Not more than a few years ago, my Florida neighbor and golf buddy Frankie Smith, a New Hampshire snow bird, related to me how many new immigrants were coming "down Florida way" each year.
“Every day we get another one-thousand new residents down here,” said Frankie, as we sat at an open air bar under the shade of an ancient palmetto which rustled pleasantly in the gentle sea breeze. Twisting around on his bar stool, Frankie tipped his misted beer mug to a place across the white concrete strip of the AIA Coastal Highway.
“See there,” he said, pointing the foam dripped mug toward a new development being carved out of former sea-side sand dunes which were once covered in ragged palms, bunch grass and saw palmetto. He quickly retrieved the mug to gulp down the last of the cold brew.
"That 'ere place buts right back up to my back yard," complained Frankie, wiping the foam from his thin lips with the back of his hand.
I looked where he pointed. A big red and white sign tacked to posts at the highway-edge blared the name: “First Coast Condos”. Another line boasted that of its planned 200 units 150 had been sold already.
“Three-hundred-fifty thousand every year? Why that’s more than a million people every three years! That’s like adding the population of NY City every twenty-four years or so,” I said, swivelling around to avert my eyes from the construction site to gaze at our well-endowed young bar maid who was vigorously cleaning beer mugs in the bar sink.
How things have changed in a few years. As Frankie says, "a lot of beer has run through the taps at that place" since that day. Today, in 2009 the picture is very different. I don't know what happened to that bar maid, where she works now but that bar closed in 2008. And this year--2009--was the first year since the late 1940s that the population of Florida did not grow….in fact it declined by nearly 60,000 people! The drop of population was the greatest in annual population since 1901 when such data was first tabulated. So the recent recession has brought real change to Florida. For the a full treatment of these data see: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/us/30florida.html?_r=1&em
And regarding the First Coast Condos, the new development across AIA Highway---. It was never completed. Lack of interest and funds. Today it stands only partially occupied. One ofits parking lots remains a muddy unsurfaced ground with a rusting bulldozer and a great mound of topsoil gowing rank tall reeds. The few residents complain about the exhorbitant community fees, much more than what they expected to pay. Since now there are fewer than 100 residents when more than two hundred were planned.
The New York Times article on Florida by Damien Cave (August 29, 2009) underscores what any southern sojourner knew, that Florida was one of the most rapidly growing states…and most who knew it (except the builders and real-estate agents) thought it was growing too fast for its own good. The NY Times piece states that in 2000, Florida was the fourth most populous state with a population of 16 million. Of course it’s a big state in area, and much of the northern and western regions are still forest, marsh and dry pine plains, where Brahama cattle still roam. But take a Google Earth tour over the southern coastal areas and see what a century of nearly unrestrained development by the "good-ole-boy network" could do. It is eye-popping to see the vast networks of roads, and oh-so-close together rooftops and vast parking lots all extending like a cancer growth over the countryside to every place that is within smelling distance of a bit of waterside, shore area, marsh or even damp soil. The view is a testament what stupidity and greed can do to a lovely landscape.
According to William Frey a population specialist at Brooking Institution, the census data in December will no doubt confirm the findings of the striking population decline and if they are indeed accurate, the information will be a great blow to the state, states Frey, "since the whole Florida economy was based on migration flows.” He states that declines in population tend to compound the ravages of economic downturns such as the present recession. "They have a negative effect on the quality of life," he states. This is a fact for cities in the Rust Belt of the mid west, agricultural northern New York State, as well as sunny Hollywood Park, Florida. But the NY Times author notes that Florida is different, “Florida, in particular, was not built for emptying.” He reminds us that since 1924, a state constitution amendment banned the dreaded income tax. That was one more appealing factor for in migration. One of the major reasons many retirees abandon their home states and become Florida “homesteaders” was the savings that accrue to living in a “no income tax state”. But in those halcyon days the state of Florida made up this loss of revenue by relying heavily on sales taxes and property taxes which are closely linked to population growth and new housing starts.
But now with housing prices plummeting and housing sales about non-existent the State's sources of revenue are sharply crimped. As a result of the decreasing tax base, municipalities and cities have been forced to cut staff and slash budgets. Unfortuneatley these changes are not likely to encourage people to stay in the state. In fact, there has been an uptick of what some Floridians are calling “halfbacks”. These are disenchanted Florida immigrants who have pulled up stakes and turn back north…but do not go all the way---winding up in the lower tax areas of Georgia and the Carolinas.
But back in Florida in 2009, according to the NY Times piece, Broward County schools were forced to slash their staff by one hundred teachers and cut the school budget from $5 billion to $3.6 billion, that is a 28% drop in budget. The county commissioners reduced library hours and closed parks early and the sheriff’s office has cut 177 positions. These are quality of life changes.
But hope springs eternal as some say…and the hope of the “baby-boom” population to choose Florida as their parents did, and of course optimists expect a return of population increases when the economy picks up. But when will that happen? What effects will higher energy costs and a slow starting and weaker economy have on the population boom and on Florida? We must wait and see. Perhaps a bit of a hiatus in the growth boom might not be such a bad development. Frankie thinks so as he looks on his back yard.
rjk
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
ROUBINI'S LAST WORDS ON THE RECOVERY
IN LATE AUGUST 2009-- ROUBINI SPEAKS!
Slow recovery and double dip recession are likely, so says Prof. Nouriel Roubini, of the NYU Stern School of Business says (Aug 23, 2009) in the Financial Times of London (See: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/90227fdc-900d-11de-bc59-00144feabdc0.html, downloaded 8-24-09)
Roubini sees a close correlation with the “way the advanced economies of the world were contracting” in the last quarter of ‘08 and first quarter of ‘09 with that of the Great Depression of ‘29. But in 2008 world leaders “finally” responded with the powerful economic tools in their arsenal. Their efforts worked and the free-fall subsided according to Roubini.
But when will the global economy bottom out? Roubini says it has done so already in most emerging markets such as China, Brazil, India Latin America and parts of Asia. But for the advanced economies (USA and parts of Europe) the recession will not end before the end of the year.
On the question of the shape of the recovery…will it be rapid (“v” shaped curve) or slow (“u” shaped curve)—Roubini thinks the latter is to be expected. He describes it as “anemic and below trend for at least a couple of years”. He also points to a risk of a “w” shaped double dip curve.
But why will recovery be anemic?
First: Job opportunities are still falling sharply in the US and elsewhere. Prof. Roubini estimates unemployment to reach over 10% by 2010. Alone, that factor would crimp demand and exacerbate bank mortgage losses…and add to the problem of the loss of skills from key sectors of the economy, thus slowing recovery and worker productivity.
Second: There is a widespread crisis of solvency, states Roubini…not just liquidity. Banks, companies, households and individuals were so deeply leveraged-up that they continue to remain close to insolvency even though the losses of the financial institutions have been “put on the government balance sheets” this does not change the basics. Insolvency “limits the ability of banks to lend, households to spend and companies to invest.”
Third: In countries like the US—consumers need to cut spending and save more but as noted above, these very consumers are debt-burdened and as well are faced with a “wealth shock” from falling home prices, shrinking incomes, and loss of employment.
