Paying a living wage? Madness!

Even before the 2008 economic depression food banks were slowly becoming a regretable necessity in many socalled wealthy countries for increasing numbers of people, but this is I think the first time a company opens a food charity for its own employees:

Employees of UPMC can no longer say that their employer hasn’t been listening to their concerns and addressing their needs.

Since non-medical employees began seeking unionization earlier this year from SEIU, they have been telling the public about the low wages paid by the healthcare giant and how it affects their ability to make ends meet. Many employees, like Leslie Poston, have told the public how they’ve had to go to food banks to make sure they have enough food for their families. Others have said they have to go on public assistance.

But fear not, good workers: UPMC Cares, and they’ve come up with a solution. In fact, since Poston was one of the first workers to tell such tales, UPMC brass decided to alert her to the news first.

“It was two days before Thanksgiving and my unit director came up, put an arm around me and said ‘we’ve been hearing what you’ve been saying,'” Poston told City Paper earlier today. “She pulled out a flyer and said, ‘We’re starting a food bank for the employees.'”

“I turned my head and started to cry because I was so angry, although she thought I was crying because of the gesture. They just don’t get that I’d rather they pay me a better wage so I wouldn’t have to go to a food bank.”

More and more low wage workers are actually earning too little and are therefore dependent on either government assistance or food banks, but it’s rare that this is shown as blatantly as at UPMC. It’s an extreme example of a worrying trend, with increasing groups of people in work actually needing support to pay for their daily amenities in all wealthy countries. It’s also a hidden subsidy from the tax payer to employers too cheap to pay their workers a living wage. Not to mention those cases in which working people actually to depend on the charity of the rest of us to get by.

Did the UK government just get 419 scammed?



House of Lords sessions are not normally exciting nor strange, as all sorts of old men and women drone at each other with even less consequences than in late night House of Commons sessions. But sometimes they get strange, as Charlie Stross found out today:

So when an eminent member of the House of Lords stands up six hours into a debate and blows the gaff on a shadowy foreign Foundation making a bid to buy the British state, and this is recorded in Hansard, one tends to sit up and take notice. And one takes even more notice when His Lordship tip-toes around actually naming the Foundation in question, especially after the throw-away about money-laundering for the IRA on behalf of the Bank of England. Parliamentary privilege only stretches so far, it seems, and Foundation X is beyond its reach.

Quoting from the Hansard text, which can also be heard in the video above, starting from 2 hours 34 minutes in:

Lord James of Blackheath: At this point, I am going to have to make a very big apology to my noble friend Lord Sassoon [Treasury Minister], because I am about to raise a subject that I should not raise and which is going to be one which I think is now time to put on a higher awareness, and to explain to the House as a whole, as I do not think your Lordships have any knowledge of it. I am sorry that my noble friend Lord Strathclyde [Leader of the House] is not with us at the moment, because this deeply concerns him also.

For the past 20 weeks I have been engaged in a very strange dialogue with the two noble Lords, in the course of which I have been trying to bring to their attention the willing availability of a strange organisation which wishes to make a great deal of money available to assist the recovery of the economy in this country. For want of a better name, I shall call it foundation X. That is not its real name, but it will do for the moment. Foundation X was introduced to me 20 weeks ago last week by an eminent City firm, which is FSA controlled. Its chairman came to me and said, “We have this extraordinary request to assist in a major financial reconstruction. It is megabucks, but we need your help to assist us in understanding whether this business is legitimate”. I had the biggest put-down of my life from my noble friend Lord Strathclyde when I told him this story. He said, “Why you? You’re not important enough to have the answer to a question like that”. He is quite right, I am not important enough, but the answer to the next question was, “You haven’t got the experience for it”. Yes I do. I have had one of the biggest experiences in the laundering of terrorist money and funny money that anyone has had in the City. I have handled billions of pounds of terrorist money.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham [Labour]: Where did it go to?

Lord James of Blackheath: Not into my pocket. My biggest terrorist client was the IRA and I am pleased to say that I managed to write off more than £1 billion of its money. I have also had extensive connections with north African terrorists, but that was of a far nastier nature, and I do not want to talk about that because it is still a security issue. I hasten to add that it is no good getting the police in, because I shall immediately call the Bank of England as my defence witness, given that it put me in to deal with these problems.

