A friend just gave me this link to a live stream of the trial, which begins tomorrow at 9 am Guatemala time (7 am PST, 10 am EST). The site is in Spanish, and I don’t think there will be any translation services, but if you are an early-rising Spanish speaker I urge you to check it out.

Me: Professor Anderson, um, maybe there’s something wrong with me, but could you maybe send me a copy of the final after everyone’s turned it in so I can do it… for practice?

Professor Anderson: There’s nothing wrong with you, you’re just… very eager. Sure, just remind me.

Me: Also, I’m still going to do the final paper, but I probably won’t start on it until after the break because there’s another paper I want to finish first, and since the due date isn’t a problem, that would be better for me.

Professor Anderson: Okay, that’s where there’s something wrong with you. No – wait – that’s why you’re in academia.

OMG! You can buy this on a t-shirt!

]]> http://erinamelia.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/this-whole-seme/feed/ 2 erinamelia What a good present, this t-shirt http://erinamelia.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/wednesday-video-white-knuckles-by-okgo/ http://erinamelia.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/wednesday-video-white-knuckles-by-okgo/#comments Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:16:29 +0000 erinamelia http://erinamelia.wordpress.com/?p=927 ]]> It’s possible that I’ve posted this video before, and I am the first to admit I do not care if that is the case.
Choreographed. Dogs. Never. Get. Old.

One suggestion I’ll make (which of course is just a suggestion) is to focus on government corruption and the corrosive power of private money in politics, as opposed to corporate greed or growing economic inequalities.  I’ve been debating the protests with some of my conservative friends over the last week (and reading a lot of related articles) and it seems that any perceived demonization of the rich is an immediate turn-off to conservatives.  In contrast, government corruption is widely despised and is something that many conservative-leaning people will support.  Personally, I think that if this movement is going to cause any real change, the primary message has to be something that will appeal to conservatives also.

I know that this person is coming from a position of genuine commitment to social change. And I respect their willingness to say unpopular things (e.g. let’s reach out to conservatives). But at the same time? I thought about it. Then I had rage. Then I had a response which involved a lot of swearing, and that reflected badly on my commitment to nonviolent communication. It’s important to note that this initial rage-spasm was not directed at this other student, but at the conservatives who are so “turned off” by the idea of raising taxes on the rich. Anyway. I thought some more. I mustered less rage and a more respectful communication style. This was my response:

Photo by newmexico51 on Flickr.

WHY are we supposed to be pandering to conservatives and their fetishization of the rich? They don’t pander to us.

I don’t assume that everyone on this list has the exact same opinions on economic inequality that I do (although wouldn’t that be nice?) but surely we can all agree that one of the major problems in the country right now is the way that decision-makers safeguard the interests of the massively wealthy against the interests of the massively un-wealthy? There is so much good literature on how economic inequality not only deepens and strengthens economic recessions, but also leaves entire generations of people at economic disadvantage.

Socioeconomic inequality is bad for everyone except for people who are extremely well-insulated from economic shock – and it will hurt them too, in the end. But I am far less concerned about the Warren Buffets of this world than about my students who are going out into a job market that is not willing to receive them, while at the same time their parents are being laid off. This university is asking its students – grad students but especially undergrads – for greater and greater financial sacrifices in the interests of an education, which is to say the opportunity of class mobility, a decent job, and a living wage. In many cases, their families have made sacrifices on a generational scale to ensure this opportunity. But the likelihood that those sacrifices will pay off – even with enormous amounts of hard work – is shrinking. Especially when we are talking about the people without the right connections and/or the class background necessary to make those connections.

So yes, we SHOULD be criticizing the rich who make profits for their rich stockholders instead of offering good jobs to people who not only desperately need them but are in a prime position to genuinely contribute to our society (let alone the rich people who are currently laying their workers off).

YES we should be indicting corporate power brokers who cling to an outmoded economic model (which is particularly obvious in the case of energy production but applies to other sectors of the economy as well) in the interests of their short-term profits instead of thinking of the long-term economic and environmental health of their communities and their nation. YES we should be railing against politicians who want to maintain the bank accounts of their wealthy constituents at the cost of the basic social services that the government of any industrialized country should provide (assuming respect for basic human dignity, that is).

There is a growing crevasse between the haves and the have-nots in this country and as it grows the ice wall is falling out from beneath anyone who is standing on the edge.

TL, DR: Don’t indict the corporatization and corruption of the American political system without indicting its consequence: the long-term sociopolitical costs of inequality.