Fourth: The financial system—despite the bailout money—is still damaged. Banks are saddled with “trillions of dollars in expected losses on loans and securities while still being seriously undercapitalized”.
Fifth: Due to high debt, default risks, low growth and weak profit margins, companies are hesitant and/or constrained to increase production, hire workers and invest in new equipment.
Sixth: Government releveraging by building up large fiscal deficits risks crowding out private sector spending. Since the effects of the stimulus package will fizzle out by early next year.. private investment must materialize on time to make up the short-fall. Will investment confidence materialize? Roubini suggests that private investors may not be so sanguine.
Seventh: Global imbalances can lead to a weaker global recovery. With the US economy (one of the world’s “profligate”nations according to Roubini) slowed, countries which save—such as China, Germany and Japan—will have to make up the difference (for their lowered exports) with domestic spending, but this may be a big bill to fill and if domestic demand does not grow fast enough, a weaker global recovery will result.
Finally, there is a tendency for wary government policy makers (sometimes prodded by the political opposition) to take large fiscal (bailout) deficits seriously. As a response, they may act to raise taxes, and cut spending as a way to mop up excess liquidity (to avoid inflation). But if they do so, they risk tipping the economy back into recession and deflation. On the other hand, if they maintain large deficits-- inflationary expectations become their worry, since this will generate higher bond-yield demands and hurt the economy due to higher borrowing rates…and possible stagflation.
Then there is the energy problem. At present, Roubini thinks that oil prices are rising faster than economic fundamentals warrant. But these prices could be driven even higher by excessive liquidity (pumped into a weak economy) chasing scarce assets—and by speculation.
Last year when oil reached $145 a barrel it created havoc with the economies of oil importing countries. Gasoline costs at the pump skyrocketed to nearly four dollars a gallon putting a crimp in the economies of homeowners who travel to distant job sites, to companies which deliver goods by truck, etc. etc. Those higher costs certainly tipped some mortgagees into default.
In summary, Roubini sees an “anaemic and below trend” recovery for the advanced economies and a big risk for double dip inflation.
Slow recovery and double dip recession are likely, so says Prof. Nouriel Roubini, of the NYU Stern School of Business says (Aug 23, 2009) in the Financial Times of London (See: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/90227fdc-900d-11de-bc59-00144feabdc0.html, downloaded 8-24-09)
Roubini sees a close correlation with the “way the advanced economies of the world were contracting” in the last quarter of ‘08 and first quarter of ‘09 with that of the Great Depression of ‘29. But in 2008 world leaders “finally” responded with the powerful economic tools in their arsenal. Their efforts worked and the free-fall subsided according to Roubini.
But when will the global economy bottom out? Roubini says it has done so already in most emerging markets such as China, Brazil, India Latin America and parts of Asia. But for the advanced economies (USA and parts of Europe) the recession will not end before the end of the year.
On the question of the shape of the recovery…will it be rapid (“v” shaped curve) or slow (“u” shaped curve)—Roubini thinks the latter is to be expected. He describes it as “anemic and below trend for at least a couple of years”. He also points to a risk of a “w” shaped double dip curve.
But why will recovery be anemic?
First: Job opportunities are still falling sharply in the US and elsewhere. Prof. Roubini estimates unemployment to reach over 10% by 2010. Alone, that factor would crimp demand and exacerbate bank mortgage losses…and add to the problem of the loss of skills from key sectors of the economy, thus slowing recovery and worker productivity.
Second: There is a widespread crisis of solvency, states Roubini…not just liquidity. Banks, companies, households and individuals were so deeply leveraged-up that they continue to remain close to insolvency even though the losses of the financial institutions have been “put on the government balance sheets” this does not change the basics. Insolvency “limits the ability of banks to lend, households to spend and companies to invest.”
Third: In countries like the US—consumers need to cut spending and save more but as noted above, these very consumers are debt-burdened and as well are faced with a “wealth shock” from falling home prices, shrinking incomes, and loss of employment.
Fourth: The financial system—despite the bailout money—is still damaged. Banks are saddled with “trillions of dollars in expected losses on loans and securities while still being seriously undercapitalized”.
Fifth: Due to high debt, default risks, low growth and weak profit margins, companies are hesitant and/or constrained to increase production, hire workers and invest in new equipment.
Sixth: Government releveraging by building up large fiscal deficits risks crowding out private sector spending. Since the effects of the stimulus package will fizzle out by early next year.. private investment must materialize on time to make up the short-fall. Will investment confidence materialize? Roubini suggests that private investors may not be so sanguine.
Seventh: Global imbalances can lead to a weaker global recovery. With the US economy (one of the world’s “profligate”nations according to Roubini) slowed, countries which save—such as China, Germany and Japan—will have to make up the difference (for their lowered exports) with domestic spending, but this may be a big bill to fill and if domestic demand does not grow fast enough, a weaker global recovery will result.
Finally, there is a tendency for wary government policy makers (sometimes prodded by the political opposition) to take large fiscal (bailout) deficits seriously. As a response, they may act to raise taxes, and cut spending as a way to mop up excess liquidity (to avoid inflation). But if they do so, they risk tipping the economy back into recession and deflation. On the other hand, if they maintain large deficits-- inflationary expectations become their worry, since this will generate higher bond-yield demands and hurt the economy due to higher borrowing rates…and possible stagflation.
Then there is the energy problem. At present, Roubini thinks that oil prices are rising faster than economic fundamentals warrant. But these prices could be driven even higher by excessive liquidity (pumped into a weak economy) chasing scarce assets—and by speculation.
Last year when oil reached $145 a barrel it created havoc with the economies of oil importing countries. Gasoline costs at the pump skyrocketed to nearly four dollars a gallon putting a crimp in the economies of homeowners who travel to distant job sites, to companies which deliver goods by truck, etc. etc. Those higher costs certainly tipped some mortgagees into default.
In summary, Roubini sees an “anaemic and below trend” recovery for the advanced economies and a big risk for double dip inflation.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
REAGAN'S POLICIES AND THE LOCKERBIE BOMBING
September 27, 2009
Since the first draft of this blog on August 15, 2008, revelations and media analysis have cast some doubt on the Libyans as the likely perpetrators of the downing of Pan Am 103. Press reports have indicated other possibilities--that the evidence against the only convicted person: al Megrahi was weak, and perhaps it was not even Libya which initiated the bombing. Some now claim the shooting down of an Iranian commercial flight, Iranian Air #655 by the Aegis Class cruiser USS Vincennes which was lurking in Iranian territorial waters on July 3, 1988, under the command of Captain William Rogers III, was the cause. That “accidental” attack killed 290 innocent Iranian civilians, among them 66 children. Some think this precipitated an Iranian reaction—and the downing of Pan Am 103, in retaliation about five months later. That seems quite reasonable. But that is another story and perhaps another blog. But it does not change the over-all thesis of this author that American actions overseas cause reactions, and American aggressive policies of the late 80s helped to set the stage and generate the angry motives for the attack on PanAm 103. This author does not condone the perpetrators on either side…only innocents seem to die and suffer. This is a call for more circumspection from our citizenry, more questioning of our government’s motives, more review of theirpolices abroad, and a call for political action to modify or control their actions. Read on.