The point is that when I was in the course of doing this strange activity, I had an interesting set of phone numbers and references that I could go to for help when I needed it. So people in the City have known that if they want to check out anything that looks at all odd, they can come to me and I can press a few phone numbers to obtain a reference. The City firm came to me and asked whether I could get a reference and a clearance on foundation X. For 20 weeks, I have been endeavouring to do that. I have come to the absolute conclusion that foundation X is completely genuine and sincere and that it directly wishes to make the United Kingdom one of the principal points that it will use to disseminate its extraordinarily great wealth into the world at this present moment, as part of an attempt to seek the recovery of the global economy.

[…]

My noble friend Lord Strathclyde came up with a very different argument. He said that this cannot be right because these people said at the meeting with him that they were still effectively on the gold standard from back in the 1920s and that their entire currency holdings throughout the world, which were very large, were backed by bullion. My noble friend Lord Strathclyde came back and said to me that he had an analyst working on it and that this had to be stuff and nonsense. He said that they had come up with a figure for the amount of bullion that would be needed to cover their currency reserves, as claimed, which would be more than the entire value of bullion that had ever been mined in the history of the world. I am sorry but my noble friend Lord Strathclyde is wrong; his analysts are wrong. He had tapped into the sources that are available and there is only one definitive source for the amount of bullion that has ever been taken from the earth’s crust. That was a National Geographic magazine article 12 years ago. Whatever figure it was that was quoted was then quoted again on six other sites on the internet—on Google. Everyone is quoting one original source; there is no other confirming authority. But if you tap into the Vatican accounts—of the Vatican bank–— come up with a claim of total bullion—

Lord De Mauley [Government Whip]: The noble Lord is into his fifteenth minute. I wonder whether he can draw his remarks to a conclusion.

Lord James of Blackheath: The total value of the Vatican bank reserves would claim to be more than the entire value of gold ever mined in the history of the world. My point on all of this is that we have not proven any of this. Foundation X is saying at this moment that it is prepared to put up the entire £5 billion for the funding of the three Is recreation; the British Government can have the entire independent management and control of it—foundation X does not want anything to do with it; there will be no interest charged; and, by the way, if the British Government would like it as well, if it will help, the foundation will be prepared to put up money for funding hospitals, schools, the building of Crossrail immediately with £17 billion transfer by Christmas, if requested, and all these other things. These things can be done, if wished, but a senior member of the Government has to accept the invitation to a phone call to the chairman of foundation X—and then we can get into business. This is too big an issue. I am just an ageing, obsessive old Peer and I am easily dispensable, but getting to the truth is not. We need to know what really is happening here. We must find out the truth of this situation.

My guess is that somebody somewhere has just tried to 419 scam the UK government. Either that, or we’re living in a Dan Brown *ugh* novel.

Insult to injury

If this is a joke, it’s a sick one:

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has been named the recipient of the 2010 Liberty Medal.

Constitution Center CEO David Eisner said Wednesday that the medal will be presented to Blair in Philadelphia on Sept. 13 by former President Bill Clinton.

The National Constitution Center gives the annual award to individuals or organizations whose actions strive to bring liberty to people around the world.

The medal was first given in 1989 and comes with a $100,000 cash prize. Previous winners have included U2 frontman Bono, former South African President Nelson Mandela and former U.S. President Jimmy Carter.

I can only echo Sunny’s bewilderment. Did he get this for helping liberate some two million or so Iraqis and Afghans from their lives, or what?

The Worldcup as kulturkampf

You can set your clock by it: every time one of the big football tournaments, either the worldcup or the European championships comes around, there will be some normally sensible leftist/socialist having a freakout about the perfidious influence of football on the class struggle [1]. There will be sneers about bread and circuses for masses, earnest arguments about how nationalism, even football nationalism is bad, mokay, and debates in the backpages of the Socialist Review on how competitive sports are inherently incompatible with a true socialist society. It’s all somewhat embarassing, silly and I supect motivated as much from the fact that quite a few diehard lefties were the kind of bookish kid who were always the last to be picked at gym as from sincere conviction. It’s cringeworthy, but it’s as inevitable as the fact that some yankee wingnut is going to write a column about how real men only play American football and soccer is for wimps; it’s just a matter of time before somebody embarasses themselves.

