"It's About Coalitions, Not Purity" Part Forty-Four

"The Chickens Come Home To Roost-George W. Bush's Second Term"

George W. Bush's second term began with the failure of his Social Security privatization plan to get anywhere. In Iraq, a civil war had broken out between Iraqi Sunni and Shia Muslims. Caught in the middle were American, British, and other coalition forces or their assistance groups, as well as a number of private security contractors. Bombings and killings were common, and the whole situation was a mess, as coalition forces also tried to oust al Qaeda units. On top of this, reports and photos had surfaced of various torture techniques used by Americans against prisoners in Iraq. This brought condemnation from many within the U.S., as well as from international sources. This part of the war in Iraq continued to grow in media coverage as time went on.     

On the domestic front, oil/gasoline prices surged to new highs, tapping the pocketbooks of already financially strapped Americans. The number of housing foreclosures were rising ominously, as the further movement of jobs to overseas production facilities, and the subsequent reduction in wages in some parts of the American economy, hung like a dark cloud over the country, bringing a queasy feeling about the storm that was coming. During the campaign, a story broke regarding Republican Mark Foley, a congressman from Florida. The story indicated that Foley had sent sexy messages to teenage boys who worked, or had worked, as congressional pages. Foley resigned about 5 weeks from the election, but the whole matter brought into question how much the Republican House leadership knew about Foley's activities. * Also brewing at that time were separate, but related scandals involving lobbyist and Republican contributor Jack Abramoff (and others), including deals about a casino boat company in Florida, a deal about minimum wage in the Mariana Islands (a U.S. Territory in the Pacific), Native American gambling casinos and campaign contributions. All of these matters are highly complex, but they touched several Republicans in Congress and government, as well as Republican supporters outside of government. Their complexity makes them far beyond this article, but there are many online sources, and also check your local library for books and articles. 

The 2006 midterm elections saw a major win for Democrats, as President Bush's popularity plunged, dragging down many Republicans with it, and the Republican coalition fractured to a degree. Democrats gained 31 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, 6 seats in the U.S. Senate. These Democratic victories often came at the expense of Republican incumbents, and in the Senate, Democrats took seats from Republicans in Ohio, Montana, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Rhode Island. Democrats also gained 6 governorships, as well as numerous state legislative seats, and state and local offices. Nancy Pelosi of California became the first ever woman Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

* Republicans, by this point in time, almost all of the conservative bent, had made anti-gay rhetoric a major part of their political party. Here was a Republican directly involved in gay sexual activities. At that time, Dennis Hastert was the Republican Speaker of the House. In the spring of 2016, Hastert admitted that he had molested teenage boys when he was a high school wrestling coach. He was given a prison sentence and a fine.

WORD HISTORY:
Torture-This word, distantly related to "thwart," goes back to Indo European "twork/terkw," which had the notion of "turn, twist." This gave Latin the verb, "torquere," which meant, "to twist, to bend," and its participle form, "tortus," gave Latin the noun, "tortura," which meant, "writhing, pain brought on by injury inflicted to get information or to get agreement to something." This passed into French as "torture," with the same meaning. English borrowed the word circa 1500 from French, but likely with the reinforcement of Latin itself. 

How Does Your Income Compare?

I first published this in early 2007, but it is even more relevant now, as this was BEFORE the economic meltdown. Updated to include a "Word History" on November 29, 2014. I also simply added a paragraph, almost intact, from another article from back then, as it fit perfectly with this subject. At that time George W. Bush was President. 

A couple of things caught my attention regarding recent reports on income in America. First, the CEO of Home Depot is leaving. He is getting a severance package worth 210 million dollars!!! From my understanding, he's being given the boot for the company NOT doing as well under his leadership. What would he have gotten if he had left the company having done a GOOD job?

Then, on the radio, I heard this info, but I don't believe a source was cited:
The average pay of an American CEO of a company with at least a billion dollars a year in sales is about $44,000 per day (rounded off ... thank God!). The average pay for American workers is around $35,000 per year. Please draw your own conclusions.

