‘A Pipeline Straight to Jail’

Posted on Oct 11, 2015

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

Here’s Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Is Just Plain Wrong

By Robert Reich

    A Toronto protest against the TPP trade agreement in 2014. (arindambanerjee / Shutterstock)

This post originally ran on Robert Reich’s website in January.

Republicans who now run Congress say they want to cooperate with President Obama, and point to the administration’s Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, as the model. The only problem is the TPP would be a disaster.

If you haven’t heard much about the TPP, that’s part of the problem right there. It would be the largest trade deal in history — involving countries stretching from Chile to Japan, representing 792 million people and accounting for 40 percent of the world economy – yet it’s been devised in secret.

Lobbyists from America’s biggest corporations and Wall Street’s biggest banks have been involved but not the American public. That’s a recipe for fatter profits and bigger paychecks at the top, but not a good deal for most of us, or even for most of the rest of the world.

Advertisement

First some background. We used to think about trade policy as a choice between “free trade” and “protectionism.” Free trade meant opening our borders to products made elsewhere. Protectionism meant putting up tariffs and quotas to keep them out.

In the decades after World War II, America chose free trade. The idea was that each country would specialize in goods it produced best and at least cost. That way, living standards would rise here and abroad. New jobs would be created to take the place of jobs that were lost. And communism would be contained.

For three decades, free trade worked. It was a win-win-win.

But in more recent decades the choice has become far more complicated and the payoff from trade agreements more skewed to those at the top.

Tariffs are already low. Negotiations now involve such things as intellectual property, financial regulations, labor laws, and rules for health, safety, and the environment.

It’s no longer free trade versus protectionism. Big corporations and Wall Street want some of both.

They want more international protection when it comes to their intellectual property and other assets. So they’ve been seeking trade rules that secure and extend their patents, trademarks, and copyrights abroad, and protect their global franchise agreements, securities, and loans.

But they want less protection of consumers, workers, small investors, and the environment, because these interfere with their profits. So they’ve been seeking trade rules that allow them to override these protections.

Not surprisingly for a deal that’s been drafted mostly by corporate and Wall Street lobbyists, the TPP provides exactly this mix.

What’s been leaked about it so far reveals, for example, that the pharmaceutical industry gets stronger patent protections, delaying cheaper generic versions of drugs. That will be a good deal for Big Pharma but not necessarily for the inhabitants of developing nations who won’t get certain life-saving drugs at a cost they can afford.

The TPP also gives global corporations an international tribunal of private attorneys, outside any nation’s legal system, who can order compensation for any “unjust expropriation” of foreign assets.

Even better for global companies, the tribunal can order compensation for any lost profits found to result from a nation’s regulations. Philip Morris is using a similar provision against Uruguay (the provision appears in a bilateral trade treaty between Uruguay and Switzerland), claiming that Uruguay’s strong anti-smoking regulations unfairly diminish the company’s profits.

Anyone believing the TPP is good for Americans take note: The foreign subsidiaries of U.S.-based corporations could just as easily challenge any U.S. government regulation they claim unfairly diminishes their profits – say, a regulation protecting American consumers from unsafe products or unhealthy foods, investors from fraudulent securities or predatory lending, workers from unsafe working conditions, taxpayers from another bailout of Wall Street, or the environment from toxic emissions.

The administration says the trade deal will boost U.S. exports in the fast-growing Pacific basin where the United States faces growing economic competition from China. The TPP is part of Obama’s strategy to contain China’s economic and strategic prowess.

Fine. But the deal will also allow American corporations to outsource even more jobs abroad.

In other words, the TPP is a Trojan horse in a global race to the bottom, giving big corporations and Wall Street banks a way to eliminate any and all laws and regulations that get in the way of their profits.

At a time when corporate profits are at record highs and the real median wage is lower than it’s been in four decades, most Americans need protection – not from international trade but from the political power of large corporations and Wall Street.

The Trans Pacific Partnership is the wrong remedy to the wrong problem. Any way you look at it, it’s just plain wrong.