Fox News reported this week (August 15, 2009)that the families of the victims of the December 21, 1988 PanAm 103 (Lockerbie, Scotland) bombing were outraged at the release of a Libyan man, Abdel Ali al-Megrahi, who was serving a life sentence for the 1988 bombing of the Pan Am flight 103 which fell from the sky over Lockerbie, Scotland killing 269 passengers and crew and 11 on the ground. The convicted perpetrator, Al-Megrahi is seriously ill and is not expected to live very long. As would be expected, the parents and relatives of the many victims can see no reason for “compassion” for the man who they see as responsible for the death of their loved ones. Their great losses were too harrowing to expect anything else from them and their responses are fully understandable.
Regarding the Pan Am 103 tragedy one can empathize with the responses of the survivor-relatives of the victims but what is troubling, is the attitude of the American public at large. For that, one can blame America's general lack of interest in history and background knowledge--all aided and abetted by the American mass media which rather over-simplify, and shore-up an "American exceptionalism" rather than deal in facts.
Little is generally known here in the US of the underlying causes of the conflict between the US and Libya--- in the--so distant 1980s. This Pan Am 103 case is just one of many in which the American public seems to have no clue as to the "why" of events and seem to prefer simplistic answers such as "they hate us", or they are "envious of our freedoms" or similar pabulum offered up for the unconcerned, uniformed masses.
In this case, there is a well-documented history of our actions and of those of the Libyans. Purposeful acts such as the tragic bombing of Pan Am 103 are not random acts of unthinking terrorists. As in physics:''To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction" (See Newton’s third law in "Aximata Leges Motus"). Political actions have consequences too.
President Reagan's purposeful over-reaction to a terrorist night club bombing in Germany (which killed one soldier) was the stated reason for a massive aerial attack on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 which initiated events which are presented here as one cause for the Lockerbie tragedy. We live in a much smaller world than we think. Our actions in foreign lands can and do have consequences. When the American public understands that fact, perhaps we may better evaluate then act to modify or moderate the actions of our leaders when they propose actions abroad.
What is the history of this act of horrible terrorism? If al-Meghari was actually complicit in the bombing (and many in Scotland and elsewhere believe the wrong man was convicted) then why did he do it? (It is noteworthy to mention here that after the trial it was revealed that the key witness against Meghari was paid $2 million dollars for his court testimony by the FBI.) We must go back a few decades.
The Reagan years were a time when the US government initiated some questionable actions in foreign policy. Libya was only one folder in the thick foreign policy dossier of President Reagan, but it is one which is fully documented and is easily available for anyone who may be interested in reading it.
President Reagan is often remembered as an elderly, avuncular, bumbling, but good-natured President—more of an old vaudevillian actor than a politician. But as the man who was credited with helping to bring down the Soviet Union there had to be a darker more sinister side—and there was. Most Americans are unaware of the shadowy area of American foreign policy which President Reagan led the nation into for the first time. (See: http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp) The so called "Reagan Doctrine" openly supported right-wing, pro-American insurgencies in many countries around the world--such as in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola, Cambodia, Lebanon, and this policy led to great deal of terror, hardship and bloodshed for many innocent civilians who were caught up in a conflict between opposing economic philosophies, for abstruse economic and political theories which they did not care about or understand.
As a consequence of these covert actions (some of which Congress legislated against) Reagan was faced with a storm of opprobrium and an investigation when his illegal support of the Contras in Nicaragua was revealed. He weathered that storm. But during the Congressional investigations bits of embarrassing information were exposed. One was that Reagan's CIA, under the direction of William Casey, financed, produced and disseminated an assassination manual entitled “Psychological Operations in Guerrilla War” which recommended “selective use of violence and propaganda” and examined various ways to assassinate legally elected government officials in target countries.
The expose' of this secret program clearly destabilized relations with some allies and non-aligned nations and strained relationships with others. But it was clearly in direct contravention to Reagan’s own 1981 executive order, which explicitly banned assassinations. While the US media and Reagan himself denounced terrorism as “uncivilized and barbaric” the US policies continued to use and to espouse these very methods when it found them useful. (See http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp ).
In 1984 Reagan authorized the CIA to equip and train a wide range of terrorist organizations in the Middle East. This directive was so loosely stated that it was understood by intelligence officials (as reported in the Washington Post in 1984) as a virtual “go-any-where-do-anything-license-to-kill”. The results of these aggressive policies were a wave of terror and death emanating from both the US, on one side, and its targets in the conflict on the other. Often innocent civilians were caught in the cross-fire. Or sometimes they were purposely targeted by US operatives to generate terror.
In an example of the latter case, in March of 1985 a car bomb exploded a few meters from the Beirut, Lebanon residence of the Islamic cleric known as Sayyed Fadallah, a Moslem cleric sympathetic to the cause of the Palestinians and insurgents in Lebanon was the target—he escaped injury. At the time it was widely believed to be a CIA sponsored attack, but there was no firm proof. The attack killed more than 80 civilians, mostly women and children exiting from a near-by mosque, and injured over two-hundred. The perpetrators remained uncertain until, years later, CIA director William Casey admitted his personal culpability to journalist Bob Woodward for the attack on Fadallah. A much later interview with Bob McFarlane is revealing on this same subject. See: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html.
Then in 1986, President Reagan decided to attack Libya. According to McFarlane's account, the attack had been planned for nine months--and thus the proximate and published cause of the attack--the bombing of a Berlin night club where a US trooper was killed was simply a cover story. However, reading McFarlane’s statements, one surmises that the actual cause was domestic politics.
In those years the Reagan administration had been frustrated and buffeted by a number of overseas setbacks (the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon, the abduction of the CIA’s Beirut Chief, William Buckely, the bombing of the US Beirut embassy annex in September 1984, and the hijacking of TWA 847 (in June 1985). All of these events--many which were responses to CIA covert actions, caused the administration to appear weak and indecisive.
For domestic political reasons something had to be done to reverse that trend in the public perceptions. Though the “just do something” school of foreign policy is probably not the most sensible route to follow, frightened and worried heads of state and threatened politicians often do just that. The plan to bomb Libya appears to have been hatched by McFarlane for just that specific purpose---to satisfy a domestic audience and boost the President’s popularity, among other even more mundane concerns. You choose which was more prominent in the President’s mind. (See: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html)
Libya is a small (about the size of the State of Alaska)undeveloped desert country on the north coast of Africa, with a population of a about 3.5 million. In 1969, Muammar Qaddafi seized power and hewed to an independent socialist and pro-communist line. He used his nation’s oil wealth to confront the US in several areas, but mostly by sponsoring independence movements and left-wing insurgencies in several countries from Northern Ireland to the Philippines (See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=us+attack+on+libya+1986&aq=0&oq=US+attack+on+Libya&aqi=g1).