President George W. Bush recently said in an interview that corporate boards need to be more vigilant in oversight of CEO pay and benefits. The reaction has been that last week, one Wall Street company paid it's CEO $40 million (as Jethro Bodine, of the Beverly Hillbillies would say, "That's 40 comma... naught... naught... naught...comma...naught...naught...naught"). As if to further prove a point, this week, another Wall Street company paid it's CEO more than $50 million. I'm glad these companies have followed the President's advice. (Generally gleaned from CNBC, December 2006)

WORD HISTORY:
Ween-This is NOT the same word as "wean," which means, "to get used to, get accustomed to, to gradually become independent of," but they are distantly related from long ago. English has a noun and verb form of this word, although both have unfortunately become archaic, but you never know when words may make a comeback, or when you may encounter old forms in poetry or old writings. "Ween" goes back to Indo European "wen," which had the notion of "to wish, to desire, to strive for, to expect." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "wenjanan," which had the meanings "to hope, to imagine, to expect." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wenan," with the same general meanings, but also with the notion behind these meanings of "to believe unrealistically, have unreal expectations." This then became "wenen," before "ween" became the standard form. Old Germanic also had the noun form "wenaz," which meant "an expectation, a hope." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wena/wen," with the same meanings, but also "incorrect expectation, false hope." This then became "wene," before "ween" became the standard. Forms of "ween" in the other Germanic languages have suffered a decline in usage too, except: German has the verb "wähnen" (to falsely imagine) in limited use, and the much more common noun "Wahn" (delusion, mania), Dutch has the limited use verb "wanen" (to falsely imagine) and the noun "waan" (delusion). Low German Saxon has "wahn," an adverb meaning "angry," which goes to a state of mind, too.    

If Public Assistance Programs Disappeared, What Would Be The Consequences?

If all forms of public assistance disappeared, as some Americans seem to want, what would be the consequences?  I'm not sure I have many answers, but I have a lot of questions that "may" just be answers too. First, where would everyone work, if that's the goal of those who favor elimination of assistance? Collectively, companies have pretty much record profits, yet the unemployment rate remains around seven percent (6.1% as of June 2014), although many people have only part time work, but want full time employment. For one thing, wages would be driven down further, as there would be so many people added to the potential work force, and don't go exempting your own job in wage cuts, likely substantial wage cuts, as that nasty little "supply and demand" comes into play ... BIG TIME! Maybe if a lot of people worked for a buck an hour, there would be a sudden explosion of job openings? Of course with such wages, who would have the money to buy anything? Prices would have to come down, but with the rest of the world not participating in this exercise, how would that effect things? Who would take care of elderly or sick family members, if everyone had to work? And with low wages, who would have the money to hire anyone to do so? With no unemployment benefits, what would happen to people who didn't have jobs, for whatever reason? With suppressed wages, how would charities fare, if many people were already struggling to keep themselves from the poorhouse? (Or would there be a poorhouse?) With the wealthy fully in charge, would any and all worker protections disappear? You know, would you be required to work holidays and virtually any number of hours or consecutive days with no extra pay? And what about child labor?   

Just to add a little perspective here, the Great Depression and World War Two both brought major changes to the American labor market. With high unemployment during the Great Depression, one idea was to restrict the labor force; that is, cut down on the number of potential workers, leaving a more limited number to hold or seek scare jobs. Social Security became law in the mid 1930s, with a collection age of 65, but the program took a few years to actually start letting Americans collect (and not all that many companies had pension plans), but once in full swing, the 65 retirement age opened up jobs for younger workers to move up, or enter the work force, in a sort of "chain reaction" (this all took time, including after WW II). The whole situation of unemployment changed during World War Two, as millions of men (and a number of women) went into the armed forces, leaving all sorts of job openings for an economy that had shifted into high gear by making planes, tanks, guns, ships, helmets, military clothing, etc, besides most of the usual things it had already been making. 

Can our current system provide adequate numbers of jobs with living wages and benefits?* Notice I said "living wages and benefits," since providing jobs is not the end game in itself, but providing living standards must be part of our modern civilization. While we've progressed in civilization, there are those who want to go back in time, including some who seem to visualize the past as some ideal period. In the former television show Fantasy Island, people got to see what their "imagined dreams" were really like. My guess is, if we could get some of those with the misguided beliefs about the past onto a new "Fantasy Island," it wouldn't take long for them to want to scurry back to the present, with a very different perspective on the future

* For more on this subject, see these articles:  http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2012/06/capitalism-long-term-broad-based.html

http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2012/07/capitalism-long-term-broad-based.html

WORD HISTORY:
Horn-This traces back to Indo European "kher," which had the idea of "top of the body or head, horn of an animal." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "hurnaz," meaning "horn." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "horn," which has remained that way for many centuries, with the exception of some adding an occasional ending "e" hundreds of years ago. The use of animal horns as instruments brought that added meaning. The other Germanic languages have: German "Horn," Low German "Hoorn," Dutch "hoorn," West Frisian "hoarn," Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Swedish "horn."

