UPMC Avoids Responsibility for Workers

UPMCThe non-medical staff at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) are not making enough money to get by. Like workers at Walmart and elsewhere, they have to depend upon welfare programs and private charities like food banks. As a result, they are trying to unionize under the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). And the UPMC has heard their cries!

The UPMC has started its own food bank.

That’s right. Why pay employees a living wage when you can instead just make charity more convenient? And the great thing is that they don’t even have to pay for it. Thus far, all they’ve done is send out fliers to employees asking them to donate to the food bank.

One employee pointed out that in addition to missing the point of their complaints, the local food bank isn’t even helpful. “It’s going to be more demeaning and embarrassing for me because now I have to go and pick up food at a food bank where I work in front of my friends and co-workers. I make it a point to go to food pantries where nobody knows who I am.”

This is a critical point that I don’t think the rich understand: we who are poor have just as much dignity as anyone else. It isn’t easy to be poor in this society that measures worth by bank account balance. But it is even worse when our poverty is made public display of. And it is worst of all when those better off than we are use their acts of charity to feel even more superior.

Of course, in this case, we have something totally different: a company that is trying to avoid its responsibilities to its employees with a gimmick that skirts the issues—hopefully, with someone else’s money.

H/T @JoyfulA

Christian Nationalism and School Shootings

American Christian FishThe poem below was sent to me by my Christian Conservative aunt. If she’s sent it out, it must be viral among the Christian crowd on the internet. It is a parody of Twas the Night Before Christmas. As poetry, it shows about as much skill as I’ve come to expect from ChristiProp. There is a total lack of understanding of accents and meter. For example, the first line of the song has 12 syllables; the parody has 15.[1] But this isn’t what bothers me.

I can accept the assumption that all kids go to heaven. I can even accept that all the children are happy except for that one little girl who is a total buzz kill remembering her parents. But I can’t accept the explicit political nature of the poem. Just on the surface: none of these kids seem to remember their teachers. When I was that age, my teachers were very important to me; I spent a lot of time with them. But the poem doesn’t even mention teachers, I suspect because they are (1) union members and (2) teaching in a secular school.

Much more problematic is badass Jesus. He’s going to take his country back. He’s wants the country taken out of the hands of “fools.” Who do you think he could mean? I’ll bet Sarah Palin could tell you. And, of course, he’s going to take back the schools, because that’s what caused this shooting: no school prayer. This is pure Christian Nationalism: what we really need is for America to be a Christian Nation. That and tax cuts for the rich will solve all our problems.

It is interesting that murders at schools have been going down. This is from Up with Chris Hayes:

Homicides in Grammar and High Schools

So that’s a little good news. But the good news of the poem is: ain’t it nice to think that all these children are now living in bliss with Jesus. That may be a happy thought, but it doesn’t do anything for those of us who don’t believe in their myths. In fact, it is worse than that: such happy thoughts just allow us to continue to do nothing about problems that actually exist.

This poem may serve to make certain people feel better. But its main intent is to push a particular, very conservative, political agenda. You have to ask yourself: why would it take this particular tragedy to inspire Jesus to “take his country back”? If he does have this power, why didn’t he do it 2000 years ago? And if it is because humans just have to make their own mistakes, then why did the murder of these 20 children cause him to change this policy?

Read the poem. I think it is worth it. Also: I’d be interested in what others have to say.