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

What It Means to Be a Socialist

Posted on Sep 20, 2015

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

The Real Enemy Is Within

Posted on Sep 6, 2015

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

The Myth of Quality Time

SEPT. 5, 2015 Frank Bruni

EVERY summer for many years now, my family has kept to our ritual. All 20 of us —my siblings, my dad, our better halves, my nieces and nephews — find a beach housebig enough to fit the whole unruly clan. We journey to it from our different statesand time zones. We tensely divvy up the bedrooms, trying to remember who faredpoorly or well on the previous trip. And we fling ourselves at one another for seven days and seven nights.That’s right: a solid week. It’s that part of the ritual that mystifies many of myfriends, who endorse family closeness but think that there can be entirely too muchof it. Wouldn’t a long weekend suffice? And wouldn’t it ward off a few spats andsimplify the planning?The answer to the second question is yes, but to the first, an emphatic no.I used to think that shorter would be better, and in the past, I arrived for these beach vacations a day late or fled two days early, telling myself that I had to when intruth I also wanted to — because I crave my space and my quiet, and because I wearyof marinating in sunscreen and discovering sand in strange places. But in recentyears, I’ve showed up at the start and stayed for the duration, and I’ve noticed adifference.With a more expansive stretch, there’s a better chance that I’ll be around at theprecise, random moment when one of my nephews drops his guard and solicits my advice about something private. Or when one of my nieces will need someone otherthan her parents to tell her that she’s smart and beautiful. Or when one of mysiblings will flash back on an incident from our childhood that makes us laughuncontrollably, and suddenly the cozy, happy chain of our love is cinched that muchtighter.There’s simply no real substitute for physical presence.We delude ourselves when we say otherwise, when we invoke and venerate“quality time,” a shopworn phrase with a debatable promise: that we can planinstances of extraordinary candor, plot episodes of exquisite tenderness, engineerintimacy in an appointed hour.

We can try. We can cordon off one meal each day or two afternoons each weekand weed them of distractions. We can choose a setting that encourages relaxationand uplift. We can fill it with totems and frippery — a balloon for a child, sparklingwine for a spouse — that signal celebration and create a sense of the sacred.And there’s no doubt that the degree of attentiveness that we bring to anoccasion ennobles or demeans it. Better to spend 15 focused, responsive minutesthan 30 utterly distracted ones.But people tend not to operate on cue. At least our moods and emotions don’t.We reach out for help at odd points; we bloom at unpredictable ones. The surest wayto see the brightest colors, or the darkest ones, is to be watching and waiting andready for them.

That’s reflected in a development that Claire Cain Miller and David Streitfeldwrote about in The Times last week. They noted that “a workplace culture that urgesnew mothers and fathers to hurry back to their cubicles is beginning to shift,” andthey cited “more family-friendly policies” at Microsoft and Netflix, which haveextended the leave that parents can take.How many parents will step off the fast track and avail themselves of thisremains to be seen. But those who do will be deciding that the quantity of time withtheir brood matters as much as the intensity of it.

They’ll be lucky: Many people aren’t privileged enough to exercise suchdiscretion. My family is lucky, too. We have the means to get away.But we’re also dedicated to it, and we’ve determined that Thanksgiving Day isn’tample, that Christmas Eve passes too quickly, and that if each of us really means tobe central in the others’ lives, we must make an investment, the biggest componentsof which are minutes, hours, days. As soon as our beach week this summer was done,we huddled over our calendars and traded scores of emails to figure out which weeknext summer we could all set aside. It wasn’t easy. But it was essential.