Labor Day

The national holiday of Labor Day was established by an act of Congress, and signed by President Grover Cleveland, in 1894, although the tradition of honoring labor in September actually began more than a decade earlier in New York City. Strong unions can help keep America's middle class grow by achieving good wages and benefits for workers, and this in turn can help other workers by setting wage and other standards in employment. An increasing percentage of the national income has been going to the richest people in country, a fact even admitted to by none other than Alan Greenspan, a conservative, pro-business, Republican, who warned the gap was growing so much, it's continuance could literally threaten capitalism. Support unions folks! You don't have to agree with them 100% of the time, but they'll be on your side far more than the wealthiest 1% will ever be.

WORD HISTORY:
Summer-This goes back to Indo European "sem," which meant "part of a year, a season, year." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "sumara," which had narrowed the meaning to the particular season of the year, "summer." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "sumor," which then became "sumer," before the modern version. The verb form, meaning "to spend summer in a particular area," was derived from the noun. Common in the other Germanic languages: German and Low German have "Sommer," West Frisian has "simmer," Dutch has "zomer," Icelandic has "sumar," Danish and Norwegian have "sommer," Swedish has "sommar."
 
 

Greed For The Moment

Throughout our lives we hear about the need to think ahead, but I'm not sure we can really do that, most of us anyway, at least not enough of us or far enough into the future. When I was in school in the 1960s, there was talk of computers being the way of the future and that students needed to choose training for that future. Some heeded that advice from those with the foresight into the developing computer advances, but too few, in my opinion, including myself, took the advice. It's a tough sell telling people, especially when we're young, that we need to do such and such for the future. For young people the future is the next school dance, the next school sporting event or the next legal holiday when school will be closed. With the wealthiest of Americans, some people ask, "Can't they see where their greed is leading?" So will greed for the moment threaten to later bring down dog-eat-dog capitalism? No question about it, the money is going to the top of the income ladder, but is there a point where that top rung of the ladder collapses from the weight of all the wealth up there?

Technology and the sending of sectors of the economy out the country for cheap labor and ways to get around workplace and environmental regulation can only go so far, as the resulting consequences of stagnant or declining wages for so many Americans come home to roost. It's a vicious cycle, with lower wages requiring cheaper goods for lower paid workers to be able to afford to buy them, but with the increased profits going to the top, where few seemingly can see, or want to see, from that lofty perch, that the Titanic is heading for an iceberg.

The growing income gap is not just about technology and the decline in manufacturing, but also about the  financial sector, which has expanded as a part of the economy for the last several decades. As finance expanded, it began to need more income to sustain the big and increasing salaries in the industry, as well as its growing workforce. The financial sector makes money a number of ways, two of which obviously are through fees for various services and commissions on transactions. How do you collect more commissions? By selling more stocks and bonds. How do you get people to invest more in stocks and bonds? You show them profits. How do you show them more profits? By selling more of something and by cutting costs to increase margins. As you can see, it's not a big leap to "cutting wages and benefits by shipping jobs and production to places where costs are low, thus increasing profits." If true wealth is measured by tangible items; that is, things we can actually touch and which usually have some endurance, what does the financial sector produce for Americans? Not a hell of a lot, although it can be involved in helping produce wealth and it IS important. We've seen a similar situation with the growth in lawyers, as a number of Americans poured into law schools to be trained in legal matters, a profession that typically pays well above average income. What happened? Lawsuits went wild, as the expanding legal profession needed more business to pay for all of the added lawyers and incomes. The action of the financial and legal sectors is not a terribly tough one to figure out folks, as at its heart, it is about self interest.  

Hm, I don't know about you, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the need for more income brought about risky ventures in the financial sector, especially after protections against nonsense were removed in the 1999/2000 era.  If such risky ventures pay off, those involved can make big money, but when they fail or are so misguided, as was the mortgage fiasco, LOOK OUT, but it was greed for the moment, "we want money NOW!" Few, if any, at the top paid no real penalty and they certainly did not spend any time in prison, although their schemes almost brought down the entire world economy. In the end, to halt a potential collapse of world finance, governments, including the U.S., first under George W. Bush and then under Barack Obama, stepped in with money; that is, taxpayer money, to bolster the teetering financial system. So the rewards up to that point went to millionaires and billionaires, but the losses were covered by that dreaded entity ... GOVERNMENT; that is, society. Amazingly, many in the upper class speak against socialism, but I guess that only counts when they aren't the ones getting "socialized." (In fairness here, a good deal of the "bailout money" has been paid back.)

