In the United States, we celebrate Independence Day on the Fourth of July. Independence Day commemorates the adoption of our Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, thus declaring our independence from Great Britain. Many people use this date as the first day of the United States of America's existence as a free nation.
Many Americans view the Fourth of July almost the same way as they do Veterans Day and Memorial Day. We seem to commemorate the veterans of all of our wars, not just the Revolutionary War, as well as all of the enlisted men and women who fought and died to defend our country (or the Union, or the Confederacy), or those who fought and died to defend the simple concepts of freedom and democracy for all.
How long will the United States remain a free nation? Economically, the United States is subject to China. For decades Americans have purchased everything--from clothes to television sets to Barbie dolls to garlic--from China. We are hard pressed to find items actually made in the United States for sale.
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
In spite of their economic turmoil, the currency of the European Union is worth more than the US dollar. EU members can enjoy a pretty reasonably priced vacation in the United States, complete with three full meals a day, and not really feel it in the wallet. In the meantime, our food prices are going up, American salaries and benefits are being frozen or cut back, and for the first time in a long time American children are not getting enough to eat.
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
After 9/11, Americans have silently conceded to the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration. These two federal departments have made domestic and international travel for Americans a criminal offense, as all Americans--even those taking a plane from one city to another in the same state--are scanned and patted, and subject to more invasive searches upon the whim of a high school graduate with a uniform, a badge, and a taste of power. We allow this, because the majority of Americans are convinced that terrorists walk among us, and we have nothing to fear if we are good, honest people. Unless we are wearing a controversial Tshirt, or a questionable complexion.
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
We are not free to smoke or drink during our spare time.
We are not free to have casual sex.
We are not free to tell certain jokes or admit that we like certain celebrities.
But somehow...those in power have all the right, those with money have all the right, and those with money have all of the power and privilege without paying their fair share of federal and state taxes.
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
We are being actively discouraged from questioning the powers that be, and their actions. In spite of corporate demands for employees with higher level critical thinking skills, American schools discourage students from asking questions and bombard them with standardized tests. If any learning does take place, hopefully it would happen outside of school...
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
Slavery was officially made illegal in the United States through the Thirteenth Amendment of our Constitution in 1865, but industrial farms and food processing plants still use contractors that provide illegal labor, so they can be paid less than minimum wage and no benefits...or perhaps nothing at all. There is no law on the books in the United States which states that a sex worker is entitled to her own earnings, which opens up the field for pimps and human traffickers. Then there are those who will cycle in and out of the prison system for generations, millions of wasted potentials.
How long will the United States remain a free nation?
Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Saturday, June 30, 2012
The Truth About "Obamacare"
Too many people, armed with too little information, are panicking about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, familiarly known as "Obamacare".
Some facts:
1. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law on March 23, 2010.
2. PPACA requires individuals not covered by employer- or government-sponsored insurance plans to maintain minimal essential health insurance coverage or pay a penalty unless exempted for religious beliefs or financial hardship, a provision commonly referred to as the individual mandate. The Act also affects certain aspects of the private health insurance industry and public health insurance programs, requires insurance coverage of pre-existing conditions, expands access to insurance and increases projected national medical spending. Supporters claim it will slow health care cost inflation, and lower projected Medicare spending.
In other words, those who need the government to provide healthcare for them will be paying for it if they can afford it.
Some more facts from Statistical Abstracts 2012:
1. Between 2008 and 2009, the percentage of uninsured Americans increased...but not by much. In 2009, only 16.7% of Americans were uninsured. (Uninsured = NOT covered by private or government insurance.)
2. Of the uninsured, nearly 60% are between 18-34 years old--those in their prime working years.
3. Of the uninsured, 26.6% have household incomes of 0-$25,000, and 21.4% have household incomes of $25,000-$49,000.
Working people who get health insurance through employment have money taken from their paychecks to cover their insurance. Working people who do not get health insurance through employment will, instead, give a percentage of their income to a private health insurance plan. Low income or poverty level individuals would receive government subsidies in order to have insurance. This is not a bad thing. What is problematic, however, is that even after government intervention, a percentage of uninsured Americans will remain. Critics of "Obamacare" have not cited this as a problem...instead, they criticize the law for FORCING HEALTHCARE ON PEOPLE.