Clearly, the length of my sentences is kind of a syntactical gnashing of teeth.

Jobs: Dirty vs. Clean -
David Roberts points out that sure, EPA regulations may cost us jobs. But does the US actually want dangerous , dirty, pollluting jobs which give our children asthma and are heavily subsidized by the federal government? Coal fired power plants do 21 cents of unpaid economic, social, and environmental damage for every kilowatt hour they produce – and these costs are borne by the government, individuals, and future generations, not executives getting rich off of bonus pay. Do we want to make sacrifices to protect these jobs of the past, or would we like to put some of our millions of unemployed people to work in secure, profitable clean tech jobs that help out country move into the future (and compete with China)?

Knowledge is Power -
10 links to resources for Open Learning/OpenCourseWare. These sites are part of a larger movement to get information and education online, and free, to anyone who needs or wants it. These sites all offer not just information, but the opportunity to engage with the material interactively.

Here’s the link, anyway. In particular, check out section 4, “Vulnerable Communities” – not just because vulnerable communities are what I study, but because of the “conservatively high” sea level rise estimates: 16 inches within the next 50 years and 55 inches within the next 100 years. That’s almost five feet, and these can still be considered conservative estimates. 16 inches of sea level rise will flood 281 square miles of SF Bay shoreline. Scary stuff.

Head: checked.

New friend: made.

my friend, the lizard

Ridgeline: conquered.

“Well, there are lots of ways to get funding,” I replied. “Sometimes, if you don’t have enough money they give you money, and sometimes if you have won some sort of academic achievement you get money too.”

“And how much it costs, and how much money you get, depends on which school you attend,” interjected another housemate.

“But how do you get the money?” asked the Belgian. “Where does it come from? Does the government give it to you?”

The interjecting housemate and I exchanged winces. How on earth could we explain the chaos of getting college funding to a European? “It’s …um, it’s… very complicated. Some money comes from the government, and some money comes from your school, and some money comes from private donors, and, um…”

“You know how our health care system is really bizarre and chaotic? Like, there are all of these different ways to get health insurance, and everyone pays a different amount, and it’s hard to really tell what you’re doing, and there are lots of forms to fill out? And the care isn’t really all that great, but rich people always seem to get really good care, and regular people get good enough care, for the most part, and a bunch of poor people don’t really get any care at all, and they have to make the choice between going to the doctor and going bankrupt?”

The Belgian nodded.

“Well, applying for money to go to college is a lot like that.”

“But with less death.”

“Yes, with less death.”

This was really the best way we could think of to describe it. I don’t think the Belgian was very impressed.

Let’s start with the popularity of the tax benefit that allows people to deduct mortgage interest from their tax bill.

Only 40% of people in the 50k - 75k income bracket claimed the tax break.

Only 20% of tax filers report an income of $75,000 or more – clearly not the middle class. If you’re in the top quintile, you’re officially wealthy. Fortunately for you, you are not only more likely to claim the mortgage interest deduction, your economic group will receive 60% of the money from it. As pointed out by Brian McCabe in the New York Times,

Commentators often talk about the mortgage interest deduction as a prized middle-class benefit that enables households to achieve the American dream of homeownership. But despite their strong support for the deduction, middle-class Americans are not the primary beneficiaries of this federal tax subsidy. …In part, low- and middle-income Americans are less likely to claim the deduction because they are less likely to be homeowners. Of those who own homes, taking the standard deduction often makes better economic sense than taking the mortgage interest deduction.

This is clearly a tax break designed to help the wealthy much more than the middle class. Why are people so supportive of it? Oh right, I forgot, everything is great for the middle class and the government is swimming in money. Don’t worry, we can provide that subsidy to rich people and pay for schools and health – OH WAIT.

I mean, maybe it’s just ignorance and misinformation? I mean, half of the beneficiaries of US government social programs don’t think they’ve ever gotten government benefits. You read that right. It’s true. There are people who will cheerfully pick up their social security check or Medicare-funded prescription and decry those degenerates who have to take help from the government.

Here’s a link to the original article, if you’re one of those latte-drinking Volvo-drinking members of the liberal elite who like sources and citations. Hey check it out, the Mortgage Interest Deduction is on there. So are student loans – I <3 my government handout. So here’s the problem. While I’m not, in principle, opposed to stupid people working (voting) against their own interests, I wish there was a way to keep them from screwing me over.

I hope that's not a meter stick. You don't want people to think you're a cheese-eating surrender monkey, do you?