Most Americans can't save the necessary amount, if anything, for retirement. It's easy for the wealthy to talk about people needing to save money for retirement, they have money ANY TIME.* There is a high proportion of Americans living essentially paycheck to paycheck, a very dangerous situation (some say 3/4 of all Americans, but even if that's a bit high, and it's "only" 2/3, that's still not great either). Lack of savings makes Social Security mandatory, as it's the only thing to keep many older Americans from being totally destitute, and Medicare and Medicaid, both targets of the superegos and their right wing allies, provides needed medial care to the elderly, the poor and the disabled. Many Americans fiddle while their own personal Rome burns, oblivious to the scheming of the rightists and fascists who can't stand the fact that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are shared national programs. They want control and their cut of the action. Don't be fooled by "privatization" talk, meant only to open the door to the treasure chest for the wealthy interests. They always seek to make matters about money with the euphemism "free markets," because then they can control it; "free markets"=control by the wealthy, not anything else, there's no other definition. To the wealthy, Social Security just can't be right because it is in part financed by lower interest rate securities. To wealthy and financial people who love to talk about "yields" on stocks and bonds, that's almost criminal, because their own personal sense of business, driven by human greed (we all have it to some extent) just can't accept that. They lack the ability to grasp anything that isn't solely about making money.** They have to be regulated by us, because they can't self regulate; many lack the perspective necessary to do so. It often tends to be "greed for the moment." In one episode of "Gilligan's Island," the castaways are threatened by an active volcano. When the Professor needs a timing device for a bomb to act as a counter to the volcano, super millionaire Mr. Thurston Howell III SELLS him a clock. Even in the face of danger or death, he just couldn't give up that business idea of making a profit on something. It may only have been a television comedy, but there's an underlying truth there. All well and good to talk about the future, but people live in the present.

* America really took off as a "consumer" driven nation in the 1920s. Mass production of various goods needed a market to sell those goods, which brought investment in mass marketing to "encourage" Americans to buy products. Consumer credit (often called "charge accounts" back then) expanded tremendously to allow Americans to buy products on credit and pay for them in installments. The increasing spread of electricity and the invention of several electrical devices, like refrigerators, radios and mixers, saw sales skyrocket, and profits for companies soared too, but wages did not soar so much. After an intense run-up, the whole thing took a major nosedive in a little event termed the Great Depression. So when I say Americans cannot always save for retirement, what I mean is, many people make bad choices, buying things to "keep up with the Joneses," but then again, there are pulls and tugs at us going on all of the time. Self esteem is certainly in play, as some folks try hard to be seen as "cool" and part of "what's happnin'." On the other hand, those preaching for Americans to save are trying to have it both ways; that is, they want us to spend, spend, spend to buy their products and services, but then they preach about too much credit and too little savings. What the right balance is, I don't know, but I believe I'm safe in saying, "we aren't in balance, nor have we been, for quite some time."

** To add some balance, the opposites can't understand about human greed, let alone big money greed, and they seem to think things get financed from thin air. There is balance here somewhere, folks, but finding it is often difficult, especially in the last several decades of  the "greed is good" mentality.  

WORD HISTORY:
Wight-This ultimate origin of this now generally archaic word is unknown, and "apparently," besides forms in the Germanic languages, it has some connection with Slavic (Russian "vesc" and Old Church Slavonic "vesti," both meaning "thing, matter"), but it is related to English "whit," (small object, particle).^ Old Germanic had "wihktiz," which seems to have meant "substance, matter." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wiht," with the meaning "person, being, creature." Other forms in Germanic are: German "Wicht" (small child, rascal, imp, little creature); Low German "Wicht" (young girl); Dutch "wicht" (child, small creature); Swedish "vätte" (imp, gnome). I did not find a form in Frisian, but sources on this close relative of English are not exactly abundant, so such a form may well exist, or like English, it could now be archaic. Further I could not find forms in Danish, Icelandic or Norwegian.  

^ Now more commonly used in an expression like, "I don't even care one whit about it."   