One of his more independent and "pro-statist" moves was his 1973 declaration to extend Libya’s territorial control from the normal 12-mile limit to the entire Gulf of Sidra, a wide embayment enclosed by two Libyan coastal promontories. The Gulf of Sidra is about three-hundred miles across and and about ninety miles wide, or about the size of the Ionian Sea (which incidentally is claimed by Hellenic Republic its territorial waters). At the time, in the late 1980s, Libya was weakly defended, it had no significant naval forces, a clear, dry, desert-climate (which permitted easy bomb-targeting), and its leader was and remains a blustering, uncompromising man who was easily demonized in the press. See McFarlane interview: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html.
The history of the Libya-US relationship was marred by a series of naval and aerial skirmishes in the Gulf of Sidra which continued over several years. The US acknowledges only a 12 mile limit and maintains that the Gulf of Sidra is part of international waters. To underscore this fact aggressively, President Ronald Reagan sent the US Sixth Fleet into the Gulf for naval maneuvers and to “show the flag”.
Once the Fleet's ships entered the area considered by Libya as their territorial waters, the US ships were followed and harassed by Qaddafi’s small-boat navy. The unequal confrontation resulted in the downing of two Libyan aircraft in 1981, then two Libyan radio ships were sunk by the US in March of 1986, followed by the sinking of a Libyan-Navy patrol-boat, soon afterward a similar fate befell another Libyan vessel later in March 1986.
In April, 1986, Muammar al-Qaddafi, in retaliation, or at least as claimed by the CIA, ordered an attack on an American-frequented night-club, known as “La Belle”, in what was then East Berlin. One American soldier was killed, several civilians and many others were injured in the attack. The allegation was based on a CIA intercept of an incriminating message from Libya to its embassy in East Berlin.
On the 15th of April, 1986 with the CIA report in his hand, President Reagan spoke to the US nation and claimed he had the right to protect Americans from attack anywhere in the world, and with that, he launched a punitive bombing raid, code named “Operation El Dorado” on Libya.
More than 45 planes flew from aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean and from land bases in Great Britain to Tripoli and Benghazi where they dropped over three hundred and fifty bombs and laser guided missiles on military installations, and on Qaddafi’s home-compound. Qaddafi's compound was the primary target. Many other non-military targets in those cities were hit as well. Several schools were accidentally hit as was the French embassy in Tripoli. The BBC reported that the raid killed more than two hundred civilians. Quaddafi's’s infant daughter, Hanna, was killed and two of Gaddafi's young sons were injured.
It is claimed that both the governments of Italy and Malta warned Quaddafi of an imminent attack by US planes. The foreign minister of Malta is said to have called Qaddafi and warned him that unidentified planes were passing overhead (above Malta) and that he and his family had better take-cover immediately . Qaddafi and his family were in the process of escaping when the guided missiles struck. The attack on Gaddafi's home compound--where several of his relatives were killed--indicates that the attack was in effect a massive assassination plot. Reagan simply wanted to rid himself of Quaddafi. Aside from the illegality of assinations of heads of state and the extensive physical effects of the bombing raid and the death of several hundred civilians, the end-effects of the attack on Libya's "behavior" toward the US were minimal. Of course if they had killed Quaddafi they might have had more effect. (See: Terrorism and Foreign Policy, by Paul Pillar)
The hoped for "elimination" of Qaddafi, and the possible deterrent and disruption effect from such a military maneuver did not materialize. Libya’s leader continued to do what he was doing--support of regimes not necessarily in favor in Washington--and in fact the American bombing raid appeared to increase the Libyan leaders popularity and helped to solidify his domestic support and popularity around the world.
There is no sound data to suggest that blunt military force--such as the Libya air raid-- on so called “terrorists” have any deterrent long lasting effect. First, as in the case of Libya the effects though widespread, had little impact on Qaddafi actually conducting additional retaliatory attacks.
The Reagan attacks actually served to strengthen Qaddafi’s political position and galvanized public opinion, in the Arab world against the US. If it is true that Libya planned and executed the Pan Am bombing, it probably made it easier for Qaddafi to organize such counter attacks. The over the top US reaction, helped to alienate the civilian population of surrounding states and increase recruits, resources and sympathy for Libya.
Finally, the bombing raid was only part of a series of strikes and counter strikes, attack and retaliation that is a well known pattern. Thus the probable Libyan -sponsored attack on Pan Am 103 was a not an unexpected response, from a state leader who had suffered through an assassination attempt, the loss of his infant daughter and the serious injuries to his sons. Reagan and his advisors were probably hoping that the raid and the assassination would have put an end to Qaddafi as an irritant and the results would have been all positive for the Reagan administration. But events did not go the way they were planned. Quaddafi escaped assassination—and went on to fight another day. Reagan kicked over the Libyan beehive and then stepped back hoping for disruption and deterrence…and a boost in his popularity ratings.
But the angry bees went on to sting others—such as the innocent civilians on the Pan Am 103 flight. Who bears responsibility for the tragedy? Is it the angry bees we blame, who were after all, quiescent in their nests and would have stung no one had they been left undisturbed? Or was it the one who kicked the hive over?
From this vantage point…more than twenty years later..when the pain of the great losses suffered continues to affect us as we recall all those young people on that plane would have gone on to productive careers, married, had children. We must ask ourselves, was Reagan’s act of unnecessary belligerence as a motive for retaliation worth it? What did he accomplish? Quaddafi is still in power. He still claims the entire Gulf of Sidra for Lybia. What has changed? From this point of view…I say---No.
Get the picture?
rjk
Since the first draft of this blog on August 15, 2008, revelations and media analysis have cast some doubt on the Libyans as the likely perpetrators of the downing of Pan Am 103. Press reports have indicated other possibilities--that the evidence against the only convicted person: al Megrahi was weak, and perhaps it was not even Libya which initiated the bombing. Some now claim the shooting down of an Iranian commercial flight, Iranian Air #655 by the Aegis Class cruiser USS Vincennes which was lurking in Iranian territorial waters on July 3, 1988, under the command of Captain William Rogers III, was the cause. That “accidental” attack killed 290 innocent Iranian civilians, among them 66 children. Some think this precipitated an Iranian reaction—and the downing of Pan Am 103, in retaliation about five months later. That seems quite reasonable. But that is another story and perhaps another blog. But it does not change the over-all thesis of this author that American actions overseas cause reactions, and American aggressive policies of the late 80s helped to set the stage and generate the angry motives for the attack on PanAm 103. This author does not condone the perpetrators on either side…only innocents seem to die and suffer. This is a call for more circumspection from our citizenry, more questioning of our government’s motives, more review of theirpolices abroad, and a call for political action to modify or control their actions. Read on.
Fox News reported this week (August 15, 2009)that the families of the victims of the December 21, 1988 PanAm 103 (Lockerbie, Scotland) bombing were outraged at the release of a Libyan man, Abdel Ali al-Megrahi, who was serving a life sentence for the 1988 bombing of the Pan Am flight 103 which fell from the sky over Lockerbie, Scotland killing 269 passengers and crew and 11 on the ground. The convicted perpetrator, Al-Megrahi is seriously ill and is not expected to live very long. As would be expected, the parents and relatives of the many victims can see no reason for “compassion” for the man who they see as responsible for the death of their loved ones. Their great losses were too harrowing to expect anything else from them and their responses are fully understandable.
Regarding the Pan Am 103 tragedy one can empathize with the responses of the survivor-relatives of the victims but what is troubling, is the attitude of the American public at large. For that, one can blame America's general lack of interest in history and background knowledge--all aided and abetted by the American mass media which rather over-simplify, and shore-up an "American exceptionalism" rather than deal in facts.
Little is generally known here in the US of the underlying causes of the conflict between the US and Libya--- in the--so distant 1980s. This Pan Am 103 case is just one of many in which the American public seems to have no clue as to the "why" of events and seem to prefer simplistic answers such as "they hate us", or they are "envious of our freedoms" or similar pabulum offered up for the unconcerned, uniformed masses.
In this case, there is a well-documented history of our actions and of those of the Libyans. Purposeful acts such as the tragic bombing of Pan Am 103 are not random acts of unthinking terrorists. As in physics:''To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction" (See Newton’s third law in "Aximata Leges Motus"). Political actions have consequences too.
President Reagan's purposeful over-reaction to a terrorist night club bombing in Germany (which killed one soldier) was the stated reason for a massive aerial attack on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 which initiated events which are presented here as one cause for the Lockerbie tragedy. We live in a much smaller world than we think. Our actions in foreign lands can and do have consequences. When the American public understands that fact, perhaps we may better evaluate then act to modify or moderate the actions of our leaders when they propose actions abroad.
What is the history of this act of horrible terrorism? If al-Meghari was actually complicit in the bombing (and many in Scotland and elsewhere believe the wrong man was convicted) then why did he do it? (It is noteworthy to mention here that after the trial it was revealed that the key witness against Meghari was paid $2 million dollars for his court testimony by the FBI.) We must go back a few decades.
The Reagan years were a time when the US government initiated some questionable actions in foreign policy. Libya was only one folder in the thick foreign policy dossier of President Reagan, but it is one which is fully documented and is easily available for anyone who may be interested in reading it.
President Reagan is often remembered as an elderly, avuncular, bumbling, but good-natured President—more of an old vaudevillian actor than a politician. But as the man who was credited with helping to bring down the Soviet Union there had to be a darker more sinister side—and there was. Most Americans are unaware of the shadowy area of American foreign policy which President Reagan led the nation into for the first time. (See: http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp) The so called "Reagan Doctrine" openly supported right-wing, pro-American insurgencies in many countries around the world--such as in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola, Cambodia, Lebanon, and this policy led to great deal of terror, hardship and bloodshed for many innocent civilians who were caught up in a conflict between opposing economic philosophies, for abstruse economic and political theories which they did not care about or understand.
As a consequence of these covert actions (some of which Congress legislated against) Reagan was faced with a storm of opprobrium and an investigation when his illegal support of the Contras in Nicaragua was revealed. He weathered that storm. But during the Congressional investigations bits of embarrassing information were exposed. One was that Reagan's CIA, under the direction of William Casey, financed, produced and disseminated an assassination manual entitled “Psychological Operations in Guerrilla War” which recommended “selective use of violence and propaganda” and examined various ways to assassinate legally elected government officials in target countries.
The expose' of this secret program clearly destabilized relations with some allies and non-aligned nations and strained relationships with others. But it was clearly in direct contravention to Reagan’s own 1981 executive order, which explicitly banned assassinations. While the US media and Reagan himself denounced terrorism as “uncivilized and barbaric” the US policies continued to use and to espouse these very methods when it found them useful. (See http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp ).
In 1984 Reagan authorized the CIA to equip and train a wide range of terrorist organizations in the Middle East. This directive was so loosely stated that it was understood by intelligence officials (as reported in the Washington Post in 1984) as a virtual “go-any-where-do-anything-license-to-kill”. The results of these aggressive policies were a wave of terror and death emanating from both the US, on one side, and its targets in the conflict on the other. Often innocent civilians were caught in the cross-fire. Or sometimes they were purposely targeted by US operatives to generate terror.
In an example of the latter case, in March of 1985 a car bomb exploded a few meters from the Beirut, Lebanon residence of the Islamic cleric known as Sayyed Fadallah, a Moslem cleric sympathetic to the cause of the Palestinians and insurgents in Lebanon was the target—he escaped injury. At the time it was widely believed to be a CIA sponsored attack, but there was no firm proof. The attack killed more than 80 civilians, mostly women and children exiting from a near-by mosque, and injured over two-hundred. The perpetrators remained uncertain until, years later, CIA director William Casey admitted his personal culpability to journalist Bob Woodward for the attack on Fadallah. A much later interview with Bob McFarlane is revealing on this same subject. See: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html.
Then in 1986, President Reagan decided to attack Libya. According to McFarlane's account, the attack had been planned for nine months--and thus the proximate and published cause of the attack--the bombing of a Berlin night club where a US trooper was killed was simply a cover story. However, reading McFarlane’s statements, one surmises that the actual cause was domestic politics.
In those years the Reagan administration had been frustrated and buffeted by a number of overseas setbacks (the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon, the abduction of the CIA’s Beirut Chief, William Buckely, the bombing of the US Beirut embassy annex in September 1984, and the hijacking of TWA 847 (in June 1985). All of these events--many which were responses to CIA covert actions, caused the administration to appear weak and indecisive.
For domestic political reasons something had to be done to reverse that trend in the public perceptions. Though the “just do something” school of foreign policy is probably not the most sensible route to follow, frightened and worried heads of state and threatened politicians often do just that. The plan to bomb Libya appears to have been hatched by McFarlane for just that specific purpose---to satisfy a domestic audience and boost the President’s popularity, among other even more mundane concerns. You choose which was more prominent in the President’s mind. (See: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html)
Libya is a small (about the size of the State of Alaska)undeveloped desert country on the north coast of Africa, with a population of a about 3.5 million. In 1969, Muammar Qaddafi seized power and hewed to an independent socialist and pro-communist line. He used his nation’s oil wealth to confront the US in several areas, but mostly by sponsoring independence movements and left-wing insurgencies in several countries from Northern Ireland to the Philippines (See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=us+attack+on+libya+1986&aq=0&oq=US+attack+on+Libya&aqi=g1).
One of his more independent and "pro-statist" moves was his 1973 declaration to extend Libya’s territorial control from the normal 12-mile limit to the entire Gulf of Sidra, a wide embayment enclosed by two Libyan coastal promontories. The Gulf of Sidra is about three-hundred miles across and and about ninety miles wide, or about the size of the Ionian Sea (which incidentally is claimed by Hellenic Republic its territorial waters). At the time, in the late 1980s, Libya was weakly defended, it had no significant naval forces, a clear, dry, desert-climate (which permitted easy bomb-targeting), and its leader was and remains a blustering, uncompromising man who was easily demonized in the press. See McFarlane interview: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/mcfarlane.html.