Twas’ 11 days before Christmas, around 9:38
when 20 beautiful children stormed through heaven’s gate.
their smiles were contagious, their laughter filled the air.
they could hardly believe all the beauty they saw there.
they were filled with such joy, they didn’t know what to say.
they remembered nothing of what had happened earlier that day.
“where are we?” asked a little girl, as quiet as a mouse.
“this is heaven.” declared a small boy. “we’re spending Christmas at God’s house.”
when what to their wondering eyes did appear,
but Jesus, their savior, the children gathered near.
He looked at them and smiled, and they smiled just the same.
then He opened His arms and He called them by name.
and in that moment was joy, that only heaven can bring
those children all flew into the arms of their King
and as they lingered in the warmth of His embrace,
one small girl turned and looked at Jesus’ face.
and as if He could read all the questions she had
He gently whispered to her, “I’ll take care of mom and dad.”
then He looked down on earth, the world far below
He saw all of the hurt, the sorrow, and woe
then He closed His eyes and He outstretched His hand,
“Let My power and presence re-enter this land!”
“may this country be delivered from the hands of fools”
“I’m taking back my nation. I’m taking back my schools!”
then He and the children stood up without a sound.
“come now my children, let me show you around.”
excitement filled the space, some skipped and some ran.
all displaying enthusiasm that only a small child can.
and i heard Him proclaim as He walked out of sight,
“in the midst of this darkness, I AM STILL THE LIGHT.”

Update (28 December 2012 2:25 pm)

Jeremy wrote a really good article at Our Daily Train that is well worth checking out:


[1] How about this, which took me no time at all:

Twas just days before Christmas, ’round nine thirty-eight
When 20 lovely children stormed through heaven’s gate.

And yes, I understand that the “20” is still wrong, but I figure it is very important to them to drive home what they’re talking about. “When loads of bright children stormed through heaven’s gate” works much better.

Lesser Bargain

Fiscal CliffAs I reported before, changing how the government adjusts for inflation to the chained-CPI would affect both Social Security and income taxes. But the main thing that has been covered in the media is the effect on Social Security. I think this is mostly because while running for re-election, President Obama explicitly stated that he would not touch the program. Although few want to come out and say it, it is a gotcha moment. I just wish they would be substantially more hysterical about it.

Nowhere in the major media do we see any discussion of what I think is the most important issue. Obama and Boehner are negotiating over the budget deficit. Social Security is not part of this. Social Security has its own funding stream and budget. Social Security will not have a deficit for at least 20 years. Why are we talking about changing anything about Social Security in these budget negotiations?

Politico reported yesterday that, “The scope of a potential fiscal cliff deal narrowed dramatically Friday.” The deal would be to raise taxes on incomes over $250,000, extend unemployment benefits, and delay the sequester. On its merits, this is a much better and more progressive solution than the last one that Obama offered to Boehner.

There is no mention of two other very important parts of the Fiscal Cliff. The capital gains tax rate is scheduled to go up from 15% now to 20% next year. Also: dividend income, which is currently taxed as capital gains, will be taxed as regular income as of 1 January. These are excellent changes, but the Republicans will be very much against them since they hit the rich hard. But these changes will not hurt the economy; they will just make the rich a little less so.

Regardless of whether these tax cuts are included, this “lesser bargain” is a good thing. As Matt Yglesias puts it:

The quest for the lesser bargain is important because achieving it will improve the short-term economic picture. The grand bargain, by contrast, is impossible and pointless and its relentless pursuit is positively harmful since it generates these damaging crises.

Of course, Yglesias also argues that Obama has always been in favor of cutting Social Security. He goes back to The Audacity of Hope and shows that while Obama won’t come right out and say he wants to cut the program, he is always hearkening back to deals that did just that.

So as usual, it seems we have that crazy Republicans to thank for saving Obama from himself. We just might get a Fiscal Cliff deal that doesn’t suck.

A Decade Without Joe Strummer

Joe StrummerTen years ago today, Joe Strummer died suddenly of a congenital heart defect. He was only 50. I always wonder about people who believe in a loving God. If God loves me, why did he take all the music that Strummer would have made for me but left all the bad law that Clarence Thomas has and will continue to make? And don’t give me any of that, “God works in mysterious ways.” Electronic devices work in mysterious ways, but I don’t worship them.

Here is The Clash performing Sonny Curtis’ I Fought the Law, pretty much the same way that The Bobby Fuller Four did it, except with Strummer’s distinctive sneer:

Although it isn’t one of their best songs, I think that Rock The Casbah has some of the most amusing lyrics of any rock song. And the video is very good—especially for the time: