April 2004 Continued, Page 2

Home
Overtime--2004 and 2003 issues

Would you like fries with that?

Apparently, despite what we all thought, manufacturing jobs in America are not disappearing. They are alive and well at McDonald’s.

Servers at McDonald’s can now be considered manufacturers. That is what the President’s Economic Report recently suggested. “When a fast-food restaurant sells a hamburger, for example, is it providing a ‘service’ or is it combining inputs to ‘manufacture’ a product?” the President’s report asks.

Yes, some economists are arguing - according to the chief economist of the National Association of Manufacturers - that “hamburger flipping” constitutes “manufacturing” since heat is used to chemically transform the product and the server is assembling components to “manufacture” a sandwich.

Make no mistake: working in the fast food industry is a perfectly honorable job - and this point should not be made to take anything away from the hardworking people in the service sector who are providing for their families in good, honest, and often exhausting work.

But ask anyone in Maine, like the folks at one of our endangered paper mills, whether they think these are “manufacturing” jobs, and you will get a lot of funny looks.
[Representative Michael H. Michaud, Maine Standard Times (Lewistown, ME), March 4, 2004. Contributed by Stan Brooks, Maine, USA.]

Whistle-blowers

People who report wrongdoing by their bosses, either to the authorities or to the general public.

It’s important, when you read the inevitable attempts to impugn the character of the latest whistle-blower, to realize just how risky it is to reveal awkward truths about the Bush administration. When Gen. Eric Shinseki told Congress that postwar Iraq would require a large occupation force, his military career ended. When Ambassador Joseph Wilson revealed that the 2003 State of the Union speech contained information known to be false, someone in the White House destroyed his wife’s career by revealing that she was a CIA operative. And we now know that Richard Foster, the Medicare system’s chief actuary, was threatened with dismissal if he revealed to Congress the likely cost of the administration’s prescription drug plan.
[From an article by Paul Krugman, New York Times, March 23, 2004.]

Unemployed in the US

The pernicious joblessness bedeviling this nation is spawning a new category of Americans dubbed “exhaustees”: the hundreds of thousands of hard-core unemployed who have run through state and federal unemployment aid. According to the latest estimates, close to 2 million Americans, futilely hunting for work while scrambling for economic sustenance, will joint the ranks of exhaustees in the first half of 2004. They represent a record flood of unemployed individuals with expired benefits - the highest in 30 years - who are plainly desperate for help.

President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress are doing nothing to help these people.
Washington showed no qualms last month in allowing the expiration of the emergency federal program that had offered an extra 13 weeks of help to those who exhausted state benefits. Historically, such help has been continued in periods of continuing job shortages.

A year ago, the aid was extended by an extra year by Republican leaders. But now, the Republican’s election-year talk is of a recovery rooted in the tax cuts weighted for the affluent. Tending to the exhaustees would clearly run counter to that message.

The emergency program cries out for immediate renewal. I costs about a billion dollars a month but that money is available in the federal unemployment fund.

In January 2004, over 375,000 unemployed people ran out of state benefits, with nothing to help them through to spring. The story is much the same for February and March.
[Carl O’shea, Mail Order Network Newsletter, California, USA. Contributed by S.B., Maine, USA.]

Letters to the Editor, The West Australian

If Australian workers get $15 an hour and Indian workers get $3 and hour, who gets to keep the difference when jobs are sent overseas? [J.T., Peppermint Grove.]

I think the concept of manned flights to Mars is great. So great, in fact, that Captain George W. Bush should be on the first flight - leaving tomorrow. There is just one small proviso: it’s a one-way ticket, [George. F.G., Parkerville.]

Ecology and the future

From the military viewpoint
The Pentagon, in its report on climate change [reported in last month’s Overtime], predicted a set of problems. The official US government position is that there is no global warming going on. But you might want to look at this list anyway, just in case the Administration doesn’t know what is happening or is lying to us.

Future wars will be fought over the issue or survival rather than religion, ideology, or national honour.

By 2007, violent storms will smash coastal barriers, rendering large parts of the Netherlands uninhabitable. Cities like The Hague will have to be abandoned.

Between 2010 and 2020, Europe will be hardest hit by climatic change, with an average annual temperature drop of 6F [about 3C]. Climate in Britain will become colder and drier, as its weather begins to resemble Siberia’s.

