Actually, Miriam, Cathy and I talked through the possibilities for
many months. On paper we made the right choice. We're not
cheapskates, but we are rather frugal, and we've tucked away a decent
cushion. By taking early retirement, I could receive full disability.
And when I reached 65, I became a SS recipient without any change in
my allotment. Since neither of us have any vices or expensive
hobbies, we put enough aside to enable us to buy our last two
vehicles(trucks)with cash on the barrel.
But as well as Cathy has managed our finances, I know that it could
all be wiped out if I were to wind up like Cathy's mother, lingering
in a Rehab facility while she had savings and property wiped out. We
had an appointment with a person skilled in planning how to avoid such
unhappy endings, but we had to cancel. Now that the holidays are
behind us, we need to get back on track.
As for my referring to anyone working for the enrichment of our Ruling
Masters, as Working Class, I do know the difference between
employement and work. I put 8 years in at Bartmann and Bixer's
drapery factory. I know drudgery and hopelessness felt by middle aged
women whose husbands ran off with another woman, or who is hiding from
an abusive bully, falling financially behind even as they sweat 40
plus hours a week in a deadend job. After I had become blind and
returned to college, I chose government work for the reason that I
never again wanted to be driven in order to enrich someone already too
rich for their own good.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/7/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I suppose that my response is: You left a full time job with a good salary
before it was necessary in order to follow a dream. In spite of your
knowledge of, and cynicism about capitalism, you thought that somehow, you
could beat the system on a farm off the grid with beautiful scenery and some
horses. I suspect that you have some additional investment income that you
haven't mentioned. I hope so. But of course, even with our mistrust of the
system, we haven't been able to protect ourselves from it. I did what I
could to protect myself, but I was at a disadvantage. I didn't have a solid
fulltime job with an agency or with the government or with a corporation for
years and years. I didn't have a pension. And my values didn't allow me to
invest my savings in high paying shares in some big corporation. I did what
I could, worked as long as it was profitable to do so, and then watched as
the value of the real estate that I owned, plunged, my income slowly
dwindled, and my expenses, mostly due to medical issues and disability,
ballooned.
But when you talk about the working class, please do remember that we are
not working in an Amazon warehouse or picking fruit on an industrial farm,
or plucking chickens, or working for MacDonalds. Those people are the
working class.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2020 5:37 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: TV Pundits Praising Suleimani Assassination
Neglect to Disclose Ties to Arms Industry
Miriam,
Yes and No.
We both now have decent social security and retirement pensions. But
remember, Cathy is 17 years my junior, so initially we received only my SSDI
and State Pension...and the contract dollars.
If I recall 25 years back, we began working in 5 counties. That meant
driving many miles each month, covering all of the Olympic Peninsula and
Kitsap county.
We traded in our 1994 Ford 150, in 2002, and bought the Ford Sport Trak. We
now use it as our farm truck, having retired it in 2017 with over 304
thousand miles on it.
We would have gone with another Ford Sport Trak, but they stopped making
them around 2015. The closest to it was the Toyota Tacoma.
I'm not as comfortable, even though it is very nearly the same space as the
Sports Trak. These are four doors with full size rear seats, and a short
truck bed with a Tonto top, a solid locking bed cover.
But back to the money. The state offered "contracts" to qualified Rehab
Teachers. I put "contracts" in parenthesis because my idea of a contract is
a document that has been agreed upon by both parties. In the case of our
Independent Living contracts, it was offered, and if you had questions or
concerns you were told, "It's the best we can offer. Take it or leave it."
Every contract I go over the content and write "suggestions" that should be
included in future contracts...which never ever happens.
But the money is one lump sum. Initially I believe we were offered
$50 thousand, but with the addition of Grays Harbor county it ended up at
$60 thousand. Everything comes out of that money. Travel expenses and
vehicle repairs, office and business expenses and taxes, and any medical and
vacation funds. The Program set an amount that we could spend on each
client. Initially it was $300 per client. Later the funding dropped and
the client equipment money was lowered to $200 per client. But this was not
reimbursement money. It came out of the same pot. Even tougher for those
just starting up a business, we spent our money up front and sent in our
billing. Our first billing went in on the last day of January 1995, and by
the end of February, as we were preparing our second billing, we still had
not been paid.
Since I had been assistant director for the agency, I called up the director
and told her that I felt it was demeaning to expect rehab teachers to put in
the hours and the service, and not receive prompt reimbursement.
Our check came 2 days later.
It was fine once we built up a slush fund. But initially we were living on
my SSDI and state pension, and whatever was left from our contract, minus
expenses.
We had never believed we would make much from the business. The plan had
always been that our business, along with our SS and retirement pensions
would allow us to live in the Olympic foothills and to build an off-grid
home. And in that sense, it has been a success. But despite working under
contracts for 25 years, I am dead opposed to it.
The contractor is always in control of the terms and conditions of the
contract.
It sounds great, "Be your own boss!" but just check in with other folks
doing business under contract. Uber and Lift drivers are finding that they
are only told that they are self employed. They are under contract that
spells out their every minute and movement.
Logging companies out here in the Northwest used to own their equipment,
like the huge logging trucks. But they lept at the idea of contracting with
"independent" drivers, and sold their expensive trucks to the independent
drivers. Cab companies are doing the same thing. Drivers are beginning to
realize that they are slaves to their vehicles.
There's a reason workers organize unions.
Oh yes, I almost forgot one other thing. When we first began our service,
we sent all our information to our Spokane Office, where the Program records
were kept. We did none of the entries, and the agency provided all forms
and office supplies. Over the years the burden and the costs have been
shifted to the rehab teachers. The half time office staff has grown to need
two full time office employees...who do no reviews of our work, fill out no
forms, provide only Independent Living brochures, and none of the many forms
that we must download and fill out in hard copy, and keep hard copies of
all client records for
7 years.
But our last two full time contracts, each being two years in length,
covered only three counties, but paid the same as the contracts for the five
counties. In that sense it was a pay raise.
Anyway, before I go off on another tangent, I'd better sign off.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/7/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I assume that you are reimbursed for your business expenses and that
the ones for which you're not reimursed are tax deductible. I also
assume that you have a pension and social security benefits. Just
clarifying so people don't think that you're poverty stricken.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2020 2:02 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: TV Pundits Praising Suleimani
Assassination Neglect to Disclose Ties to Arms Industry
This failure to declare sources of funding reminds me that I've never
declared my source. I now will do so, just to enable any critics to
check out whether or not my contractual agreements have led to biases
in how I respond to the American Empire's behavior.
Since 1995, my wife and I have contracted with the Washington State
Department of Services for the Blind...and later, with both the
Department and with the University of Washington. Our first 24 years
were full time contracts. Our last full time contract was in the
annual amount of $60 thousand, out of which we paid all expenses. Our
last contract is a part time agreement for $25 thousand each year.
And, just to make the point, you might want to compare those figures
to the contracts let out to some of the people contracting in the
Industrial/Military Field.
I'd say that your tax dollars bought you more benefits from our
services than for the very expensive contracts let out by the Arms
Industry.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/7/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
TV Pundits Praising Suleimani Assassination Neglect to Disclose Ties
to Arms Industry By Lee Fang, The Intercept
07 January 20
Since Friday, a loud chorus of voices has appeared in the media to
celebrate President Donald Trump's decision to assassinate Iranian
Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, a move that has sparked renewed tension
in the Middle East, a new deployment of U.S. forces, and predictions
of increased military spending.
Many of the pundits who appeared on national television or were
quoted in major publications to praise the president's actions have
undisclosed ties to the defense industry - the only domestic industry
that stands to gain from increased violence.
Jack Keane, a retired Army general, appeared on Fox News and NPR over
the last three days to praise Trump for the strike on Suleimani. "The
president acted responsibly," Keane said during an appearance with
Fox News host Lou Dobbs. "It should have happened a long time ago."
Keane has worked for military companies, including General Dynamics
and Blackwater, and currently serves as a partner at SCP Partners, a
venture capital firm that invests in defense contractors.
