understand the need for taxes, and they are willing to pay them, so long as the revenues raised are well used.
State governments around the nation should take note, because state revenues are in dire straits and making budget cuts cannot be the only answer. Indeed, large cuts are certain to diminish revenues further. It’s time for state politicians to stop avoiding the issue and honestly admit to the people what they already know, taxes are part of the solution. It would be wise also to recognize what Oregonians realized, new and increased taxes must be born proportionally by those who can afford to pay them.
I, for one, am sick of the evasions from politicians when they claim they would love to enact good policy but that would require them to raise taxes and would be politically infeasible. From this point forward, I am going to demand leadership and courage in facing these issues. No more excuses. Thank you, Oregon.
Here is the web address of an article that details the Oregon election:
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html
Showing posts with label Abel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abel. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The Flaws of Cap and Trade: Part II: The Validators
By Abel Collins
The second weakness in the administration of the cap and trade system is found in the creation and validation of the carbon credits themselves. Typically, a carbon credit comes into being when an industry proposes a new business model that will allow it to reduce its carbon emissions. Each credit is claimed to be the equivalent of one metric ton of carbon reductions. This credit is then sold to a dirty industry to offset its own pollution. The claimed reduction must be substantiated at the outset by an audit from a rating agency called a validator and must subsequently be verified to have actually occurred by another similar audit.
Worldwide, there are less than thirty such validators, and the market is dominated by just two. The industry or business looking to create carbon credits hires one of these validators to certify its creation. The biggest certification requirement, aside from actually curbing carbon emissions, is that the project meets an additionality standard, proving that the carbon reducing project would not occur without the capital made available through the credits. Once the credit has been sanctioned by the validator, it can be sold in the carbon market. Complicating this picture further is the fact that many of the emissions reducing projects get their funding from venture capital through the large banks that control the carbon markets.
Here, then, is the problem. The validators are paid by the industries that are having their projects regulated, creating a monstrous conflict of interest and potential corruption. Reviewing the work of the validators to this point, it has been discovered that forty percent of projects do not meet additionality standards. Furthermore, the credits only produce 65-85% of the reductions that they promised. When graded, none of the validators received a grade higher than a D. Whether through corruption or incompetence, this administrative system is a proven failure.
Looking forward, the carbon market is already the fastest growing commodity market in the world, and it promises to get exponentially larger if the United States adopts a cap and trade policy. Clearly, major improvements to the administration of cap and trade are necessary if it is to function effectively. The question is, at what cost. Even if the conflicts of interest can be mitigated, the sheer amount of resources and bureaucracy that will be needed for the validation and verification process will produce tons of carbon emissions. There has to be a better way.
Please go to the address below and read this important article from Harper’s Magazine for more information on the validation and certification process.
http://citizensclimatelobby.org/files/Conning-the-Climate.pdf
The second weakness in the administration of the cap and trade system is found in the creation and validation of the carbon credits themselves. Typically, a carbon credit comes into being when an industry proposes a new business model that will allow it to reduce its carbon emissions. Each credit is claimed to be the equivalent of one metric ton of carbon reductions. This credit is then sold to a dirty industry to offset its own pollution. The claimed reduction must be substantiated at the outset by an audit from a rating agency called a validator and must subsequently be verified to have actually occurred by another similar audit.
Worldwide, there are less than thirty such validators, and the market is dominated by just two. The industry or business looking to create carbon credits hires one of these validators to certify its creation. The biggest certification requirement, aside from actually curbing carbon emissions, is that the project meets an additionality standard, proving that the carbon reducing project would not occur without the capital made available through the credits. Once the credit has been sanctioned by the validator, it can be sold in the carbon market. Complicating this picture further is the fact that many of the emissions reducing projects get their funding from venture capital through the large banks that control the carbon markets.
Here, then, is the problem. The validators are paid by the industries that are having their projects regulated, creating a monstrous conflict of interest and potential corruption. Reviewing the work of the validators to this point, it has been discovered that forty percent of projects do not meet additionality standards. Furthermore, the credits only produce 65-85% of the reductions that they promised. When graded, none of the validators received a grade higher than a D. Whether through corruption or incompetence, this administrative system is a proven failure.
Looking forward, the carbon market is already the fastest growing commodity market in the world, and it promises to get exponentially larger if the United States adopts a cap and trade policy. Clearly, major improvements to the administration of cap and trade are necessary if it is to function effectively. The question is, at what cost. Even if the conflicts of interest can be mitigated, the sheer amount of resources and bureaucracy that will be needed for the validation and verification process will produce tons of carbon emissions. There has to be a better way.
Please go to the address below and read this important article from Harper’s Magazine for more information on the validation and certification process.
http://citizensclimatelobby.org/files/Conning-the-Climate.pdf
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Flaws of Cap and Trade: Part I: The Market
By Abel Collins
On paper, cap and trade offers a versatile regulatory strategy to reduce carbon emissions. Rather than the blunt tool of a blanket tax, the innovation of the carbon credit allows industries that might find it particularly onerous to cut carbon pollution to promote other sectors of the economy to make reductions in their place. By creating a carbon market, the world theoretically summons the mystical invisible hand of market efficiency theory to produce the most effective reductions.
Of course, market efficiency theory is now seen as a rather naïve economic model that is disproven on a daily basis, and ideas that make a lot of sense on paper are often met with resistance by reality. Such is the case with cap and trade. The translation of the theory into cap and trade reality is fraught with problems.
The most glaring problem is administration, and it is manifold. Before we delve into the many failings of the administration of cap and trade, it is important to note with administrative costs that resources dedicated to organizing and maintaining the system (administration) are resources that are being taken away from actually addressing the issue that the system is designed to resolve (e.g. healthcare). With cap and trade, there are two distinct areas of administration; the carbon markets, and the validation and verification of the carbon credits to be traded within those markets.
Large banks, notably J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs, have graciously offered to administer the commodity markets for carbon credits. They have not made this offer out of concern about global warming or because they have any expertise in environmental matters. No, like everything else they do, they run the carbon markets in pursuit of profits, and there are many to be had.
Not only do the banks get paid to oversee the transactions in the marketplace, they are further allowed to use this position of advantage as they trade within it. Of even greater concern is how they can manipulate the market through unregulated financial instruments (i.e. derivatives, CDOs, etc.). With massive government subsidies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and unlimited sums of low-interest money available to the big banks, carbon markets are primed for overleveraging and bubble formation. As the markets get more and more manipulated, they will become less and less transparent and farther removed from their mission. Indeed, the carbon market, itself, is a secondary approach, regulating an intangible commodity to address climate change, and it in no way needs to be made more abstract through financial wizardry.
On paper, cap and trade offers a versatile regulatory strategy to reduce carbon emissions. Rather than the blunt tool of a blanket tax, the innovation of the carbon credit allows industries that might find it particularly onerous to cut carbon pollution to promote other sectors of the economy to make reductions in their place. By creating a carbon market, the world theoretically summons the mystical invisible hand of market efficiency theory to produce the most effective reductions.
Of course, market efficiency theory is now seen as a rather naïve economic model that is disproven on a daily basis, and ideas that make a lot of sense on paper are often met with resistance by reality. Such is the case with cap and trade. The translation of the theory into cap and trade reality is fraught with problems.
The most glaring problem is administration, and it is manifold. Before we delve into the many failings of the administration of cap and trade, it is important to note with administrative costs that resources dedicated to organizing and maintaining the system (administration) are resources that are being taken away from actually addressing the issue that the system is designed to resolve (e.g. healthcare). With cap and trade, there are two distinct areas of administration; the carbon markets, and the validation and verification of the carbon credits to be traded within those markets.
Large banks, notably J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs, have graciously offered to administer the commodity markets for carbon credits. They have not made this offer out of concern about global warming or because they have any expertise in environmental matters. No, like everything else they do, they run the carbon markets in pursuit of profits, and there are many to be had.
Not only do the banks get paid to oversee the transactions in the marketplace, they are further allowed to use this position of advantage as they trade within it. Of even greater concern is how they can manipulate the market through unregulated financial instruments (i.e. derivatives, CDOs, etc.). With massive government subsidies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and unlimited sums of low-interest money available to the big banks, carbon markets are primed for overleveraging and bubble formation. As the markets get more and more manipulated, they will become less and less transparent and farther removed from their mission. Indeed, the carbon market, itself, is a secondary approach, regulating an intangible commodity to address climate change, and it in no way needs to be made more abstract through financial wizardry.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Be It Resolved
By Abel Collins
I have freedom of speech,
They say.
It’s even guaranteed
In writing,
The constitution binding.
Equally, I must have the freedom to listen;
To hear and give credence,
To believe if I must
One thing or another.
Call that religion.
I do not want a captive audience.
I want them free and freely associated.
Everything’s written down in Washington,
Stored in marble halls where we keep the country’s warranties.
I have many rights.
But here’s the rub,
Rights are not possessions.
They are ideas that take form only in action.
Pend here
Upon notions
Do I have the ability to express these freedoms?
Consider speech:
First of all,
Every voice must carry through a medium.
Already, I feel a little restricted…
I mean; I want a medium that allows me to speak to everybody
I want to turn to all seven billion of you and say,
‘Whoa there, how’s it going?
We’re going to just take a little break here
Spare me ten minutes
A moment of silence to rest your mind on the beauty around you:
The spectacle of nature and the wonder of civilization.
This beauty in you
As you are their individual reflection.
Mostly though, rest your attention upon the beauty in the people around you.
Yes, in this we are all kindred
We share this moment
This choice to be aware of the beauty that always surrounds us
That we are integral parts of.
Let this kinship be trust
Now, everyone put down your weapons
Whether metaphorical or physical.
Accept peace, and let’s move on
There’s much to accomplish
Humanity to save
Stars to reach
We must work together if we want to get it done.’
Ten minutes of free speech is all I need,
But it’s really just a dream.
The sound of my voice does not travel very far,
And what I say may sound good,
But the volume is turned too low.
Instead people hear the clarion call to fear
Bullhorns on bully pulpits
Talking to the nodding heads of people entranced by the steady beat of war drums.
The volume is kept loud and constant
Because if we had silence to think about what they threaten
The hypocrisy would be so monstrous and obvious
The only recourse could be revolution.
Orwell.
Yet I do have this voice,
And though my freedom is not all I hope for,
I can speak with those beautiful people near to me.
Some may even exercise their freedom to listen,
And surely something will happen when I say,
‘We can all speak a little louder.
Help me turn up the volume.’
I have freedom of speech,
They say.
It’s even guaranteed
In writing,
The constitution binding.
Equally, I must have the freedom to listen;
To hear and give credence,
To believe if I must
One thing or another.
Call that religion.
I do not want a captive audience.
I want them free and freely associated.
Everything’s written down in Washington,
Stored in marble halls where we keep the country’s warranties.
I have many rights.
But here’s the rub,
Rights are not possessions.
They are ideas that take form only in action.
Pend here
Upon notions
Do I have the ability to express these freedoms?
Consider speech:
First of all,
Every voice must carry through a medium.
Already, I feel a little restricted…
I mean; I want a medium that allows me to speak to everybody
I want to turn to all seven billion of you and say,
‘Whoa there, how’s it going?