Couples move in together not just because it’s economically prudent. Theyunderstand, consciously or instinctively, that sustained proximity is the best route tothe soul of someone; that unscripted gestures at unexpected junctures yield sweeterrewards than scripted ones on date night; that the “I love you” that counts most isn’twhispered with great ceremony on a hilltop in Tuscany. No, it slips out casually,spontaneously, in the produce section or over the dishes, amid the drudgery anddetritus of their routines. That’s also when the truest confessions are made, whenhurt is at its rawest and tenderness at its purest.I know how my 80-year-old father feels about dying, religion and God notbecause I scheduled a discrete encounter to discuss all of that with him. I knowbecause I happened to be in the passenger seat of his car when such thoughts wereon his mind and when, for whatever unforeseeable reason, he felt comfortablearticulating them.

And I know what he appreciates and regrets most about his past because I wasnot only punctual for this summer’s vacation, but also traveled there with him, tofatten our visit, and he was uncharacteristically ruminative on that flight.It was over lunch at the beach house one day that my oldest nephew spoke withunusual candor, and at unusual length, about his expectations for college, hisexperiences in high school — stuff that I’d grilled him about previously, neverharvesting the generous answers that he volunteered during that particular meal.It was on a run the next morning that my oldest niece described, as she’d neverdone for me before, the joys, frustrations and contours of her relationships with her parents, her two sisters and her brother. Why this information tumbled out of herthen, with pelicans overheard and sweat slicking our foreheads, I can’t tell you. But Ican tell you that I’m even more tightly bonded with her now, and that’s not becauseof some orchestrated, contrived effort to plumb her emotions. It’s because I waspresent. It’s because I was there.

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

Migliore: Time to wake up, America

By: R. Henry Migliore Guest Columnist September 1, 2015

After falling sharply early last week, the Dow is on a rebound. But do not be fooled. The market is in a downward spiral and this is a short adjustment. We must be aware of global markets and world events, commodity prices and possible political hot spots.

There is a good chance that our United States of America will not exist as we know it today. With the United States in its 239th year and Canada at its 188th year, we are very low on the learning curve. China and Russia, for example, have existed for thousands of years. These societies and others have adapted to change. China has adapted to change and continues to be a world power. The Soviet Union collapsed, and now Russia is emerging again as an economic and military world power. I have worked as a consultant and visiting professor in China and Russia. They are bright, shrewd, calculating, and have a mind-set to look at the future. Our North American mind-set is short term with the thought to only what’s just around the corner; we seem to have little apparent interest in the long-term future. Russian President Vladimir Putin was quoted: “Russians do not have to worry about the USA. They will self-destruct.”

The federal debt since January 2009 has gone from $10.6 trillion to more than $17 trillion. More debt and no relief in sight mean it’s only going to get worse. Our form of government will have to change to combat decades of moral decline, economic downturns, weak international position, and decades of failed foreign policy.

My spirit is telling me that dramatic events are on the horizon. We can see that Iraq is back in civil war. The Russians are asserting dominance in the Ukraine. We did not learn a lesson from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan. There is no clearly divine foreign policy and for sure we have no clue about the cultures of the entire world. Getting out of Iraq left a vacuum for ISIS. What a blunder. We still have troops in Europe, Korea and Japan. A basic understanding of culture would have shaped a better strategy to deal with world events. We can expect more turmoil in the next few years. The Department of Homeland Security is successful to some extent but handcuffed. One thing you can count on is more lone-wolf and ISIS attacks here in America. As events unfold, our inability to adjust will lead to our sense of isolation.

The Obama administration is sleeping at the wheel and, in general, educated beyond their intelligence. I clearly saw this as the following articles I wrote will attest: the March 1997 Tulsa World, right before the 2001 downturn, “History Suggests Severe Economic Trouble Looming,” the Jan. 20, 2001, Tulsa World, “Economic Change on the Horizon; and my June 5 Jenks Journal and July 10, 2008, Tulsa World, “All Economic Signs Point to Recession.” There is nothing complicated here if you wake up and think. The facts are there. The American people are like sheep. In the last presidential election, 35 million people did not vote, according to the Berna Foundation. The media and the politicians just herd us along; we stop and graze and water, and no one wants to just plain think about what is going on.