Step forward, Laurie Penny:

I refuse to get excited about some wealthy misogynist jocks tossing a ball around in the name of patriotism and product endorsement. Mistrust of team sport as a fulcrum of social organisation comes naturally to me. I’m a proud, card-carrying member of the sensitive, wheezy, malco-ordinated phalanx of the population for whom the word “football” still evokes painful memories of organised sadism and unspecified locker-room peril.

[…]

Liberal alarm bells can’t help but start ringing when a bunch of overpaid PE teachers get together to orchestrate a month of corporate-sponsored quasi-xenophobia; however, as soon as World Cup fever rolls around, members of the otherwise uninterested bourgeois left feel obliged to muster at least a sniffle of enthusiasm, sensing that not to do so is somehow elitist.

This is a misplaced notion: football is no longer the people’s sport. Just look at the brutal contempt that the police reserve for fans, or count the number of working-class Britons who can afford to attend home matches, much less the festivities in South Africa. Then there’s the uncomfortable fact that the World Cup is only and always about men.

[…]

There is something suspect about a people’s sport that violently excludes more than half the people, and boozy, borderline misogynist pseudo-nationalism is the last thing Britain needs to help foster a badly-needed sense of community. George Orwell observed in 1941 that “in England all the boasting and flag-wagging, the ‘Rule Britannia’ stuff, is done by small minorities . . . The patriotism of the common people is not vocal or even conscious.”

[…]

Meanwhile, the left still has no coherent response to Britain’s bricolage of troubles. The problem with football as commodified nationalism is that it leaves the left wing entirely undefended.

The tacky, tribalistic, red-and-white bandage of cheesy national sentiment is already stifling the healing power of political expediency, and as the people gear up to root for EnglandTM, the left’s best chance to re-organise and re-energise is deflating like a ruptured football, smashed against a wall by idiot children.

All the usual gripes are dragged in: “more serious things to worry about”; “pseudo-nationalism”; “violently excludes excludes more than half the people”; “overpaid PE teachers”; the obligatory Orwell reference [2] — it’s the Worldcup as Kulturkampf, with football no longer a sport or entertainment, but the embodiment of everything reactionary Penny can think of. It’s no different from what the American culture warriors that Roy Edroso writes about do everyday: project their own political feelings on activities that actually cannot be captured in these terms, as they exclude everything worhtwhile from it. Football in this way becomes just another thing to be scored for political correctness, rather than something to be enjoyed on its own terms.

And of course it’s possible to criticise football and the Worldcup, to like the sport but hate the way it has been captured by capitalism as just one more thing to sell to the masses or promote their worthless unnecessary shit. This is hardly unique to football and is in fact inevitable in a capitalist society: everything is mobilised to serve the interest of capitalists, unless actively resisted. It’s the sporty equivalent of moaning how alternative music has sold out, man. To be able to criticise football you have to engage it, be genuinely interested in it first, not just make lazy remarks about “wealthy misogynist jocks”. Football (and sport in general) is one of the few ways in which working class people can still become rich in a society were the odds are stacked against them. Moreover, if it’s not the workers reaping the benefits of their labour, who does Penny think should? They’re after all the people without whom a football club can’t function; if they don’t get those salaries the money would disappear in the owners’ wallets.

So yeah, Jamie’s right when he says “the first paragraph’s bad enough, but the last paragraph’s just surreal all the way through”. An awful, awful article, ill-thought out, dumb and seemingly written out of spite and a desire to show how much better Laurie Penny is than you for not following the Worldcup.

[1] There will also inevitably be the opposite and equally embarrasing phenomenom, the more prolier-than-thou opinion piece by a middleaged middleclass git in touch with his inner worker haragueing “intellectuals” for not embracing some of the more embarassing aspects of football; for examples see Socialist Unity on the English flag.
[2] And what was it that George Orwell said about free loving, sandal wearing and muesli eating invading the left? Seems to fit somehow…