We’re going to just take a little break here
Spare me ten minutes
A moment of silence to rest your mind on the beauty around you:
The spectacle of nature and the wonder of civilization.
This beauty in you
As you are their individual reflection.
Mostly though, rest your attention upon the beauty in the people around you.
Yes, in this we are all kindred
We share this moment
This choice to be aware of the beauty that always surrounds us
That we are integral parts of.
Let this kinship be trust
Now, everyone put down your weapons
Whether metaphorical or physical.
Accept peace, and let’s move on
There’s much to accomplish
Humanity to save
Stars to reach
We must work together if we want to get it done.’
Ten minutes of free speech is all I need,
But it’s really just a dream.
The sound of my voice does not travel very far,
And what I say may sound good,
But the volume is turned too low.
Instead people hear the clarion call to fear
Bullhorns on bully pulpits
Talking to the nodding heads of people entranced by the steady beat of war drums.
The volume is kept loud and constant
Because if we had silence to think about what they threaten
The hypocrisy would be so monstrous and obvious
The only recourse could be revolution.
Orwell.
Yet I do have this voice,
And though my freedom is not all I hope for,
I can speak with those beautiful people near to me.
Some may even exercise their freedom to listen,
And surely something will happen when I say,
‘We can all speak a little louder.
Help me turn up the volume.’
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Motivation
By Abel Collins
Last week, I finished reading a book called Beyond the Limits written in 1990 by Meadows et al. For those unfamiliar with it, the book is a follow up to The Limits of Growth published in 1972. In both cases, the books detail exhaustive studies of the socio-economic and environmental states of the world to get an accurate picture of where humanity is headed. The scientists who conducted the studies and authored the books used systems analysis and a computer model named World3 to extrapolate potential futures for the human population and its quality of life.
The scary thing is that maintaining the status quo of the 1970s led inevitably to a population and standard of living collapse within this century, generally by about 2070. Even with the most optimistic assumptions, continuing the trends of exponential economic and population growth was certain to lead to a catastrophe due to a combination of overpopulation, resource depletion, and pollution.
The scarier thing is that it has now been forty years, and all we have done is accelerate. Economic growth and development has been the dominant force organizing the world for more than half a century. We even gave it a fancy name, globalization, though all it really amounts to is the increased utilization of our finite resources in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Likewise, the human population grows unabated.
According to the scientists’ models, the only way to avoid cataclysmic collapse is to embrace a sustainable model to replace the growth model. If we had embraced such a model in 1970, we could have achieved a stable population with a high standard of living by 2050. If we had made the change in 1995, we could have reached a slightly larger stable population with a lower standard of living. In the case of putting off the transition to a sustainable way of life until 2015, humanity faces a small population crash in the latter half of the twenty-first century followed by stable population with a significantly lower standard of living.
Here we are, five years from 2015. We are already seeing the telltale signs that we have overshot our limits and our destined for collapse. Peak oil is at hand, and other resources are being depleted just as quickly. Deserts are spreading. We are working harder and harder to feed the people of the world, and we are getting diminishing returns. Fisheries are being exhausted around the globe. Perhaps most importantly, clean water is becoming harder to come by. Add to these troubling symptoms the specter of climate change that already is happening faster than was foreseen and we face a terrible reality.
Here we are, five years from 2015, and from time to time I’m asked how or why I came to be an activist. I could speak to you of ideals that I have in plenty, but I don’t need to go that far. Rather, I reply snarkily, ‘wouldn’t you act if you saw that you were about to drive over a cliff?’ The truth is our culture is not sustainable. Exponential growth, economically or population wise, is not compatible with the finite nature of the world. Common sense, call it self-preservation, dictates that I act to change the course we are on. I am determined that it is possible, and I would encourage you to act with me. Let’s build a sustainable future.
Last week, I finished reading a book called Beyond the Limits written in 1990 by Meadows et al. For those unfamiliar with it, the book is a follow up to The Limits of Growth published in 1972. In both cases, the books detail exhaustive studies of the socio-economic and environmental states of the world to get an accurate picture of where humanity is headed. The scientists who conducted the studies and authored the books used systems analysis and a computer model named World3 to extrapolate potential futures for the human population and its quality of life.
The scary thing is that maintaining the status quo of the 1970s led inevitably to a population and standard of living collapse within this century, generally by about 2070. Even with the most optimistic assumptions, continuing the trends of exponential economic and population growth was certain to lead to a catastrophe due to a combination of overpopulation, resource depletion, and pollution.
The scarier thing is that it has now been forty years, and all we have done is accelerate. Economic growth and development has been the dominant force organizing the world for more than half a century. We even gave it a fancy name, globalization, though all it really amounts to is the increased utilization of our finite resources in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Likewise, the human population grows unabated.
According to the scientists’ models, the only way to avoid cataclysmic collapse is to embrace a sustainable model to replace the growth model. If we had embraced such a model in 1970, we could have achieved a stable population with a high standard of living by 2050. If we had made the change in 1995, we could have reached a slightly larger stable population with a lower standard of living. In the case of putting off the transition to a sustainable way of life until 2015, humanity faces a small population crash in the latter half of the twenty-first century followed by stable population with a significantly lower standard of living.
Here we are, five years from 2015. We are already seeing the telltale signs that we have overshot our limits and our destined for collapse. Peak oil is at hand, and other resources are being depleted just as quickly. Deserts are spreading. We are working harder and harder to feed the people of the world, and we are getting diminishing returns. Fisheries are being exhausted around the globe. Perhaps most importantly, clean water is becoming harder to come by. Add to these troubling symptoms the specter of climate change that already is happening faster than was foreseen and we face a terrible reality.