If our political system will not correct national debt, a propped-up economy, moral decline, then I have to agree with Allan Sloan, “What this country needs to get its act together is a good five-alarm financial crisis.” The federal government is like a runaway freight train with no brakes taking over among things education, marriage, and the list goes on and on – and with no breaks – all we can hope for is a “crash.” And I can see a crash coming … world events and massive debt. This is out of control – crash hurts, you bet – but in the long turn we need a derailment so we can start over and get back on the right track. The stock market will respond with a big decline.

After the upcoming recession, you can count on it in 50 to 60 years from today; there will be another severe economic downturn. The key index of raw materials prices is at its lowest level in more than a decade. The cycle has repeated itself since the 12th century, and there is reason to believe it will come as scheduled and on time. Note: Kondratieff’s curve business cycles. We are in the fourth quadrant and poised for major decline. The stock market has started its decline into major recession and possible deep depression.

So, what factors are driving the sharp and swift, worldwide sell-off? For starters, the bull market that began March 9, 2009, is the third longest and fourth most profitable in U.S. history; it is overdue for a correction. In retrospect, that bull market was the result of the Federal Reserve’s financial engineering, spurred by the unprecedented action of reducing interest rates to near zero and holding them there for almost seven years. Several rounds of quantitative easing (the Fed buying Treasury securities) put money in the economy that inflated stock prices. One of our favorite and respected financial writers, James Grant, has coined the term “Ph.D. Standard” to describe the actions of the Federal Reserve as “the conduct of policy by neo-Keynesian, neo-monetarist academics with Ph.D.’s granted by a small number of elite schools.”

Americans should be concerned about today’s level of national debt. Since January 2009, federal debt has grown from $10.6 trillion to more than $17 trillion. Despite some rather glowing reports about the U.S. economy in recent months, federal student loans are out of control. These loans have exploded to $1.2 trillion over the last decade. In addition to that large figure, nearly 7 million student borrowers have gone at least a year without making a payment – either because they are unable or unwilling to do so.

In historical terms, how expensive are U.S. stock prices this summer? The answer according to research by Nobel laureate Robert Shiller: the third-highest valuation since World War I, trailing only the late 1990s and 1929; 2007 ranks fourth. The 1990s, 1929 and 2007 had stock declines of 49 percent in 30 months, 86 percent in 33 months and 57 percent in 17 months, respectively. Such times are not for the faint of heart!

In recent weeks, it has become apparent that China’s lauded economy is experiencing a dramatic showdown and its intermediate-term prospects have dimmed. In response, China devalued its currency, the yen, on Aug. 11. All other things being equal, that devaluation makes China’s exports cheaper. Another recent currency devaluation was done by Kazakhstan on Aug. 20.

In the last year, there have been huge collapses in commodities including oil, copper, agricultural products and gold. Here are declines for five commodities from 2012 through 2015: oil, down 48 percent; iron ore, 60 percent; copper, 31 percent; palm oil, 39 percent; and wheat, 37 percent. This development, along with the Fed’s policy moves, has resulted in the biggest threat of all for the world economy: deflation. The world experienced some deflation in the 1930s, but none of significance since then. For the last few years, the inflation rate has been nearly 0 percent, far below the Fed’s target of 2 percent.

My friend and University of Tulsa professor emeritus John K. Harris has developed a brand-new proprietary investment tool called the Good and Bad Times (GBT) model. The purpose of the GBT model is to enable individuals and institutions to be invested in the S&P 500 Index – a broad measure of the U.S. stock market – (1) during much of its good times and (2) avoiding much of its bad times. In the last 88 years, there have been only 22 Sell signals. No. 23 occurred on Monday of last week. It is noteworthy that six of the 23 Sell signals occurred during the periods of highest stock valuations of all time (mentioned above). Moreover, nine of the 23 Sell signals occurred during Shemitah years including 1931, 1937, 1973, 2000 and 2008.

To receive a short write-up describing the GBT model, request it by emailing harrisjohnk@hotmail.com.