^^ For the use of "wight" as part of the word that became modern "not," see:  http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2013/08/success-not-excess.html

The Psychology of the Egomaniacs and the Race to the Bottom

Psychology is a part of all of our lives, because we have minds to think with, and all of our actions are based upon thought, even though with some it may seem with less thought than for others. None of us is truly "sane," whatever the hell that actually means, but some have "problems" that extensively affect their own lives and the  lives of others on a regular basis. Most societies have laws against rape, for instance, and people who seem to have the psychological need to "force themselves" on others are held accountable for those actions, regardless of their seeming need to do such things. Just because we have psychological needs doesn't mean society doesn't try to put controls on those needs. Sherwood Schwartz, the creator of the 1960s comedy "Gilligan's Island,"  had lots of psychology in his little comedy about seven people stranded on a small Pacific island. One of the seven main characters was Thurston Howell III, a multimillionaire, who in today's dollars would be a multi billionaire. Mr. Howell couldn't stop thinking about money, even though he had long before passed the amount any human being would have needed to live a very comfortable life. Even though the little group was on an uncharted island and in need of rescue, Mr. Howell schemed, even at times against his own wife, as he just couldn't stop wanting money and exercising the power that money gave him. Accustomed to having his own way, on the island he found that money could not always be as powerful a force as in regular society, because there was nothing to buy, although that didn't stop him from trying to gain more wealth through scheming, bribery and exploitation. Mr. Howell often thought he should have been the leader of the group of castaways, because of his wealth and the large number of corporations he owned. Government scared him, as overall it had the power to control him at times, and he once mentioned that he had had a dream about ordering the "wholesale arrest of the Supreme Court." In spite of Mr. Howell's sometimes ruthless behavior, he had a connection to reality and at times he wanted to be loved and respected by the others in the group, and he once drew up a will dividing his fortune among the castaways. He also was fearful that he would be seen as weak if he did good deeds; a frightening thought in itself, if you think about it. Even on the island, however, Mr. Howell's ego and sense of privilege couldn't get away from being reined in by law, as in one episode a conflict breaks out over the ownership of a chest, thought to contain great treasure, which had been discovered by Gilligan when he was doing to job for Mr. Howell,* but the group holds a "hearing" on the case, presided over by the Professor, as judge. So Mr. Howell was not a totally ruthless money grubber all of the time, and his insecurity was demonstrated by his need to have his Teddy Bear to cuddle up with at night.

In more recent times, the egomaniacs in American society have sought every possible way to avoid paying decent wages and offering employees benefits. Before you say, "Well Randy, I work for 'XYZ,' and my employer has provided decent pay and benefits for many years," ask yourself and check out why the employer has done such. Remember, while not all employers strive to be Ebenezer Scrooge in exploiting their employees, many do not just "give" good pay and benefits, although there are decent employers in this country who have consciences and who want to do the right thing, with occasional lapses. My guess is, there are likely more such than we ever hear about, perhaps because they aren't in need of the acclamation. And I don't want to imply that there aren't times of contentiousness between management and labor in those companies. Many years ago there was a furniture company where the warehouse men and the deliverymen were all Teamsters. I knew just about all of them and I know the things they said about the company and it's owners. You're probably thinking it was all bad, but it wasn't. Quite to the contrary, they mainly said good things about the primary owner, a lady (I knew her somewhat), although some remarks about some in her family were not quite as nice.** Over the years there was a strike or two, but there was never a lot of animosity, and certainly no hatred. In fact, one employee was found to have been drinking on the job, but the company didn't fire him, and he was just given a warning. Unfortunately, the guy didn't learn his lesson and when he did the same thing, the consequence was his termination. It was at that time that the relatively good relations between the Teamster employees and the company showed themselves, as one Teamster, a very good union man, told the fired man off in my presence, even telling him how the company had given him another chance that he then abused.