Some facts:
1. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law on March 23, 2010.
2. PPACA requires individuals not covered by employer- or government-sponsored insurance plans to maintain minimal essential health insurance coverage or pay a penalty unless exempted for religious beliefs or financial hardship, a provision commonly referred to as the individual mandate. The Act also affects certain aspects of the private health insurance industry and public health insurance programs, requires insurance coverage of pre-existing conditions, expands access to insurance and increases projected national medical spending. Supporters claim it will slow health care cost inflation, and lower projected Medicare spending.
In other words, those who need the government to provide healthcare for them will be paying for it if they can afford it.
Some more facts from Statistical Abstracts 2012:
1. Between 2008 and 2009, the percentage of uninsured Americans increased...but not by much. In 2009, only 16.7% of Americans were uninsured. (Uninsured = NOT covered by private or government insurance.)
2. Of the uninsured, nearly 60% are between 18-34 years old--those in their prime working years.
3. Of the uninsured, 26.6% have household incomes of 0-$25,000, and 21.4% have household incomes of $25,000-$49,000.
Working people who get health insurance through employment have money taken from their paychecks to cover their insurance. Working people who do not get health insurance through employment will, instead, give a percentage of their income to a private health insurance plan. Low income or poverty level individuals would receive government subsidies in order to have insurance. This is not a bad thing. What is problematic, however, is that even after government intervention, a percentage of uninsured Americans will remain. Critics of "Obamacare" have not cited this as a problem...instead, they criticize the law for FORCING HEALTHCARE ON PEOPLE.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Rural Women's Health The Focus of International Women's Day
While the World Health Organization and the Gates Foundation focus on the health issues of rural women in the developing world, no one is paying attention to health issues of rural women in the United States.
According to the Rural Assistance Center, rural women in the United States, particularly women in persistent poverty areas (including Northern Plains states), receive delayed prenatal care, or none at all. Infant mortality rates in rural areas of the United States also remain higher than in metropolitan areas. The odds for infant mortality increase when rural women are more likely to bear children before their 20th birthday, or after their 40th. The prevalence of chronic illness and depression is also higher among rural women in the United States.
The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has listed some recommendations to improve gynecological, prenatal, and obstetric care to rural women in the United States,
According to the Rural Assistance Center, rural women in the United States, particularly women in persistent poverty areas (including Northern Plains states), receive delayed prenatal care, or none at all. Infant mortality rates in rural areas of the United States also remain higher than in metropolitan areas. The odds for infant mortality increase when rural women are more likely to bear children before their 20th birthday, or after their 40th. The prevalence of chronic illness and depression is also higher among rural women in the United States.
The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has listed some recommendations to improve gynecological, prenatal, and obstetric care to rural women in the United States,
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
He's Not in Prison for Being Queer
LGBT news magazine The Advocate made the claim that Barack Obama would like us to forget Bradley Manning, whom Advocate writer Victoria Brownworth called "the first openly gay political prisoner" and also "the most dangerous man in America".
The Advocate is treading some pretty dangerous waters here, in implying that:
1. Bradley Manning could have been imprisoned due to his gender identity (not the case);
2. Bradley Manning should not be in a military prison, or tried by a military tribunal, for his crime (he was an enlisted man when he leaked military documents to Wikileaks);
3. Frustration over how the military addressed his gender identity is legitimate justification to commit treason (Manning expressed the discrimination he faced as a gay servicemember as the reason he leaked documents).
According to Brownworth, Manning's treatment in the Fort Leavenworth military prison is similar to what prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are getting, and that it violates the Geneva Convention. Instead of fighting for the human rights of all prisoners in military detention, however, Brownworth makes a distinction--that Manning should receive different treatment because he is a US citizen. She does not understand that he was not a free citizen at the time of his incarceration--he was an enlisted man, and thus subject to military law as well as the US Constitution and federal law.
The question is--do Manning's actions make him a terrorist? Do his actions make him a threat to national security, or military security? The question is not whether he should receive special treatment due to his queer American status.
The Advocate is treading some pretty dangerous waters here, in implying that:
1. Bradley Manning could have been imprisoned due to his gender identity (not the case);
2. Bradley Manning should not be in a military prison, or tried by a military tribunal, for his crime (he was an enlisted man when he leaked military documents to Wikileaks);
3. Frustration over how the military addressed his gender identity is legitimate justification to commit treason (Manning expressed the discrimination he faced as a gay servicemember as the reason he leaked documents).