Here we are, five years from 2015, and from time to time I’m asked how or why I came to be an activist. I could speak to you of ideals that I have in plenty, but I don’t need to go that far. Rather, I reply snarkily, ‘wouldn’t you act if you saw that you were about to drive over a cliff?’ The truth is our culture is not sustainable. Exponential growth, economically or population wise, is not compatible with the finite nature of the world. Common sense, call it self-preservation, dictates that I act to change the course we are on. I am determined that it is possible, and I would encourage you to act with me. Let’s build a sustainable future.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Mr. Zinn
By Abel Collins
Today, I dedicated a few minutes of silent contemplation to the work of Howard Zinn in honor of his long and fruitful life. He died yesterday, but the effects of his contributions to the profession of history and his tireless activism will continue to have profound influence on our world.
He stripped away the glory, melodrama, and ego worship that is so prevalent in the study of history, and what was left was a much more accurate picture of reality. Zinn legitimized the lives of the countless people that have lived and sacrificed their lives to progress without fame or notoriety, and, in so doing, he legitimized all of us. For despite what most historians believe, it is the actions of each and every one of us that determine the course of history.
Beneath the pride and posturing, great leaders are primarily figureheads and would count for very little without the support of the masses behind them. Indeed, the greatest leaders throughout history have been those who realized the context of their power; those who have known that the communities they serve are the real heroes of change and the leaders are merely privileged to articulate their progress to the rest of society. Thus, we circle back to Howard Zinn, who was just such a leader. He gave strength to us who believe in and fight for equality, freedom, and fraternity by recognizing us as the true motive force in humankind’s search for humanity, and, together, we will go that much farther in finding it.
If you have not read A People’s History, do yourself a favor and take it out from the local library or even go the extra step and buy it. Heck, it may even be sitting in your bookshelf already, untouched since college. In any case, pick it up and take some time to reacquaint yourself with our history, our story. Take a few pages at a time. There is no rush. For myself, I kept it in the bathroom and finished it over the course of about three months, and I will probably do the same again when I realize that I need a reminder of what we have done, what we are doing, and where we are going.
Today, I dedicated a few minutes of silent contemplation to the work of Howard Zinn in honor of his long and fruitful life. He died yesterday, but the effects of his contributions to the profession of history and his tireless activism will continue to have profound influence on our world.
He stripped away the glory, melodrama, and ego worship that is so prevalent in the study of history, and what was left was a much more accurate picture of reality. Zinn legitimized the lives of the countless people that have lived and sacrificed their lives to progress without fame or notoriety, and, in so doing, he legitimized all of us. For despite what most historians believe, it is the actions of each and every one of us that determine the course of history.
Beneath the pride and posturing, great leaders are primarily figureheads and would count for very little without the support of the masses behind them. Indeed, the greatest leaders throughout history have been those who realized the context of their power; those who have known that the communities they serve are the real heroes of change and the leaders are merely privileged to articulate their progress to the rest of society. Thus, we circle back to Howard Zinn, who was just such a leader. He gave strength to us who believe in and fight for equality, freedom, and fraternity by recognizing us as the true motive force in humankind’s search for humanity, and, together, we will go that much farther in finding it.
If you have not read A People’s History, do yourself a favor and take it out from the local library or even go the extra step and buy it. Heck, it may even be sitting in your bookshelf already, untouched since college. In any case, pick it up and take some time to reacquaint yourself with our history, our story. Take a few pages at a time. There is no rush. For myself, I kept it in the bathroom and finished it over the course of about three months, and I will probably do the same again when I realize that I need a reminder of what we have done, what we are doing, and where we are going.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Cheshire Patience
By Abel Collins
The breeze sprints ahead of me
Jumping from one bent blade of meadow grass to the next
It rushes in green waves
That pass hissing and whispering to the edge of the field
If I listen in silence
With Cheshire patience
I can hear the song
But I can never discover the secret of the leaves’ words
The song rises and falls
Waking inhuman memories
Of thirsty roots
Joyous flowers
And triumphant seeds
It is a silken voice
Ancient as wind and grass
Yet young with hope and full of life
Ageless soft and sweet
I let the breath of it fill me
Stillness
Peace
I understand why the willows came here to weep
The tears are in gratitude to eternal beauty
The breeze sprints ahead of me
Jumping from one bent blade of meadow grass to the next
It rushes in green waves
That pass hissing and whispering to the edge of the field
If I listen in silence
With Cheshire patience
I can hear the song
But I can never discover the secret of the leaves’ words
The song rises and falls
Waking inhuman memories
Of thirsty roots
Joyous flowers
And triumphant seeds
It is a silken voice
Ancient as wind and grass
Yet young with hope and full of life
Ageless soft and sweet
I let the breath of it fill me
Stillness
Peace
I understand why the willows came here to weep
The tears are in gratitude to eternal beauty
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Letter Writing
Posted by: Abel Collins
Despite my better judgment, I spend a lot of time thinking about politics and the economy; analyzing, criticizing, and basically trying to figure out what is going on in the world. From time to time, I get cynical and overwhelmed. At times like those, I take heart in the fact that I can take action do something about it. Letter writing is one action that I take particular pleasure in and that is sure to get a response. With email, it’s really easy to start a dialog with your political representation, and if you request the favor of a reply, they are required by law to respond.
Here’s a letter I wrote to my representatives today. I will post the responses I get to this letter in the comments section as they arrive. If you like it, you can even copy and paste it, and edit it to your liking. Google your legislator and go to the ‘contact ________’ button on their public site, then send it along. Otherwise, I encourage you to take the time to write your own letter and make our democracy a little more vibrant:
Dear _______________,
I was overjoyed today by the news that President Obama is going to take a hard line against the financial industry and follow the advice of Paul Volcker. It is my hope that you will do whatever you can to aid the President in his battle for real financial reform.