Conclusion

It is time to wake up, America, and take control of our own destiny. History shows us what happens if we stay on the current path. What we need now is an earth-shaking recession and I think this is it. No one has courage to make the changes needed. From last week’s Time Magazine: “A market rout carries echoes of the 2008 crash. What hasn’t been fixed.” Looking at their points, a whole lot (is) not fixed. A repeat of 2008 would force us to get our house in order. We do not have time to wait for the coming election. This recession/depression is going to force dramatic action. The current administration does not have the mental or moral courage to face the challenge. The Senate and Congress are going to have to “cross the aisle” and take dramatic steps. Right now 71 percent of the federal budget is entitlements and interest on debt. Dramatic cuts have to be made. Example: Thanks to our own retired senator Tom Coburn, aka Dr. No, he was able to stop the infamous “bridge to nowhere.” I question the value of the federal Department of Education. They should be cut to the bone and turn education back to the states where it belongs in the first place. Dramatic cuts can be made in the federal budget by going to a modified flat tax and get rid of a big part of the Internal Revenue Service bureaucracy. Iran Deal … no-brainer … reject it. Dodd Frank … time has passed … repeal it. Dodd Frank is slowing growth of small business Social Security; just cannot last like this … for now say move ages to 63 and 66 to collect benefits … slow down the tide coming in. Remember Putin is just watching all this and licking his chops waiting for the U.S. to fail. He has been quoted as saying, “No need to worry about the USA, they will self-destruct.” In his mind … “great, cut your troop strength.” For goodness sake, don’t cut 40,000 troops from our armed forces. America needs strong decisive leadership.

R. Henry Migliore is professor emeritus at Northeastern State University and president of Managing For Success, an international consulting company.

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

The Great Unraveling

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_great_unraveling_20150830/

Posted on Aug 30, 2015

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

Are We Really Moving Towards an Age of Technological Abundance in Which No One Will Need to Work?

Sept 1, 2015
Robert Reich

Shutterstock

This post originally ran on Robert Reich’s Web page.

In 1928, famed British economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that technology would advance so far in a hundred years – by 2028 – that it will replace all work, and no one will need to worry about making money.

“For the first time since his creation man will be faced with his real, his permanent problem – how to use his freedom from pressing economic cares, how to occupy the leisure, which science and compound interest will have won for him, to live wisely and agreeably and well.”

We still have thirteen years to go before we reach Keynes’ prophetic year, but we’re not exactly on the way to it. Americans are working harder than ever.

Keynes may be proven right about technological progress. We’re on the verge of 3-D printing, driverless cars, delivery drones, and robots that can serve us coffee in the morning and make our beds.

But he overlooked one big question: How to redistribute the profits from these marvelous labor-saving inventions, so we’ll have the money to buy the free time they provide?

Without such a mechanism, most of us are condemned to work ever harder in order to compensate for lost earnings due to the labor-replacing technologies.

Such technologies are even replacing knowledge workers – a big reason why college degrees no longer deliver steadily higher wages and larger shares of the economic pie.

Since 2000, the vast majority of college graduates have seen little or no income gains.

The economic model that predominated through most of the twentieth century was mass production by many, for mass consumption by many.

But the model we’re rushing toward is unlimited production by a handful, for consumption by the few able to afford it.

The ratio of employees to customers is already dropping to mind-boggling lows.

When Facebook purchased the messaging company WhatsApp for $19 billion last year, WhatsApp had fifty-five employees serving 450 million customers.

When more and more can be done by fewer and fewer people, profits go to an ever-smaller circle of executives and owner-investors. WhatsApp’s young co-founder and CEO, Jan Koum, got $6.8 billion in the deal.

This in turn will leave the rest of us with fewer well-paying jobs and less money to buy what can be produced, as we’re pushed into the low-paying personal service sector of the economy.

Which will also mean fewer profits for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because potential consumers won’t be able to afford what they’re selling.

What to do? We might try to levy a gigantic tax on the incomes of the billionaire winners and redistribute their winnings to everyone else. But even if politically feasible, the winners will be tempted to store their winnings abroad – or expatriate.