According to Brownworth, Manning's treatment in the Fort Leavenworth military prison is similar to what prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are getting, and that it violates the Geneva Convention. Instead of fighting for the human rights of all prisoners in military detention, however, Brownworth makes a distinction--that Manning should receive different treatment because he is a US citizen. She does not understand that he was not a free citizen at the time of his incarceration--he was an enlisted man, and thus subject to military law as well as the US Constitution and federal law.
The question is--do Manning's actions make him a terrorist? Do his actions make him a threat to national security, or military security? The question is not whether he should receive special treatment due to his queer American status.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Semper Heil
U.S. Marines in Afghanistan pose with Nazi symbol.
Even more shameful is that the official United States Marines blog is not addressing the issue.
What do the Marines have to do with human rights, you might ask?
Why does a Nazi symbol still have so much power?
It is not the role of the Marines to defend white supremacy, or white Americans, but all Americans.
The only flag that the Marines should defend is the red white and blue Stars and Stripes.
A Nazi symbol still has so much power because people around the world still use it to define their identity and express hatred for others. In many European countries, production of Nazi symbols, flags, and publications is illegal. Ironically, in the United States, Nazi and white supremacist publishing is alive and well, although under the radar.
White supremacy and Nazism in the US Marine Corps is not new...a 2008 article reveals that there is a neo-Nazi cell in the Marine Corps, and that those Nazis among them have more loyalty to their gang than to the US flag.
Meanwhile, the official United States Marines blog is highlighting African-American Marines who fought during World War Two. African-Americans were considered racially inferior by the Nazis, our enemies at the time. They were also considered racially inferior by many white Marines, but good enough to fight, and so served in segregated units.
Our military leaders cannot look away while their troops bond together in racism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia. They certainly cannot support it, either. As the United States continues to have a military presence around the world, it must show that it is not corrupted by the true poison of our enemies--fear and hatred for those not considered "white" or "Christian". That is never what the US flag stood for.
Even more shameful is that the official United States Marines blog is not addressing the issue.
What do the Marines have to do with human rights, you might ask?
Why does a Nazi symbol still have so much power?
It is not the role of the Marines to defend white supremacy, or white Americans, but all Americans.
The only flag that the Marines should defend is the red white and blue Stars and Stripes.
A Nazi symbol still has so much power because people around the world still use it to define their identity and express hatred for others. In many European countries, production of Nazi symbols, flags, and publications is illegal. Ironically, in the United States, Nazi and white supremacist publishing is alive and well, although under the radar.
White supremacy and Nazism in the US Marine Corps is not new...a 2008 article reveals that there is a neo-Nazi cell in the Marine Corps, and that those Nazis among them have more loyalty to their gang than to the US flag.
Meanwhile, the official United States Marines blog is highlighting African-American Marines who fought during World War Two. African-Americans were considered racially inferior by the Nazis, our enemies at the time. They were also considered racially inferior by many white Marines, but good enough to fight, and so served in segregated units.
Our military leaders cannot look away while their troops bond together in racism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia. They certainly cannot support it, either. As the United States continues to have a military presence around the world, it must show that it is not corrupted by the true poison of our enemies--fear and hatred for those not considered "white" or "Christian". That is never what the US flag stood for.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Health and Human Rights in the United States
Some facts:
1. People in the United States must pay more for health care than in any other country in the world. The United States spends twice as much on health care per capita ($7,129); in 2005, the national health care expenditures totaled $2 trillion (National Center for Health Statistics).
2. While Americans pay more for healthcare than anyone, the United States is the only wealthy industrial nation without a universal health care system (Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences).
3. In 2006, approximately 47 million people in the United States (about 16% of the population) did not have health insurance (U.S. Census Bureau). In Minnesota, roughly 8% of the state population does not have health insurance; nearly 75% of those are working, employed white people (MinnPost.com).
4. 75% of all health care dollars are spent on patients with one or more chronic conditions, many of which can be prevented, including diabetes, obesity, heart disease, lung disease, high blood pressure, and cancer (Health Affairs). Most of the time people with these conditions have not seen a doctor to monitor their condition due to lack of health insurance, and often end up in emergency hospitals.