Not only must important aspects of Glass-Steagall be re-enacted so that the banks are not mixing commercial lending with speculative investment banking, but the banks must not be allowed to be so large that they pose a systemic risk. Please help craft legislation that diminishes the power and influence of major financial institutions, and I mean this to include holding the Federal Reserve accountable to its mandates. The economic system needs transparency in its financial sector to create a healthy and sustainable system. In other words, audit the fed.
Finally, I am greatly worried by the decision of the Supreme Court to allow unlimited corporate contributions to political campaigns. I would like you to consider proposing a constitutional amendment(s) to enact corporate reform. This country cannot afford to have more power accumulate in the hands of corporate interests. It is time to reconsider whether corporations are the same as individuals and what rights they really deserve.
Thank you for your time and your consideration. I look forward to hearing back from you on these issues.
Yours respectfully,
Abel Collins
Despite my better judgment, I spend a lot of time thinking about politics and the economy; analyzing, criticizing, and basically trying to figure out what is going on in the world. From time to time, I get cynical and overwhelmed. At times like those, I take heart in the fact that I can take action do something about it. Letter writing is one action that I take particular pleasure in and that is sure to get a response. With email, it’s really easy to start a dialog with your political representation, and if you request the favor of a reply, they are required by law to respond.
Here’s a letter I wrote to my representatives today. I will post the responses I get to this letter in the comments section as they arrive. If you like it, you can even copy and paste it, and edit it to your liking. Google your legislator and go to the ‘contact ________’ button on their public site, then send it along. Otherwise, I encourage you to take the time to write your own letter and make our democracy a little more vibrant:
Dear _______________,
I was overjoyed today by the news that President Obama is going to take a hard line against the financial industry and follow the advice of Paul Volcker. It is my hope that you will do whatever you can to aid the President in his battle for real financial reform.
Not only must important aspects of Glass-Steagall be re-enacted so that the banks are not mixing commercial lending with speculative investment banking, but the banks must not be allowed to be so large that they pose a systemic risk. Please help craft legislation that diminishes the power and influence of major financial institutions, and I mean this to include holding the Federal Reserve accountable to its mandates. The economic system needs transparency in its financial sector to create a healthy and sustainable system. In other words, audit the fed.
Finally, I am greatly worried by the decision of the Supreme Court to allow unlimited corporate contributions to political campaigns. I would like you to consider proposing a constitutional amendment(s) to enact corporate reform. This country cannot afford to have more power accumulate in the hands of corporate interests. It is time to reconsider whether corporations are the same as individuals and what rights they really deserve.
Thank you for your time and your consideration. I look forward to hearing back from you on these issues.
Yours respectfully,
Abel Collins
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Financial Activism
Posted by: Abel Collins
Today I took the first step toward moving my money out of Bank of America where I have kept it for several years. I went to a local credit union and started a checking account from which I will be able to do all of my banking. The terms on the new account are much better than the ones that I at BofA (2.5% interest versus .1%), but that is not why I am moving my money.
Two years into this financial crisis, it is obvious that banks are in large part responsible for the calamity. Financial institutions, primarily those now seen as too big to fail, rose to great influence over the past four decades (TBTF list here, http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/19th-nervous-breakdown-tbtf-stress-test-banks/). They created financial innovations that allowed them to take on insane amounts of leverage. They encouraged so much debt that they guaranteed a credit bubble and its inevitable collapse. In fact, they engineered numerous bubbles, and at every opportunity said that deregulation would allow them to make a more productive and efficient financial system so it would never happen again. The banks made money on the way up and on the way down, and they used it to gain ever greater political and economic power.
By now, we are familiar with the results. The regulators and the legislators crafting financial policy were captured by the banking industry that they were supposed to be holding accountable. Regrettably, nothing has been done to reform this broken economic model. The reform that is proposed would be laughable if it were not so tragic, and even those weak measures will probably never be enacted.
It has become clear that the only thing the political system and the powerful people it represents care about is money. Therefore, I suggest that it is incumbent upon us to redress our grievances in terms that they understand. It is time for some good old nonviolent activism. It is time to stop giving them our money, and the logical place to start is with the TBTF banks.
If you do your banking with Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, or one of the other monster banks that control approximately 60% of the deposits of US citizens, it is time to move your money. Go to http://moveyourmoney.info/ and find out how to get started.
Time and again, massive nonviolent activism is the only effective way to realize revolutionary change, and it is time to bring it to bear on the economy. We must follow in the footsteps of great leaders like MLK, Gandhi, and Jesus, and refuse to support the system that abuses us. The first step is taking our money from the banks that control the system. If they do not listen then, if they simply turn to the government for another round of tax payer funding, we must resort to civil disobedience. We must sever the ties between money and politics, whatever it takes. Let’s get started.
Today I took the first step toward moving my money out of Bank of America where I have kept it for several years. I went to a local credit union and started a checking account from which I will be able to do all of my banking. The terms on the new account are much better than the ones that I at BofA (2.5% interest versus .1%), but that is not why I am moving my money.
Two years into this financial crisis, it is obvious that banks are in large part responsible for the calamity. Financial institutions, primarily those now seen as too big to fail, rose to great influence over the past four decades (TBTF list here, http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/03/19th-nervous-breakdown-tbtf-stress-test-banks/). They created financial innovations that allowed them to take on insane amounts of leverage. They encouraged so much debt that they guaranteed a credit bubble and its inevitable collapse. In fact, they engineered numerous bubbles, and at every opportunity said that deregulation would allow them to make a more productive and efficient financial system so it would never happen again. The banks made money on the way up and on the way down, and they used it to gain ever greater political and economic power.