Suppose we look instead at the patents and trademarks by which government protects all these new inventions.

Such government protections determine what these inventions are worth. If patents lasted only three years instead of the current twenty, for example, What’sApp would be worth a small fraction of $19 billion – because after three years anybody could reproduce its messaging technology for free.

Instead of shortening the patent period, how about giving every citizen a share of the profits from all patents and trademarks government protects? It would be a condition for receiving such protection.

Say, for example, 20 percent of all such profits were split equally among all citizens, starting the month they turn eighteen.

In effect, this would be a basic minimum income for everyone.

The sum would be enough to ensure everyone a minimally decent standard of living – including money to buy the technologies that would free them up from the necessity of working.

Anyone wishing to supplement their basic minimum could of course choose to work – even though, as noted, most jobs will pay modestly.

This outcome would also be good for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because it would ensure they have customers with enough money to buy their labor-saving gadgets.

Such a basic minimum would allow people to pursue whatever arts or avocations provide them with meaning, thereby enabling society to enjoy the fruits of such artistry or voluntary efforts.

We would thereby create the kind of society John Maynard Keynes predicted we’d achieve by 2028  – an age of technological abundance in which no one will need to work.

Happy Labor Day.

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

The Hall of Fame Speech Junior Seau’s Daughter Couldn’t Give

In his 20-year N.F.L. career, Junior Seau established himself as one of the game’s greatest linebackers. He committed suicide in 2012 at age 43 and was subsequently found to have had a degenerative brain condition linked to repeated hits to the head. Before his death, Seau told his daughter Sydney that she should speak on his behalf if he made it into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. But the Hall, citing a five-year-old policy of not letting others give full speeches for deceased inductees, did not allow Sydney to deliver her speech.

Recorded in her hotel room in Canton, Ohio, this is the speech Sydney had hoped to deliver on Saturday at the Pro Football Hall of Fame induction ceremony.

  • • •

First off, I would like to thank the generous people of Canton, Ohio, for opening up their homes for this event, the Pro Football Hall of Fame committee for voting my father into the Hall, and of course the other seven deserving inductees.

 

Before I start thanking communities, teams, family and friends that I do know and many others that I have yet to have the pleasure of getting to know, I would like to say that this is not my speech to give. This speech was meant for a man that worked 20 years within the sport he loved most in this world.

I cannot speak for him because I am not him. I have not played in the N.F.L. for one second, let alone 20 years; I do not have past seasons to reminisce about or hilarious locker room stories to joke about. But I do have one thing, and that is unconditional love.

Your Junior Seau, your No. 55 and your buddy, was also my father. And although I didn’t know every aspect of his life, I did know one particular part very well. His athleticism and talent made him extraordinary enough to make it into the Hall, but it is his passion and heart that make him truly legendary and deserving of this tremendous honor. Tonight I would like to honor him and his legendary heart.

The two words that exemplify my dad the most are “passion” and “love.” Everything he achieved, accomplished or set his mind to was done with both qualities. In every situation — whether it be practice, a game, a family barbecue, an impromptu ukulele song or just a run on the Oceanside Strand — he always gave you all of himself because to him, there was never any other option.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

I would like to think that his selflessness and ability to love unconditionally were instilled in him by his family. Nana, Papa, all my aunts, uncles, cousins, mother and brothers who share the Seau name, I know that he would say that this honor is also yours. You all were the motivation he needed to become a success. He wanted nothing more than to make you all proud, and I hope you know that without you he wouldn’t have been the man, the player or the father he was, and for that, I also thank you.

Being the first Polynesian and Samoan to make it into the Hall of Fame is such an accomplishment. He is proof that even a young boy from Oceanside can make his dreams a reality. All his success is a direct reflection of the Oceanside community and family that raised him and molded him into the man he became. Although he is the first Polynesian to make it into the Hall, I know he will not be the last.

Photo

Sydney Seau accepted a framed remembrance of her father, Junior Seau, at the Pro Football Hall of Fame’s Gold Jacket Ceremony in Canton, Ohio, on Thursday. Credit Gene J. Puskar/Associated Press

 

San Diego, you are and always will be home. You have embraced my father with open arms and allowed him to carry on his athletic career, but more importantly the Junior Seau Foundation. In my mind, one of his greatest achievements was being able to give back to the community and home that gave him everything.

Looking back, it’s unbelievable because my father was an Oceanside Pirate, a U.S.C. Trojan, a Miami Dolphin, a New England Patriot, a San Diego Charger, and now he is, and forever will be, a Pro Football Hall of Famer. I think it’s safe to say that he has most definitely made it.

Even though he would never admit to retiring, I think this is the perfect final graduation. I say final graduation because in 2006, instead of retirement, my dad decided to graduate from being a Charger after 13 years. Today is the day he graduates from the game itself.

I think the point is, he could never fully retire from this game because that would indicate that he was quitting and you can’t quit something that is a part of who you are. Instead he graduates, and this is the diploma he has always dreamed of.

What keeps coming to mind when I think of him is the fact that he was basically superhuman. On the field he was relentless, hard-hitting, passionate and unstoppable. Off the field he was caring, gentle, hilarious and generous. On top of that he played within the league for 20 years, and that in itself is pretty exceptional.

But I think what we tend to forget about our favorite invincible, unstoppable, indestructible superhumans is the minor detail that they are also human. That is something that we all must endure today without his physical presence. We cannot celebrate his life and achievement without feeling the constant piece that’s missing.

May 2, 2012, we all endured a loss. Thousands lost their all-time favorite linebacker, hundreds lost their favorite Charger, tens lost their buddy, and four lost their father. The reason why this honor is so hard to accept is because we had always envisioned him still being here to accept it.

But something that we all cannot deny is that we are all still here. We can keep working today, we can keep building our tomorrows, and we can keep praying for the rest. This superhumanlike man truly blessed us with one of the most precious gifts he could have given. He gave us his time. With that time, I know he made one hell of an imprint on my life, and from the amount of emotion and love in this room, I think we all could say the same.

Something that is hard for me to admit to myself and to you all is the fact that I miss his singing. I miss his huge mangled hands strumming on his uke, playing the only five chords he knew, to the hundreds of songs he would attempt to sing off-key. I miss him calling me Beau, my girlie middle name, and I miss him hugging me too long and too tightly, almost to the point where I couldn’t breathe.

Yes, I witnessed his career and accomplishments as a pro athlete, but what I remember most is the way he made me feel. I can honestly say that he made me feel like I was the most important person in the world. The reason why I think he wanted me to present him is because I didn’t know his athletic career but I did know his heart, and I’m blessed to say that I felt his love for 18 beautiful years, and I still feel it to this day.

Continue reading the main story 91Comments

Dad, you gave us your time, your presence, your love, but most of all you gave us your heart. For that we honor you with this induction and this final graduation. I know at times it seemed as if everything you accomplished in life wasn’t enough, but today and every day since you held me in your arms for the first time, you weren’t just enough; you were more than enough. In fact, you were everything.

There’s nothing I want more than to see you walk up on stage, give me a hug and tell me that you love me one last time, but that isn’t our reality. You would always say you loved me, and even after I would respond and say I loved you, too, you would look me in the eyes and say, “I love you; do you hear me?”

Well, after this speech, I hope you can hear us when we say that we love you, and I hope that this induction can exemplify the fact that you were more than just Junior Seau — you were a light, and you’re still mine. This is your speech, your moment and your honor, and to say that I’m the most proud daughter on Earth would be an understatement. Congratulations, Dad; you made it.

 

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment

Incurable American Excess

Aug 6, 2015

Roger Cohen

A few years ago, Americans and Europeans were asked in a Pew Global Attitudes survey what was more important: “freedom to pursue life’s goals without state interference,” or “state guarantees that nobody is in need.” In the United States, 58 percent chose freedom and only 35 percent a state pledge to eradicate neediness. In Britain, the response was the opposite: 55 percent opted for state guarantees and just 38 percent for freedom. On the European Continent — in Germany, France and Spain — those considering state protection as more important than freedom from state interference rose to 62 percent.