A “significant drop” in the planet’s ability to sustain its population will become apparent over the next 20 years. Deaths from war and famine run in the millions as the population is reduced until the Earth can once again support it.

Access to water will become a major battleground. The Nile, Danube, and Amazon are all at high risk.

Rich areas like the US and Europe will become “virtual fortresses” to prevent millions of migrants from entering after being forced from land drowned by sea-level rise or land that is no longer able to grow crops. Europe will face huge internal struggles as it tries to cope with massive numbers of migrants arriving at its shores. Southern Europe will be beleaguered by refugees from hard-hit Africa.

Nuclear arms proliferation is inevitable. Japan, South Korea, and German will develop nuclear weapons capabilities, along with Iran, Egypt, and North Korea. Israel, China, India, and Pakistan already have nuclear weapons, and will become more likely to use them.

By 2010, the US and Europe will experience a third more days with peak temperatures above 90F [32C]. Climate becomes an “economic nuisance” as storms, droughts, and hot spells create havoc for farmers. More than 400 million people in subtropical regions will be at risk, due to heat and drought.

Mega-droughts will affect the world’s major breadbaskets, including the US Midwest, where strong winds will erode the topsoil. China’s huge population will make it particularly vulnerable.

Bangladesh will become nearly uninhabitable because of rising sea level, which will contaminate inland water supplies.
[The Observer, February 22, 2004.]

From a civilian viewpoint

Perhaps the time is right for me to confess one of my fears.

If global warming melts the polar ice cap [very possible] and that causes the Gulf Stream to shift southward or stop altogether [also very possible], the climate of the UK would change to something like Newfoundland. If this were to happen gradually, we could adjust to it. But if it happens rather suddenly, the people of the UK would be more than upset - they would be mad as hell.

The leaders of such an angry nation, in order to preserver their positions, would probably try to place the blame on the US. This would be an easy sell, considering the US track record on ecology, which is lousy.

These leaders would probably suggest to their angry citizens that war with the US would be reasonable. And the Brits would probably agree.

Such a war would be nasty. It would be fought on US soil. Both sides would have lots of technology and finely honed weapons of mass destruction. The US is bigger but anyone willing to attack the US would attract plenty of allies. The UK forces, in a killing rage because of the destruction of their balmy isle, would fight ferociously, bitterly, and without mercy. The US people are not used to being invaded and would fight like cornered animals over every little piece of real estate. The land would be soaked with blood - theirs and ours.

Taken altogether, this is a terrible nightmare. But it could happen. Perhaps I will be dead by the time it happens, although I’m not really that old. Maybe I’ll have the good luck to be run over by a truck. [L.F.]

Religious sects - Islam

The attacks on Shi’ites in Iraq and Pakistan a few weeks ago have drawn attention to the nature of Shi’ite-Sunni relations in Islam. Questions are being raised about the causes and effects of the schism between these two sects and their implications for the situation in Iraq.

There are more than 1.2 billion Muslims in the world who believe in the Five Pillars of Islam. These include (in English): declaration of God’s unity, prayers, fasting, charity as a percentage of annual savings, and pilgrimage.

This unity coexists with divisions that have been present since the early days of Islam. The difference between the Sunnis and Shi’ites is an example of this division. It dates back to the early days after the death of The Prophet Mohammed, when Muslims differed on the principles to determine political succession.

The Shi’ites argued that the leadership of the Muslim community needed to stay within the family and supported Ali (The Prophet Mohammed’s cousin and son-in-law) as the caliph. Sunnis argued that piety, irrespective of blood lineage, was to determine the selection of the caliph.

The Sunni view prevailed and three other men were chosen as caliphs before Ali. The divide deepened when The Prophet Mohammed’s grandson and Ali’s son, Hussein, was assassinated in Karbala (south of Baghdad) in 680. Shi’ites blamed the Sunnis while Sunnis accused the Shi’ites of inviting Hussein to take the lead and then deserting him, leaving him to struggle against tyranny alone.

Since then, Sunnis and Shi’ites have differed on a number of theological issues that are reflected in different practices. Shi’ites believe in the inner essence of Islam being revealed first through The Prophet Mohammed and, upon his death, by a series of Imams. The Imams are accorded a higher status as the sustainers and interpreters of religious revelations and ideas through stages of history. Such a view of Islamic knowledge contributes to accepting and promoting hierarchy among Shi’ite Muslims. At the same time, it also keeps the door to reinterpretation open.