Why can't all management and employee relations be more like the above? Well we're back to psychology and especially to the superego-types in the business world who have taken over and driven the agenda for many sectors of the business world. They have done everything possible to fatten their already fat bank accounts, including moving plants and jobs overseas to get around American labor and American regulation; that is, law. It's hurt our country folks and most of you know it, whether you'll admit it or not. Some industries, like clothing, are now heavily located overseas in low wage countries, where they may well be owned by American corporations and then the finished products are shipped to the U.S. Such maneuvers has put pressure on American wages/benefits, forcing many Americans to have to look to buy cheaper foreign-made products, because they don't always have the money to buy American products. Of course the corporations and their minions say it's because American workers want to make too much money, or that federal, state or local regulations drive up costs, or a combination of both, forcing corporations to seek lower wages and less regulation elsewhere. Let's see ... when was the last time you heard that it might have something to do with corporate executives and the billionaire/millionaire stockholders wanting "more money?" The argument is NEVER framed in that way, as if these superegos are too important to question. This has truly become a "race to the bottom." Folks, you might think you won't be affected, but with this crap going on and on, it will HAVE to affect you too, if it hasn't already, and that includes if you're a small business owner, as the less money Americans have, the less money they have to spend at your business; thus, the less business for you. As I've said here before, the superegos haven't gone to all of the effort of moving production elsewhere, supporting anti-labor candidates and anti-labor agendas, just so they can pay you MORE; they want to pay you LESS! That's the whole point. Don't be in denial until it's too late!

* The conflict in this episode shows the technical aspects of law, as Mr. Howell "claims" ownership of the chest, because Gilligan was doing work for him. The Skipper, who handles Gilligan's side of the case, argues that Gilligan owns the chest, because he did the work for Mr. Howell as a favor and wasn't paid.

** There will always be a certain amount of contentiousness between labor and management, as, by and large, we humans don't much like to be told what to do, but it often also has a great deal to do with "how" management does the telling. I guess that's just the "psychology" to it.

WORD HISTORY:
Bleach-This goes back to Indo European "blehg," which had the notion of "shine, pale, bright." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "blaikjanan," a verb form which meant "to make pale, to make bright" (in some of its other Indo European relatives, the Indo European form took on meanings having to do with fire from the "bright, shine" idea). This then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "blaecan," which meant "to make white or pale, to whiten," or in the modern sense, "to bleach." There were noun and adjectival forms in Old English such as the noun "blaece," which meant "skin ailment that made the skin dry and pale,"^ another noun "blaeco," which meant "paleness," and the adjective "blaec," which meant "pale," but it seems the modern noun (for the bleach product) was derived from the verb form. The other Germanic languages have: German "bleichen" (to bleach), "bleich" (pale) and "Bleichmittel" (bleach); Low German has "bleeken/bleken" (to bleach) and "Bleik" (bleach); Dutch "bleken" (to bleach) and "bleekmiddel" (bleach); Swedish "bleka" (to bleach) and "blekmedel" (bleach); Danish "bleg" (pale) and  "blegemiddel" (bleach); Icelandic "bleikja" (light/pale color) and "bleikur" (pale); Norwegian "blek" (pale) and "blekemiddel" (bleach);^^ I could not find any forms in Frisian.   

^ Some have also applied this English term to leprosy, a disease much disputed in what it meant long ago and it may well have meant different things to different people, including eczema, dermatitis and syphilis.

^^ The compound form of the noun in use in some other Germanic languages is a form of "middle" as the second part of the word. It is equivalent to English "medium," a word borrowed from Latin, which besides the literal meaning "in between," also means "a means to convey or do something, an agent;" thus those Germanic compound nouns essentially mean "agent/substance for bleaching, whitening." So, it is likely that had "medium" not been borrowed by English, we too might use a form of "middle" in certain compounds. By the way, Latin "medium" shares the same Indo European origin as the Germanic form which produced English "middle" and "mid."        

Addition To The Great Depression

I should have added this during my original articles, but better late than never. In order to add some balance, it should be noted that not everyone suffered terrible job loss or financial hardship during the Depression. We do need to remember, that while unemployment was far above what would have been considered normal, more people had jobs than were unemployed. Further, the ranks of the unemployed tended to be "revolving," just to use a term; that is, many who lost jobs at some given point, found other jobs eventually, although perhaps at lower wages, but while they were finding new work, others were losing their jobs. The situation at various points during the Depression was, however, that more folks were losing jobs, than finding jobs, thus the unemployment rate kept increasing for quite some time. Of course, the reciprocal of that was also true, as there were times when more people found jobs than lost jobs.

If a person or household had savings, or if a person was able to maintain a decent job during those times, they actually could have lived a pretty decent lifestyle, since prices fell faster, in most cases, than did wages; that is, some people actually GAINED purchasing power. As noted in one of the articles, I doubt many people wanted the Depression to continue in order for some to experience this benefit.