The history of the Libya-US relationship was marred by a series of naval and aerial skirmishes in the Gulf of Sidra which continued over several years. The US acknowledges only a 12 mile limit and maintains that the Gulf of Sidra is part of international waters. To underscore this fact aggressively, President Ronald Reagan sent the US Sixth Fleet into the Gulf for naval maneuvers and to “show the flag”.
Once the Fleet's ships entered the area considered by Libya as their territorial waters, the US ships were followed and harassed by Qaddafi’s small-boat navy. The unequal confrontation resulted in the downing of two Libyan aircraft in 1981, then two Libyan radio ships were sunk by the US in March of 1986, followed by the sinking of a Libyan-Navy patrol-boat, soon afterward a similar fate befell another Libyan vessel later in March 1986.
In April, 1986, Muammar al-Qaddafi, in retaliation, or at least as claimed by the CIA, ordered an attack on an American-frequented night-club, known as “La Belle”, in what was then East Berlin. One American soldier was killed, several civilians and many others were injured in the attack. The allegation was based on a CIA intercept of an incriminating message from Libya to its embassy in East Berlin.
On the 15th of April, 1986 with the CIA report in his hand, President Reagan spoke to the US nation and claimed he had the right to protect Americans from attack anywhere in the world, and with that, he launched a punitive bombing raid, code named “Operation El Dorado” on Libya.
More than 45 planes flew from aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean and from land bases in Great Britain to Tripoli and Benghazi where they dropped over three hundred and fifty bombs and laser guided missiles on military installations, and on Qaddafi’s home-compound. Qaddafi's compound was the primary target. Many other non-military targets in those cities were hit as well. Several schools were accidentally hit as was the French embassy in Tripoli. The BBC reported that the raid killed more than two hundred civilians. Quaddafi's’s infant daughter, Hanna, was killed and two of Gaddafi's young sons were injured.
It is claimed that both the governments of Italy and Malta warned Quaddafi of an imminent attack by US planes. The foreign minister of Malta is said to have called Qaddafi and warned him that unidentified planes were passing overhead (above Malta) and that he and his family had better take-cover immediately . Qaddafi and his family were in the process of escaping when the guided missiles struck. The attack on Gaddafi's home compound--where several of his relatives were killed--indicates that the attack was in effect a massive assassination plot. Reagan simply wanted to rid himself of Quaddafi. Aside from the illegality of assinations of heads of state and the extensive physical effects of the bombing raid and the death of several hundred civilians, the end-effects of the attack on Libya's "behavior" toward the US were minimal. Of course if they had killed Quaddafi they might have had more effect. (See: Terrorism and Foreign Policy, by Paul Pillar)
The hoped for "elimination" of Qaddafi, and the possible deterrent and disruption effect from such a military maneuver did not materialize. Libya’s leader continued to do what he was doing--support of regimes not necessarily in favor in Washington--and in fact the American bombing raid appeared to increase the Libyan leaders popularity and helped to solidify his domestic support and popularity around the world.
There is no sound data to suggest that blunt military force--such as the Libya air raid-- on so called “terrorists” have any deterrent long lasting effect. First, as in the case of Libya the effects though widespread, had little impact on Qaddafi actually conducting additional retaliatory attacks.
The Reagan attacks actually served to strengthen Qaddafi’s political position and galvanized public opinion, in the Arab world against the US. If it is true that Libya planned and executed the Pan Am bombing, it probably made it easier for Qaddafi to organize such counter attacks. The over the top US reaction, helped to alienate the civilian population of surrounding states and increase recruits, resources and sympathy for Libya.
Finally, the bombing raid was only part of a series of strikes and counter strikes, attack and retaliation that is a well known pattern. Thus the probable Libyan -sponsored attack on Pan Am 103 was a not an unexpected response, from a state leader who had suffered through an assassination attempt, the loss of his infant daughter and the serious injuries to his sons. Reagan and his advisors were probably hoping that the raid and the assassination would have put an end to Qaddafi as an irritant and the results would have been all positive for the Reagan administration. But events did not go the way they were planned. Quaddafi escaped assassination—and went on to fight another day. Reagan kicked over the Libyan beehive and then stepped back hoping for disruption and deterrence…and a boost in his popularity ratings.
But the angry bees went on to sting others—such as the innocent civilians on the Pan Am 103 flight. Who bears responsibility for the tragedy? Is it the angry bees we blame, who were after all, quiescent in their nests and would have stung no one had they been left undisturbed? Or was it the one who kicked the hive over?
From this vantage point…more than twenty years later..when the pain of the great losses suffered continues to affect us as we recall all those young people on that plane would have gone on to productive careers, married, had children. We must ask ourselves, was Reagan’s act of unnecessary belligerence as a motive for retaliation worth it? What did he accomplish? Quaddafi is still in power. He still claims the entire Gulf of Sidra for Lybia. What has changed? From this point of view…I say---No.
Get the picture?
rjk
Friday, August 14, 2009
WHAT ARE THEY THINKING IN WASHINGTON?
Republicans didn’t lift a finger, write a letter of complaint, or raise their voices while President Bush, manufactured a phony reason ( a causus belli) for a war in Iraq, and in its pursuit spent (or will spend) some $3 trillion taxpayer’s dollars. The vast costs over the next decade may, as some have estimated, reach to the level of $8000 dollars for every man woman and child in the US. Even today we continue to spend approximately twelve billion dollars a month to maintain our military forces in Iraq where they remain encamped and reviled by the Iraqis as occupiers. In Afghanistan , the still burgeoning war in that blighted land is estimated to have cost nearly one-quarter of a trillion dollars to date---and according to Secretary of Defense Gates’ dreary prediction in today’s (August 14, 2009) newspapers “the fighting will go on (there) for several years”.
But in Washington, an attempt by our President to spend a little money on health care is met with Republican (and Blue Dog Democrat) bellicosity and chicanery! The present bill in Congress (HR3200), would, by some estimates, cost between $600 billion ( $0.6 trillion) and $1 trillion dollars over the next ten years. Using the lower estimate that’s just 50 months or a bit more than 4 years worth of Iraq War expenses! Or only a fifth, or 20%, what Bush spent on a needless, bloody, war that brought only misery and death. The proposed health bill is a considerable expenditure, but is only a small fraction of what we have wasted on military adventurism during the Bush years. Rather than weaken us, this bill would improve our nation’s over-all health , make our businesses more competitive, reduce health costs, and provide care for the vast majority of the 30-40 million Americans who now have no health insurance.
I find it ironic and hypocritical that the anti-health-bill cabal of Republican Senators and Congressman (and some Democrats too) the vast majority of whom heartily supported the disastrous Bush-Cheney’s Iraq War and remained silent while its costs skyrocketed to astronomical levels as they continued to support it to the very end. They kept mum while slurries of taxpayer dollars were funneled into the coffers of the large military-industrial corporations--which after-all do provide largess to many in Washington.