5. From 2000 to 2006, overall inflation has increased 3.5%, wages have increased 3.8%, and health care premiums have increased 87% (Kaiser Family Foundation).
6. Roughly half of bankruptcy filings in the United States are due to medical expenses (Health Affairs Journal, 2005).
For more health facts that take away our American Dream, visit this website.
1. People in the United States must pay more for health care than in any other country in the world. The United States spends twice as much on health care per capita ($7,129); in 2005, the national health care expenditures totaled $2 trillion (National Center for Health Statistics).
2. While Americans pay more for healthcare than anyone, the United States is the only wealthy industrial nation without a universal health care system (Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences).
3. In 2006, approximately 47 million people in the United States (about 16% of the population) did not have health insurance (U.S. Census Bureau). In Minnesota, roughly 8% of the state population does not have health insurance; nearly 75% of those are working, employed white people (MinnPost.com).
4. 75% of all health care dollars are spent on patients with one or more chronic conditions, many of which can be prevented, including diabetes, obesity, heart disease, lung disease, high blood pressure, and cancer (Health Affairs). Most of the time people with these conditions have not seen a doctor to monitor their condition due to lack of health insurance, and often end up in emergency hospitals.
5. From 2000 to 2006, overall inflation has increased 3.5%, wages have increased 3.8%, and health care premiums have increased 87% (Kaiser Family Foundation).
6. Roughly half of bankruptcy filings in the United States are due to medical expenses (Health Affairs Journal, 2005).
For more health facts that take away our American Dream, visit this website.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Not Free to Say Stupid Things in France
The National Assembly in Paris is backing a bill to make it illegal to deny that the mass killing of Armenians by the Turks was genocide. If someone is caught saying it, they could be fined up to 48,000 Euros (approximately $58,000). According to the French, they are not punishing the Turks in their country, or making a statement of any kind other than to comply with European law, which states that people who deny the existence of genocides should be sanctioned.
In the United States, the First Amendment of the Constitution protects speech that other countries would classify as hate speech. At the same time, while Americans will not be sent to jail for saying ignorant things, they will be stigmatized socially and sometimes professionally. Newt Gingrich, in the eyes of many people (including Republicans), will never regain his professional reputation after calling Michelle Obama "uppity" and calling the Palestinians "an invented people". Comedians who go too far in their shtick are often forced into apologize for their words, or face lawsuits from anti-defamation groups. Teachers who voice negative opinions about LGBT people or other protected classes when their school administrators are trying to stop bullying in the schools are often forced to resign.
Is it possible that, in France and in other countries, the common people actually agree on some level with certain perspectives on genocide and minorities, and this is why those governments have to outlaw it outright?
That is one thing about people in the United States. Americans have the freedom and the right to state whatever half baked opinion they have on any subject, and make Americans look like fools in front of the whole world...but just because public figures show their ignorance does not mean that all Americans believe it or support it. In fact, the deeper a public figure puts his foot in his or her mouth, the higher a social, professional, and political price they will have to pay in their own country as well as abroad.
In the United States, the First Amendment of the Constitution protects speech that other countries would classify as hate speech. At the same time, while Americans will not be sent to jail for saying ignorant things, they will be stigmatized socially and sometimes professionally. Newt Gingrich, in the eyes of many people (including Republicans), will never regain his professional reputation after calling Michelle Obama "uppity" and calling the Palestinians "an invented people". Comedians who go too far in their shtick are often forced into apologize for their words, or face lawsuits from anti-defamation groups. Teachers who voice negative opinions about LGBT people or other protected classes when their school administrators are trying to stop bullying in the schools are often forced to resign.
Is it possible that, in France and in other countries, the common people actually agree on some level with certain perspectives on genocide and minorities, and this is why those governments have to outlaw it outright?
That is one thing about people in the United States. Americans have the freedom and the right to state whatever half baked opinion they have on any subject, and make Americans look like fools in front of the whole world...but just because public figures show their ignorance does not mean that all Americans believe it or support it. In fact, the deeper a public figure puts his foot in his or her mouth, the higher a social, professional, and political price they will have to pay in their own country as well as abroad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)