WORD HISTORY:
Save-This goes back to Indo European "sol(h)," which had the notion of "whole, keep together, keep well, keep sound." This gave Latin "salvus," which meant "safe, healthy, sound." This then gave Latin the verb "salvare," with the meaning "to make (something) safe from harm, to save." Old French, a Latin-based language, inherited the word as "sauver." English borrowed the word from French in the late 1100s as "saven," but initially with the religious sense "save a person's soul from sin." The meaning gradually broadened to "save, rescue."

Paying The Piper-Part Six-Incomes Fall, Poverty Rises

Yesterday, the Census Bureau released figures showing the nation's poverty rate climbed to 14.3% (figures go through 2009), the highest since 1994. There are now 43.6 million Americans living poverty, the most since the 1960s. The number of people without health insurance also increased, presumably as businesses tried to cut costs during the economic downturn, and the new health care law doesn't take full effect until 2014, if it survives Republican attempts to repeal or kill it by refusing to fund certain parts of it.*

While I don't believe George W. Bush is a bad person, his economic policies, and those policies that have been put into place in the last three decades have taken a TERRIBLE toll on many Americans. Newly released figures show that the median income for Americans fell nearly 5% between 2000 and 2009.** Of course incomes for the top 20% rose, and how much do you want to bet that the increases at the very top 1 to 2% were higher than most?***

I've noted here before that "Morning Joe," on cable channel MSNBC, is one of my favorite shows. Today, host Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, and none other than conservative Republican commentator Pat Buchanan talked about these very figures I've mentioned above. Buchanan said that he has had "big differences with his party" over many of the economic policies of the last few decades, most put into place by Republicans, although at times with help from some Democrats. Buchanan threw some figures out, and I have no idea how accurate these figures are, but he said that during Bush's eight years in office, more than 50,000 manufacturing plants closed in America! As a result, he stated that 6 million manufacturing jobs ("the highest income jobs for working class Americans," he added) disappeared, with many of these jobs going to China. Scarborough mentioned "three decades of American decline." Remember, these were two Republicans talking about this, not two Democrats.

If you're a Republican, God bless ya! We need differing points of view, as neither political party has a monopoly on good ideas, and certainly neither has a monopoly on virtue. I just hope you'll go look into that mirror and say to yourself, "I think we've got a problem here." That's a start! Don't be in denial! What is terribly troubling to me now is to hear Republican officeholders acting as if they had nothing to do with creating the economic situation this country is in. It's as if they learned nothing! That's a recipe for more decline. (A Word History is below the notes)

Related previous article:
http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2007/06/you-wont-need-time-machine.html

* The health care bill (now law) was not great, but it was a start. A number of Republican members of Congress and some Republican candidates are indicating they will try to repeal or "de-fund" the health care law, if Republicans take over Congress in the November elections. The Republican senatorial candidate in Alaska (Joe Miller) has noted that with a Democratic president, no repeal will be possible, as the president will veto any such legislation, but Miller advises that he will aim to "de-fund" the law, thus effectively killing it.

** See the Wall Street Journal for today, the front page article, "Lost Decade for American Income," by Conor Dougherty and Sara Murray.

*** I'm not against people making money, even lots of money, but in my lifetime I've found that most Americans are pretty sensible. We want businesses to make money, we understand it, we get it! There will always be those who resent someone who made a dime off of them, but they are in the distinct minority, probably like 2%. The other side of the coin is, however, Americans also know when they see excess, and we've seen excess. There has been a tremendous transfer of wealth to the upper incomes, and they were already, well, the upper incomes.

WORD HISTORY:
Poverty-This word goes back to the Indo European root "pau," which meant "little, few," and which then spawned the Latin offshoot "paupertas." (Latin is an Indo European language related to English, but further down the family tree.) Old French, a Latin-based language, continued with "poverte," and English then acquired the word from French in the late 1100s. Initially it was spelled as the French word, "poverte," but later took on the modern spelling. It is closely related to both "poor" and "pauper." In Old English we used a form of the base "earm" to relate words connected to poor and poverty, and in our close relative German, they still have "arm"(not the same as the body part, which is spelled the same in German), which is obviously close to our old word.