By now, we are familiar with the results. The regulators and the legislators crafting financial policy were captured by the banking industry that they were supposed to be holding accountable. Regrettably, nothing has been done to reform this broken economic model. The reform that is proposed would be laughable if it were not so tragic, and even those weak measures will probably never be enacted.
It has become clear that the only thing the political system and the powerful people it represents care about is money. Therefore, I suggest that it is incumbent upon us to redress our grievances in terms that they understand. It is time for some good old nonviolent activism. It is time to stop giving them our money, and the logical place to start is with the TBTF banks.
If you do your banking with Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, or one of the other monster banks that control approximately 60% of the deposits of US citizens, it is time to move your money. Go to http://moveyourmoney.info/ and find out how to get started.
Time and again, massive nonviolent activism is the only effective way to realize revolutionary change, and it is time to bring it to bear on the economy. We must follow in the footsteps of great leaders like MLK, Gandhi, and Jesus, and refuse to support the system that abuses us. The first step is taking our money from the banks that control the system. If they do not listen then, if they simply turn to the government for another round of tax payer funding, we must resort to civil disobedience. We must sever the ties between money and politics, whatever it takes. Let’s get started.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Democrats v. Republicans
Posted by: Abel Collins
Some of my writings here at the Satyagraha are going to be dedicated to discussing politics, both at the foundational level of political theory and also the more visible level of current political events. In the interest of disclosure, I offer this blog.
The state of politics in our country is generally agreed to be shameful. The caricature of the politician is a pig-like humanoid, grubbing in the dirt at the feet of the wealthy. He is greedy and power hungry, pinstripes and silk linings hiding his corpulence.
Sadly, the cartoon satire is a better portrait of the truth than the rest of what I read in the paper. Nobody really believes that either political party cares about the welfare of the common man, and there should be little surprise. For over three decades, the United States of America has overseen a global economy that has grown immensely. Sums of wealth never imagined have been created through industrial ingenuity and the exportation of free market capitalism. In that same period of time, average Americans have seen their real wages and the quality of their lives decline.
Needless to say, the people have become disenchanted with the representatives they have elected to provide themselves with a government of liberty, equality, and justice. For over three decades, it has not mattered one wit whether it was the Democrats or Republicans in office. The wealth has gone to the top. Both parties have conspired to create the current system that has come to primarily represent corporate interests.
The whole political society is dying from atrophy, because there is no real choice. Sure, I vote, and I usually vote for the Democrat, because Democrats tend to be a little more humane in their policy. I vote for third party candidates whenever I can, and I spend a lot of time empathizing with the fifty percent of people who are so discouraged that they refuse to participate.
The silver lining to the glooming cloud of politics is that when the people finally go back to the drawing board, they will find that they still live in a democratic republic, and they do, in fact, have the power. Sooner or later (sooner at this rate), Americans will reach their breaking point and good representative leaders will step forward or be found; honest leaders who realize that public office is a civil service and a civic duty. Americans will find and elect the citizens who are willing to suborn their personal interests and be instruments for the betterment of the society.
I, for one, cannot wait for the coming age of civic rebirth. Already, it is gestating. People are rebuilding the idea of community, preparing for a society of cooperation to replace this current culture of antagonism. I, for one, am going to be a catalyst in the growth of this movement, a radical so to speak. Already, I am, and here we are talking about it.
Let’s start something: A friendship, a community, a political party, a better way? It’s all possible.
Some of my writings here at the Satyagraha are going to be dedicated to discussing politics, both at the foundational level of political theory and also the more visible level of current political events. In the interest of disclosure, I offer this blog.
The state of politics in our country is generally agreed to be shameful. The caricature of the politician is a pig-like humanoid, grubbing in the dirt at the feet of the wealthy. He is greedy and power hungry, pinstripes and silk linings hiding his corpulence.
Sadly, the cartoon satire is a better portrait of the truth than the rest of what I read in the paper. Nobody really believes that either political party cares about the welfare of the common man, and there should be little surprise. For over three decades, the United States of America has overseen a global economy that has grown immensely. Sums of wealth never imagined have been created through industrial ingenuity and the exportation of free market capitalism. In that same period of time, average Americans have seen their real wages and the quality of their lives decline.
Needless to say, the people have become disenchanted with the representatives they have elected to provide themselves with a government of liberty, equality, and justice. For over three decades, it has not mattered one wit whether it was the Democrats or Republicans in office. The wealth has gone to the top. Both parties have conspired to create the current system that has come to primarily represent corporate interests.
The whole political society is dying from atrophy, because there is no real choice. Sure, I vote, and I usually vote for the Democrat, because Democrats tend to be a little more humane in their policy. I vote for third party candidates whenever I can, and I spend a lot of time empathizing with the fifty percent of people who are so discouraged that they refuse to participate.
The silver lining to the glooming cloud of politics is that when the people finally go back to the drawing board, they will find that they still live in a democratic republic, and they do, in fact, have the power. Sooner or later (sooner at this rate), Americans will reach their breaking point and good representative leaders will step forward or be found; honest leaders who realize that public office is a civil service and a civic duty. Americans will find and elect the citizens who are willing to suborn their personal interests and be instruments for the betterment of the society.
I, for one, cannot wait for the coming age of civic rebirth. Already, it is gestating. People are rebuilding the idea of community, preparing for a society of cooperation to replace this current culture of antagonism. I, for one, am going to be a catalyst in the growth of this movement, a radical so to speak. Already, I am, and here we are talking about it.