Sunnis, on the other hand, believe that the Koran was revealed through The Prophet Mohammed and that his actions, ideas, and practices provide the basis for Muslims to live their lives. They have generally supported the institution of the Caliphate as both an administrative and religious office, responsible for implementing Islamic ideas.

As Islam spread across different continents, the idea of a single Caliph gave way to qualified acceptance of multiple Islamic rulers, including Kings, and Sultans, etc. Note:The Sunnis are more likely to support a secular government.

Despite these differences, Shi’ites and Sunnis have coexisted peacefully for most of Islam’s history. This is true despite the fact that Shi’ites account for only 15-20% of the total Muslim population. However, the combination of political and economic factors has caused these two sects to clash with each other. Saddam Hussein’s oppression of the Shi’ites is another factor. The history of peaceful coexistence has given way to increasing incidents of sectarian violence.

In Iraq, the situation has been made worse by the presence of Islamic militant groups who view that area as a venue for a struggle with the US. Determined to undermine the American presence, they try to increase the insecurity and instability in the country. And the situation is further complicated by the presence of competing views within the Shi’ite population. While some support the US plans, others are being led by radical youth and question the position of the established Shi’ite hierarchy in Iraq.

It is, therefore, necessary to understand that while the current tensions in Iraq can partly be explained in terms of Shi’ite and Sunni differences, they do not provide the complete answer.
[From an essay by Samina Yasmeen for West Australian, March 13, 2004.]

Elections in the US

Strategists for President Bush and Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) already have conceded a majority of the states to one another, with the election likely to turn on battles in fewer than 18 states.

The principal battlegrounds range from familiar swing states of Missouri, Ohio and Pennsylvania to new arrivals of Nevada, West Virginia and Minnesota that reflect changing demographics or the clash of cultural values that can affect voters' behavior as much as the unemployment rate.

For many Americans, the election will be like a faraway war, witnessed in news reports on television and in newspapers but rarely experienced firsthand. But in the battlegrounds, the bombardment has begun, in the form of television ads from the Bush and Kerry campaigns and from a separate Democratic group called the Media Fund.

All have chosen essentially the same audiences for their appeals. Kerry's first ad targets 16 states, the Media Fund ad airs in the same 16 plus one, while Bush's ads cover those 17 plus another. Advertising money and the candidates' personal time will remain focused on those 18 states for the next eight months, to the exclusion of the rest of the country.

Judging from interviews with strategists on both sides and with outside analysts, 10 of the closest states from four years ago are seen as the most competitive as the campaign begins. Bush and Gore split them five-five. The Bush states that may be most vulnerable to Democratic takeover are Florida, Ohio, Missouri, New Hampshire and Nevada, while the five Gore states eyed by the GOP are Pennsylvania, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and New Mexico.

The 18 targeted states are: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
[D. Balz and J. VandeHei, Washington Post, March 15, 2004.]

Next month: We’d love to know what you think. These are our usual classifications:

-- Open - questions, comments, tirades, etc.
-- RSVP. React to previous statements.
-- The ecology.
-- Clippings from newspapers, etc.

On the Web:

Overtime is included in the website of Socialism for a Real Labor Union at:

socialismmarxdeleonforarealunion.org/overtime.html
[Socialism Marx DeLeon for a real union]

Money. Overtime is free, but there are expenses and any help with these would be appreciated. Please make checks payable to Linda Featheringill and mail to me at 4651 West 41st Street, Down, Cleveland, OH 44109. Contributions will be acknowledged in the next issue, or you can remain anonymous if you wish.

Finances at the end of March 2004:

Balance-----------------------14.02
Contributions-----------------82.64
Supplies and stationary-------22.64
Copying----------------------36.27
Postage----------------------35.53

Total expenses---------------94.44

Balance-----------------------2.22

Contributions: L.W. Ruble 20.00, S. Brooks 20.000, Anon. 22.64, S. Jeffrey 40.00.

And, to Everyone, thank you, thank you, thank you. Linda Featheringill.

April 2004Back to page 1
Home
Overtime--2004 and 2003 issues