Foreclosures

Just a quick note to say that I read an article by Rachel Beck of the Associated Press about the reasons for foreclosures. Up until now, the theories about the huge number of foreclosures have had to do with unscrupulous lenders and adjustable rate mortgages, but this article notes that Countrywide Financial, the largest mortgage company in the country, and a company that has had to write off billions in loans, has indicated that the primary reason given for foreclosures is a drop in income, followed by illness and divorce. That's highly likely in my opinion, as now the retailers are saying how holiday sales are not meeting expectations, and I don't know if it's just me, but it seems that around here, nowhere near the people have holiday lights and displays up this year. I'm just guessing that they're trying to save on the electric bill. If I'm right, it just shows how pinched many people are. All the while, the wealthy continue to rake it in on oil and gas prices, which is a big part of why the country is where it is.

What Will Happen To Greater Cleveland?

Most of us are aware that the Greater Cleveland area has been in decline for decades. The area, once a bulwark of industry, had seen its industries slowly erode. Each recession brought layoffs. Each recovery brought rehiring, though often with fewer workers than before the recession, but the workers still made decent wages and had good benefits. The thing was, however, the area still had a relatively strong industrial base AND a strong corporate headquarters base, many in the downtown area. I remember a number of years ago, in one of campaigns to sell Cleveland to the rest of the country, it was publicized that Cleveland was home to the third largest number of Fortune 500 headquarters, and that it also had a fair percentage of the largest financial institutions on the Fortune list. Much of this came as a surprise to many people who lived here. So, maybe Cleveland was “the best kept secret,” as one of the slogans proclaimed, even to its own residents. All of this came at a time, the 1980s, when Cleveland seemed to be moving forward, and the community had a sense of pride and an attitude that it could accomplish things. The “Light Up Cleveland” nights for Monday Night Football showed the City in a glow that reflected the pride felt by many Greater Clevelanders.

Today, I shudder to think what might happen to this community. There seems to be no one able to put out a “call to arms,” to rally the community. I don’t want to bash our elected officials too much, as I think we have many office holders who are well intentioned, but they aren’t leaders. We also need to hear the stark truth about how bad the situation is, and how bad it could become. All you have to do is look around: businesses closing, businesses moving out, declining population, lower wages and benefits, if you’re lucky to have benefits. We can’t have many of those Fortune 500 headquarters here anymore, nor can we have many of the top financial institutions, either. The inner city is in serious decline, and poverty is about the only element that is in ascendance. Poverty doesn’t recognize city boundaries, and it has leapt with vigor into the suburbs. As cited by the Plain Dealer over the past year, food pantries are now not only in many suburbs, but they are visited by substantial numbers of residents seeking help. A number of years ago, such stories were a thing limited to Cleveland proper. Further, I drove down Superior Avenue at 4:30 p.m. recently, and thought for sure that I'd regret getting stuck in rush hour traffic, only to find that it was a breeze getting to the Detroit-Superior Bridge, and that there weren’t even many people waiting for buses. I lived in Downtown for years, and at that time of day, this town was alive with people rushing to the parking garages or to catch the next bus or Rapid home, and the traffic was always heavy.

It would seem to me that everything we treasure in this community is now open to demise. Make no mistake about it, we are in trouble here! The community was stunned by Modell’s treachery in the mid 1990s, but even with a new Cleveland Browns team and a new multi-million dollar stadium, the team’s embarrassing performance since its return has left even many diehard fans turned off. Let’s not forget, the team moved once, and if it moves again, I would have to believe that it would not return. The Indians have also been floundering around for a number of years. Declining attendance brings to mind the many years when the team threatened to leave town. The most disturbing thing was the poor attendance during the late run by the Indians in the 2005 season. It used to be said that if the Indians played well, the fans would come out, but that saying, just like the BP offices in the BP Building, is empty. Of course, with the tremendous cost of attending ANY professional sport’s event, average folks are lucky if they can afford to take their family to see a game or two per season, without mortgaging the homestead, which is difficult these days, since we have the highest foreclosure rate in the nation, if I understand it right. The Cavaliers have certainly been the exception, and they have given our forlorn town something of a morale boost. I don’t want to sound the “party pooper,” but if ANYTHING happens to LeBron… well you know the answer.

With so many corporate headquarters gone, money for many charities has also left town. As I mentioned above, everything here is in danger, and that includes the renowned Cleveland Orchestra, as well as the museums. I’m not saying that any of these things WILL happen in the next two or three weeks, but unfortunately, they COULD happen in the next few years or so, and we need to start thinking about how we stop the bleeding here. Some will no doubt say that I’m overreacting, and that while these things COULD happen, we COULD also have two weeks in January with temperatures in the 40s and 50s. Oh, we just did.