Let’s start something: A friendship, a community, a political party, a better way? It’s all possible.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Meditation on the Economy
Posted by: Abel Collins
A crystalline calm is upon the ocean. The washed azure sky, without even the blemish of a cloud, speaks in the most fragile whispers about the proximity of beauty and death. The emerald water swallows with greedy equanimity both the heavy and light. The sun stretches down amber rays diffusing through teeming life, down to fathomless twilight. Somewhere, black and unknowable is the bottom. Deeper and more quiet than the blackest dream, the ship is sinking. Strange sounds resonate from the hull, air trying to push its way out, the wood groaning in protest. Large pockets rise to the surface and burp erratically as the wreck shifts in the rolling currents of its descent.
It had gone quickly at the beginning. The weakness so long in atrophy relented to its fated failure in a crack of thunder. Instantaneously, the sea rushed gurgling and hungry into the lower compartments, sucking the ship down. At first, the air had freed itself in a multitude of voices, whistles, sighs, and whooshes. It was a song of physics and chaos.
Now, an eternity of moments and ten minutes later, only the stern remains above water, pointing accusingly skyward. The ship is sinking slowly and remorselessly, a death that shudders nearer with each successive belch. The sinking is slower now but no less certain. In a panic that is so blind it is also silent, the crew and passengers are mostly frozen in denial. They cling to the idea it has stopped, that they can bob above the waves until the rescuers arrive. In reality, no aid is coming.
There aren’t lifeboats enough, and the self-important are claiming first right. These are the men in fine clothing and uniform; the captains of industry, the shipwrights, and the crewmen. Behold their fear, the dawning realization in their eyes that they aren’t in control. Their reasoning is that they will be better able to get and send help to those left behind. Sure, they were the ones that had brought them to this pass, so, too, they must be the ones who can find the way back. They offer this reasoning to the others in blue gel- cap cyanide placebos. They are saying ‘god bless you,’ and there are even tears in some of their eyes as they push off. They reason and excuse themselves from guilt. Cowardice, for naught.
The clarity of the ocean air, the sharpness of the light arcing through it, and the magical colors that they elicit; these perfections are not to be denied their finality. The falling inertia of the ship will draw the lifeboats down just as surely as the planet’s gravity draws the ship to its doom. It shall be a shared oblivion. The perfection; the fragile secret spoken by the breeze of beauty and death; no one is to speak of them.
A crystalline calm is upon the ocean. The washed azure sky, without even the blemish of a cloud, speaks in the most fragile whispers about the proximity of beauty and death. The emerald water swallows with greedy equanimity both the heavy and light. The sun stretches down amber rays diffusing through teeming life, down to fathomless twilight. Somewhere, black and unknowable is the bottom. Deeper and more quiet than the blackest dream, the ship is sinking. Strange sounds resonate from the hull, air trying to push its way out, the wood groaning in protest. Large pockets rise to the surface and burp erratically as the wreck shifts in the rolling currents of its descent.
It had gone quickly at the beginning. The weakness so long in atrophy relented to its fated failure in a crack of thunder. Instantaneously, the sea rushed gurgling and hungry into the lower compartments, sucking the ship down. At first, the air had freed itself in a multitude of voices, whistles, sighs, and whooshes. It was a song of physics and chaos.
Now, an eternity of moments and ten minutes later, only the stern remains above water, pointing accusingly skyward. The ship is sinking slowly and remorselessly, a death that shudders nearer with each successive belch. The sinking is slower now but no less certain. In a panic that is so blind it is also silent, the crew and passengers are mostly frozen in denial. They cling to the idea it has stopped, that they can bob above the waves until the rescuers arrive. In reality, no aid is coming.
There aren’t lifeboats enough, and the self-important are claiming first right. These are the men in fine clothing and uniform; the captains of industry, the shipwrights, and the crewmen. Behold their fear, the dawning realization in their eyes that they aren’t in control. Their reasoning is that they will be better able to get and send help to those left behind. Sure, they were the ones that had brought them to this pass, so, too, they must be the ones who can find the way back. They offer this reasoning to the others in blue gel- cap cyanide placebos. They are saying ‘god bless you,’ and there are even tears in some of their eyes as they push off. They reason and excuse themselves from guilt. Cowardice, for naught.
The clarity of the ocean air, the sharpness of the light arcing through it, and the magical colors that they elicit; these perfections are not to be denied their finality. The falling inertia of the ship will draw the lifeboats down just as surely as the planet’s gravity draws the ship to its doom. It shall be a shared oblivion. The perfection; the fragile secret spoken by the breeze of beauty and death; no one is to speak of them.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Rally Here
Posted by: Abel Collins
Can we spark up the old conversation
about civil disobedience?
The substance of the argument
is taxation without representation.
What right does the government have
to our livelihood
And still to conduct itself so contrary
to the will of its populace?
We ask for common sense
A fair chance, education, healthcare.
But we are given unjustified warfare;
Dead innocent.
Can they buy our acquiesence with the promise of sloth
And greed coveting possessions;
Inane status symbols.
Can they buy us
And so, own us;
Turned to pawns in a game
Whose only end can be self-destruction?
No
In our hearts we still know what liberty is
And take courage from that knowledge.
Let this be the foundation for action
Ratify these thoughts and draw up articles of confederation.
Let's make a pact to arrive at freedom,
And embark.
Can we spark up the old conversation
about civil disobedience?
The substance of the argument
is taxation without representation.
What right does the government have
to our livelihood
And still to conduct itself so contrary
to the will of its populace?
We ask for common sense
A fair chance, education, healthcare.
But we are given unjustified warfare;
Dead innocent.
Can they buy our acquiesence with the promise of sloth
And greed coveting possessions;
Inane status symbols.
Can they buy us
And so, own us;
Turned to pawns in a game
Whose only end can be self-destruction?