Van Hipp, chair of the lobbying firm American Defense International,
which represents more than two dozen defense contractors - including
Raytheon, Palantir, and General Atomics, the manufacturer of the MQ-9
Reaper drone used in the Suleimani slaying - published an opinion
column on Fox News's website praising Trump and suggesting increased
pressure on the Iranian government.
David Petraeus, the retired general who once commanded U.S. forces in
Iraq and Afghanistan, was quoted by multiple outlets in support of
the slaying.
"This is a very significant effort to reestablish deterrence," he
told Foreign Policy. On Public Radio International, Petraeus declared
that "this particular episode has been fairly impressively handled,"
and praised the Trump administration for moving "to shore up our
defenses and our offensive capabilities." He also appeared on CBS's
"Face the Nation."
Petraeus, notably, works for Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Co., the
investment firm with holdings in several major defense contractors
that is reportedly moving to "build up its defense portfolio at a
time when military budgets are skyrocketing."
John Negroponte, a former State Department official who now serves as
vice chair of the defense and aerospace lobbying firm McLarty
Associates, appeared on Fox News to dispute the claim by Sen. Bernie
Sanders, I-Vt., that the strike represented a threat of war. "I think
it's an act of self-defense," countered Negroponte.
Jeh Johnson, former Homeland Security secretary in the Obama
administration, appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" to offer measured
support, countering progressive critics who have claimed that the
strikes lacked legal and congressional authorization.
"General Suleimani," Johnson said, "was a lawful military objective
and the president, under his constitutional authority as commander in
chief, had ample domestic legal authority to take him out without an
additional congressional authorization."
Johnson joined the board of director of Lockheed Martin, one of the
largest defense contractors in the world, in 2017. The part-time
position pays him
$310,000 a year in cash and stock awards, according to disclosures.
None of the defense contracting ties were disclosed on air for Keane,
Hipp, Negroponte, Petraeus, or Johnson.
"It is imperative that viewers are aware when their news commentary
is coming from someone with a financial incentive tied to the topic
they're commenting on, especially when so many lives hang in the
balance," says Gin Armstrong, a senior researcher with the Public
Accountability Initiative, which tracks conflicts of interest. "The
key question is why media outlets allow anyone with a financial
interest in war - regardless of their previous military or government
experience - to have access to their platforms at a critical time
like this."
In the immediate aftermath of the assassination, stock prices for
major defense contractors soared on the expectation of further
conflict. The Trump administration has won more than $130 billion in
additional Pentagon spending, but analysts expect a renewed push for
even greater levels of weapons spending.
One key area for military growth in government defense spending could
be the Overseas Contingency Operations fund, a special account used
to fund wartime operations. The OCO had been largely frozen in place
and expected to flatline in the 2021 budget. The escalation in
response to the Suleimani killing could change that, according to the
Cowen Group, an investment bank that specializes in servicing defense
contractors.
The OCO account "was likely on a lower trajectory over the next
several years. We doubt that's the case now," the Cowen Group's Roman
Schweizer wrote in a memo to investors on Friday. "The U.S. will
likely increase deployments of forces to the region in coming weeks
and could make additional strikes depending on Iran's response."
It's not the first time defense contractor pundits have failed to
disclose their vested stake in the military policies they advocate.
The Boston Globe reported on how defense contractors routinely retain
former high-level officers to serve as lobbyists, even though few
bother registering or complying with ethics disclosures. Keane, for
instance, was tapped by the contractor AM General to pressure
lawmakers to support a plan to purchase new Humvee vehicles from the
company rather than refurbish older models.
Former military leaders play a decisive role in shaping public
opinion around military escalation. In the buildup to the Iraq War,
the Pentagon maintained a secret effort to deploy former generals and
other high-ranking officials on television news programs to drum up
support for the invasion.
The New York Times, which reported on the communications campaign,
noted that the military pundits maintained financial ties to defense
contractors, a financial stake in the war policies they sought to
promote.
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
Email This Page