However, when it comes to addressing the health needs of the nation’s families and those of the common working man these Congressmen and women are roused to anger and bellicosity in inequitable objection. What can one think of their behavior? And what must we imagine of those who, I might add here, while they are speaking so eloquently and angrily to deny access to health care to their constituents and the rest of us, are the happy beneficiaries of the best, most expensive, government-sponsored health-care system in the nation—just a mere shadow of which they aim to deny to the rest of us. Sadly, I suppose it is very clear what they are thinking.
RJK
But in Washington, an attempt by our President to spend a little money on health care is met with Republican (and Blue Dog Democrat) bellicosity and chicanery! The present bill in Congress (HR3200), would, by some estimates, cost between $600 billion ( $0.6 trillion) and $1 trillion dollars over the next ten years. Using the lower estimate that’s just 50 months or a bit more than 4 years worth of Iraq War expenses! Or only a fifth, or 20%, what Bush spent on a needless, bloody, war that brought only misery and death. The proposed health bill is a considerable expenditure, but is only a small fraction of what we have wasted on military adventurism during the Bush years. Rather than weaken us, this bill would improve our nation’s over-all health , make our businesses more competitive, reduce health costs, and provide care for the vast majority of the 30-40 million Americans who now have no health insurance.
I find it ironic and hypocritical that the anti-health-bill cabal of Republican Senators and Congressman (and some Democrats too) the vast majority of whom heartily supported the disastrous Bush-Cheney’s Iraq War and remained silent while its costs skyrocketed to astronomical levels as they continued to support it to the very end. They kept mum while slurries of taxpayer dollars were funneled into the coffers of the large military-industrial corporations--which after-all do provide largess to many in Washington.
However, when it comes to addressing the health needs of the nation’s families and those of the common working man these Congressmen and women are roused to anger and bellicosity in inequitable objection. What can one think of their behavior? And what must we imagine of those who, I might add here, while they are speaking so eloquently and angrily to deny access to health care to their constituents and the rest of us, are the happy beneficiaries of the best, most expensive, government-sponsored health-care system in the nation—just a mere shadow of which they aim to deny to the rest of us. Sadly, I suppose it is very clear what they are thinking.
RJK
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
SOME INTERESTING FACTS CONCERNING THE US HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
Concerning how long we live: Longevity
In 2000 the World Health Organization studied health and related factors of the world’s nations. One of these measures was longevity ranking. How long a citizen lived in good health. Of the 191 nations evaluated Japan ranked 1, while the US ranked 24th . The US placed just above the nation of Cyprus (25th) and below nations such as Iceland, Finland and Malta. Yes the citizens of those nations live longer than those in US. In these rankings Australia came in at number 2, and all of Western Europe ranked in the single digits, for instance :France (3), Italy (4). Canada was ranked 12. The citizenry of the USA, the richest most powerful nation in the world, do not live as long as those in much smaller, weaker, and poorer nations! Why? Could it be that we have no national health care system? The US government has no actual stake it its citizen’s health. Is that why? Note that the citizens of Canada (a nation much abused in our TV adverts) live longer on average than a US citizen. Why?
Concerning how our health care system functions: Health System Performance
The WHO estimated the functioning of a nation’s health care system using eight parameters. In these 1997 rankings the US placed 71 out of 191 nations listed. While nations such as France (4), Italy (3) Spain(6), Greece (11), UK(24), Norway(18), Belgium, Sweden(21), as well as little Oman, tropical Jamaica, desertified Morocco ranked well above us. We were in the company of nations such as Bhutan (73), Nicaragua (74) and (pre-US invasion) Iraq (75). Why?
Canada which US anti-health-care advocates seems to like to use in their scare tactics was ranked at 35 in health care performance. Canada and the US are found on the same NA continent. We have similar ethnic origins and speak the same language (well nearly). We have a similar economic system, government and judiciary. Why such a disparity in health care rankings? Could it be their much maligned (here in the US) health care system is better than our system of unregulated insurance companies?
Concerning how much we spend on health care: Cost
Total Health Care Expenditures: This is where the US ranks highest--in the cost of its health-care system. We expended (2005 figures) more than 15.2% of our GDP on health care and rank number two on the chart, just under the Marshal Islands (rank = 1) which spends 15.4% of its GDP, and above Niue (r= 3) Timor (r= 4) and Kiribati (r=5). Who even knows where these nations are?
On the other hand France, Italy, Germany, and Canada…all those nations with better longevity figures and health care performance rankings--- spend less of their GDP than we do.
Another Evaluation: Preventable Deaths…the US ranks last!
In a 2008 study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (See http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN07651650 --downloaded Aug 13, 2009) researchers Ellen Nolte and Martin McKee tracked patient deaths that they deemed could have been prevented by access to timely and effective health care. They ranked 19 industrialized nations on how they performed in avoiding unnecessary or preventable deaths . The researchers considered deaths before age 75 from various causes including heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes , certain bacterial infections and post operative care. The authors considered the results an important way to assess the functioning of a nation’s health care system. Of the nineteen nations France, Japan, and Australia rated the best and the US the worst (at the bottom).
In the study France did the best with less than 65 deaths deemed preventable per 1000 people in the 2002-2003 study period, while Japan had 71.2 and Australia 71.3. The US rate was 109.7 cases deemed “preventable deaths” per 100,000 citizens. After the top three, Spain was 4th, followed by Italy, Canada, Norway, Netherlands, Sweden, Greece, Austria, Germany, Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, UK, Ireland and Portugal…the US was last.
In a comparison of previous rankings in the years 1997-1998 the authors note that France and Japan were first and second, while the US was 15th in these earlier rankings. Thus over the period the US had declined by four rankings in the current study. During the period studied the authors conclude that all the nations made progress in decreasing the number of “unnecessary or preventable deaths” noting that on average the numbers of preventable deaths declined by 16% for the 19 nations studied. They noted however that the US decline was only one-fourth of the average value of the other industrialized nations, or only 4%.
The authors concluded that using if the US health care system performed as well as those of the top three countries more than 100,000 fewer US citizens would die each year. These “unnecessary” deaths constituted 23% of overall male deaths and 32% of female deaths in each year in the US.
Is there some common thread we might detect among those nations which have better health care, lower morbidity (sickness) and lower rates of mortality?
Yes it is obvious--those nations such as France, Japan, Italy, Greece, UK and ……yes Canada…. all have universal health care systems in which the central government oversees and regulates the operation and function of health care insurers and health care professionals. The results—are clearly superior to our unregulated, expensive and ineffective system. Those who continue to oppose change in our health care system may have to pay for it---not with higher taxes but with a shorter, less healthful life…for themselves and their children.
What are these activists in the town hall meetings trying to prevent?
Better health care?
Are they against the possibility of living a longer more healthful life?
Are they against lowering costs?
Or are they simply ill informed unthinking dupes of the giant HMOs, and insurance companies?