No
In our hearts we still know what liberty is
And take courage from that knowledge.
Let this be the foundation for action
Ratify these thoughts and draw up articles of confederation.
Let's make a pact to arrive at freedom,
And embark.
Today in Haiti
Posted by: Abel Collins
Suffering incomprehensible to us unfolds
Torturing the fabric of time
Slowing life to a crawl.
Acts of heroism that will be remembered only by witnesses
Light hope in darkened hearts.
Muscles strain against rubble
Tears and a desperate thirst overwhelm all thought;
Thirst for water;
For help and mercy.
Why?
We ask and watch.
There is no reason.
There is only the hero,
The courage of action struggling against the dark.
Suffering incomprehensible to us unfolds
Torturing the fabric of time
Slowing life to a crawl.
Acts of heroism that will be remembered only by witnesses
Light hope in darkened hearts.
Muscles strain against rubble
Tears and a desperate thirst overwhelm all thought;
Thirst for water;
For help and mercy.
Why?
We ask and watch.
There is no reason.
There is only the hero,
The courage of action struggling against the dark.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
FCIC, Washington, D.C.
Posted by: Abel Collins
Believe what you will about the current state of the economy, whether it is that we are in the midst of a recovery or that we are still mired in a recession, there is no denying that gross financial crimes were committed to enable and sustain the housing bubble economy of the last decade. As yet, there has been no serious investigation of those crimes let alone prosecution. In fact, the Bush and Obama administrations have gone to extravagant lengths to cover up the depth of corruption on Wall St. and at the regulatory agencies that were supposedly put in place to protect the American public. Our leaders try to justify this obfuscation by claiming that if we were to be given the truth, we would lose the faith in our economic system that allows it to function. A simple question rises in my mind. Do we want an economic system that can only survive through secrecy and lies, a system whose foremost concern is catering to the demands of a cartel of banks?
At this stage of the Savings and Loan Crisis, involving significantly less grievous financial crimes in comparison to today’s mess, there were thousands of prosecutions and meaningful jail time was being served by the white collar criminals at the heart of the problem. Today, those at the center of this scandal are enjoying record profits. It reminds me of that Dylan line when he sings, ‘steal a little and they throw you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king.’ How are we to begin addressing this problem when all of the power seems to be in the hands of the banks and their army of lobbyists?
Dear Mr. Thomas,
Thank you for giving the people the opportunity to address this issue. I am happy to see that democracy is still alive in this country. We have an immutable right to address the grievances that the financial industry has perpetrated against the American public. I fear that all the responses that will escape the mouths of the bankers will be evasive and absolve them of whatever limited guilt they feel. Nevertheless, I would like you to ask:
1. What is an appropriate leverage ratio for a bank? Are you aware of the 12 to 1 ratio that functioned well for most of the last century?
2. What do you think about the potential re-establishment of Glass-Steagall?
3. Would your banks be solvent if you had to mark all of your assets to their fair market value and keep them on your books? Please do not tell me you don't know those market values. It is your job to know. Further, how much worse would it be if the federal government wasn't massively involved in supporting the housing market? If you plead ignorance, it will not shield you from culpability. It is your responsibility to your shareholders and the public at large to act prudently and be cognizant of risks.
Thanks again. I look forward to hearing any reply.
Take care,
Abel Collins
176 Sycamore Ln.
Wakefield, RI 02879
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN2.aspx
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
An Open Letter to the American People
Posted by: Abel Collins
This writing is an excerpt from a novel that I am working on at the moment. I’d like to encourage you to share any reflections you might have. I could use the dialectic in my book:
Curious days. We assemble in a country and a nation: This shelter, a political society created to harbor free people; built with democratic architecture. We live in this structure, liberty guaranteed, and yet we are not free. We refuse democratic responsibilities, the sacrifices of self-government. Despite the best of intentions, we, the people, submit to the status quo, status infinitum, where wealth defines us. Despite our parroted words of freedom and equality, we are like the rest, divided into groups that can be boiled down into Masters, their henchmen, and slaves. We live in a democratic house, but we are not a democratic society. In the attic are dusty boxes filled with tarnished ideals. There was a spirit, a revolution, here once. There was an idea that we could govern ourselves justly and make a more perfect union. The emergence of these ideas is again at hand. We can no longer defer to the culture of greed that we have allowed to guide us to ruin. It is a new age for old questions. What is freedom, how shall we exercise it, what are our intentions, are we leaving this world better than we found it…?
We must find the answers to these questions together. We, the people.
This writing is an excerpt from a novel that I am working on at the moment. I’d like to encourage you to share any reflections you might have. I could use the dialectic in my book:
Curious days. We assemble in a country and a nation: This shelter, a political society created to harbor free people; built with democratic architecture. We live in this structure, liberty guaranteed, and yet we are not free. We refuse democratic responsibilities, the sacrifices of self-government. Despite the best of intentions, we, the people, submit to the status quo, status infinitum, where wealth defines us. Despite our parroted words of freedom and equality, we are like the rest, divided into groups that can be boiled down into Masters, their henchmen, and slaves. We live in a democratic house, but we are not a democratic society. In the attic are dusty boxes filled with tarnished ideals. There was a spirit, a revolution, here once. There was an idea that we could govern ourselves justly and make a more perfect union. The emergence of these ideas is again at hand. We can no longer defer to the culture of greed that we have allowed to guide us to ruin. It is a new age for old questions. What is freedom, how shall we exercise it, what are our intentions, are we leaving this world better than we found it…?
We must find the answers to these questions together. We, the people.
An Introduction
Hello all,
Ps- I’d like to thank Nick for putting this site together. I can already feel that tickle of excitement in my mind that always precedes the joy and productivity of new thought and good conversation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)