This finding gets to the heart of trans-Atlantic differences. Americans, who dwell in a vast country, sparsely populated by European standards, are hardwired to the notion of individual self-reliance. Europeans, with two 20th-century experiences of cataclysmic societal fracture, are bound to the idea of social solidarity as prudent safeguard and guarantor of human decency. The French see the state as a noble idea and embodiment of citizens’ rights. Americans tend to see the state as a predator on those rights. The French ennoble the dutiful public servant. Americans ennoble the disruptive entrepreneur.

To return from Europe to the United States, as I did recently, is to be struck by the crumbling infrastructure, the paucity of public spaces, the conspicuous waste (of food and energy above all), the dirtiness of cities and the acuteness of their poverty. It is also to be overwhelmed by the volume and vital clamor of American life, the challenging interaction, the bracing intermingling of Americans of all stripes, the strident individualism. Europe is more organized, America more alive. Europe purrs; even its hardship seems somehow muted. America revs. The differences can feel violent.

In his intriguing new book, “The United States of Excess,” Robert Paarlberg, a political scientist, cites the 2011 Pew survey as he grapples with these divergent cultures. His focus is on American overconsumption of fuel and food. Why, he asks, is the United States an “outlier” in greenhouse gas emissions and obesity, and what, if anything, will it do about it? Per capita carbon dioxide emissions in the United States are about twice those of the other wealthy nations of the 34-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. American obesity (just over a third of American adults are now obese) is running at about twice the European average and six times the Japanese.

Paarlberg argues persuasively that these American phenomena are linked. He finds their causes in demographic, cultural and political factors. A resource-rich, spacious nation, mistrustful of government authority, persuaded that responsibility is individual rather than collective, optimistic about the capacity of science and technology to resolve any problem, and living in a polarized political system paralyzed by its “multiple veto points,” tends toward “a scrambling form of adaptation” rather than “effective mitigation.”

Americans, in their majority, don’t want to increase taxes on fossil fuels or tax sugar-sweetened drinks because they see such measures as a regressive encroachment on individual freedoms — to drive an automobile and consume what you want. They won’t go the German route of promoting renewables like solar and wind power by guaranteeing higher fixed prices for those who generate it because higher electricity costs would result. Whether it comes to food or fuel, they don’t want measures where “voting-age adults are being coerced into a lifestyle change.”

Individualism trumps all — and innovation, it is somehow believed, will save the country from individualism’s ravages. Paarlberg notes that: “Americans eat alone while at work, alone while commuting to work in the car, alone at the food court while shopping, alone at home while watching TV, and alone in front of the refrigerator both before and after normal mealtime.”

But if all that eating continues to generate obesity — as it will — Americans tend to put their faith in “improved bariatric surgeries, and new blockbuster diet drugs” that “will be challenges welcomed by America’s innovative and responsive private market institutions.” Rather than cut back, they prefer to consume more — whether fuel or food — and then find ways to offset excess.

With the strong policy measures needed to control excess consumption — taxes, regulations and mandates — blocked, political leaders are “tempted to shift more resources and psychological energy toward the second-best path of adaptation,” Paarlberg writes: Easier, and potentially more profitable, to develop drought-resistant farm crops or improve coastal protection systems than tackle global warming by cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

His conclusions are pessimistic. The world should not expect America to change. Its response to overconsumption is inadequate. On global warming, the country adapts but does not confront, content “to protect itself, and itself alone.” On obesity, it shuns the kind of coordinated policy action that will help the less fortunate, particularly disadvantaged minorities.

The question, of course, is whether America’s virtues — its creative churn, vitality and energy — are intrinsic to these vices. My own pessimistic conclusion is that they probably are.

 

Posted in Marty's Blog | Leave a comment