Concerning how long we live: Longevity
In 2000 the World Health Organization studied health and related factors of the world’s nations. One of these measures was longevity ranking. How long a citizen lived in good health. Of the 191 nations evaluated Japan ranked 1, while the US ranked 24th . The US placed just above the nation of Cyprus (25th) and below nations such as Iceland, Finland and Malta. Yes the citizens of those nations live longer than those in US. In these rankings Australia came in at number 2, and all of Western Europe ranked in the single digits, for instance :France (3), Italy (4). Canada was ranked 12. The citizenry of the USA, the richest most powerful nation in the world, do not live as long as those in much smaller, weaker, and poorer nations! Why? Could it be that we have no national health care system? The US government has no actual stake it its citizen’s health. Is that why? Note that the citizens of Canada (a nation much abused in our TV adverts) live longer on average than a US citizen. Why?
Concerning how our health care system functions: Health System Performance
The WHO estimated the functioning of a nation’s health care system using eight parameters. In these 1997 rankings the US placed 71 out of 191 nations listed. While nations such as France (4), Italy (3) Spain(6), Greece (11), UK(24), Norway(18), Belgium, Sweden(21), as well as little Oman, tropical Jamaica, desertified Morocco ranked well above us. We were in the company of nations such as Bhutan (73), Nicaragua (74) and (pre-US invasion) Iraq (75). Why?
Canada which US anti-health-care advocates seems to like to use in their scare tactics was ranked at 35 in health care performance. Canada and the US are found on the same NA continent. We have similar ethnic origins and speak the same language (well nearly). We have a similar economic system, government and judiciary. Why such a disparity in health care rankings? Could it be their much maligned (here in the US) health care system is better than our system of unregulated insurance companies?
Concerning how much we spend on health care: Cost
Total Health Care Expenditures: This is where the US ranks highest--in the cost of its health-care system. We expended (2005 figures) more than 15.2% of our GDP on health care and rank number two on the chart, just under the Marshal Islands (rank = 1) which spends 15.4% of its GDP, and above Niue (r= 3) Timor (r= 4) and Kiribati (r=5). Who even knows where these nations are?
On the other hand France, Italy, Germany, and Canada…all those nations with better longevity figures and health care performance rankings--- spend less of their GDP than we do.
Another Evaluation: Preventable Deaths…the US ranks last!
In a 2008 study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (See http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN07651650 --downloaded Aug 13, 2009) researchers Ellen Nolte and Martin McKee tracked patient deaths that they deemed could have been prevented by access to timely and effective health care. They ranked 19 industrialized nations on how they performed in avoiding unnecessary or preventable deaths . The researchers considered deaths before age 75 from various causes including heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes , certain bacterial infections and post operative care. The authors considered the results an important way to assess the functioning of a nation’s health care system. Of the nineteen nations France, Japan, and Australia rated the best and the US the worst (at the bottom).
In the study France did the best with less than 65 deaths deemed preventable per 1000 people in the 2002-2003 study period, while Japan had 71.2 and Australia 71.3. The US rate was 109.7 cases deemed “preventable deaths” per 100,000 citizens. After the top three, Spain was 4th, followed by Italy, Canada, Norway, Netherlands, Sweden, Greece, Austria, Germany, Finland, New Zealand, Denmark, UK, Ireland and Portugal…the US was last.
In a comparison of previous rankings in the years 1997-1998 the authors note that France and Japan were first and second, while the US was 15th in these earlier rankings. Thus over the period the US had declined by four rankings in the current study. During the period studied the authors conclude that all the nations made progress in decreasing the number of “unnecessary or preventable deaths” noting that on average the numbers of preventable deaths declined by 16% for the 19 nations studied. They noted however that the US decline was only one-fourth of the average value of the other industrialized nations, or only 4%.
The authors concluded that using if the US health care system performed as well as those of the top three countries more than 100,000 fewer US citizens would die each year. These “unnecessary” deaths constituted 23% of overall male deaths and 32% of female deaths in each year in the US.
Is there some common thread we might detect among those nations which have better health care, lower morbidity (sickness) and lower rates of mortality?
Yes it is obvious--those nations such as France, Japan, Italy, Greece, UK and ……yes Canada…. all have universal health care systems in which the central government oversees and regulates the operation and function of health care insurers and health care professionals. The results—are clearly superior to our unregulated, expensive and ineffective system. Those who continue to oppose change in our health care system may have to pay for it---not with higher taxes but with a shorter, less healthful life…for themselves and their children.
What are these activists in the town hall meetings trying to prevent?
Better health care?
Are they against the possibility of living a longer more healthful life?
Are they against lowering costs?
Or are they simply ill informed unthinking dupes of the giant HMOs, and insurance companies?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
ABANDONED PYTHONS IN EVERGLADES AND LONG ISLAND TOO
Pythons on Long Island—never mind those in the Everglades?
Recent reports from Florida claim that pet-Burmese pythons have invaded Florida's Everglades. The common Burmese python is an easily purchased and inexpensive pet--when a yard-long youngster. But when it reaches full size--a length of twenty feet (or more) and weight of 200 pounds--it is too big and dangerous to keep. Then it is too-often released into the wild. See: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1028_051028_pythons.html (accessed June 18, 2009)
Florida Fish and Wildlife staff report that the first evidences of escaped Burmese pythons in Florida were made way back in 1979, when one was caught and removed from the park. Few were found after that, until 1995. Then, in the last couple of years (2001-2005) the species underwent a population explosion, with more than 200 of these big constrictors caught in the park, the largest one being 15 feet long. Recent reports have found that some of the smaller snakes collected in the 1.3 million acre reserve have "egg-scars", an indication that they were hatched in the wild and give further credence to the presence of a viable breeding population. Other reports indicate that these pythons..which can swim quite well--may be leaving the park's southern boundary and expanding their range south into the Florida Keys. Eight Burmese pythons were collected there as recently as March 2009. See: http://forums.ancientclan.com/showthread.php?t=8937.
The Burmese python is one of the largest snakes in the world. Females tend to be heavy bodied and may exceed fifteen feet in length. At sexual maturity they can lay a clutch of sixty eggs. In sixty days the eggs hatch into twenty inch long hungry hatchling's. This species is a common pet in Florida and elsewhere. Over six thousand were legally imported for the pet-trade and probably many thousand more were bred here in the US by snake fanciers.
The problem with this lovely, mottled dark brown and yellow snake native of Asia, Myanmar, and India, where it is represented by a subspecies found in restricted locations, is its growth. Well-fed it soon grows too big for its original owner to keep safely (See below July 1, 2009 story of a two-year old Florida child killed by a Burmese python.) Often the owner, with few options other than to euthanize the snake, may release the animal into the wild. Such actions have devastating consequences on native birds, mammals and reptiles. Particularly in the case of the Burmese since as an adult the Burmese python becomes an "apex predator" in the Everglades...since there are no species...not even the alligator--which it will not attack and attempt to eat.
These recent reports from Florida reminded me of an incident here on Long Island regarding an escaped exotic constrictor which occurred about a decade ago.
It wasn’t so very long ago, perhaps 1999, while I was working with a small archaeological field team in south-central LI in a thickly wooded, one-hundred acre site, south of the Country Road in the village of West Sayville. The islolated wooded parcel was surrounded by busy roads and suburban sprawl.
That day I was somewhere in the center of the parcel, using a transit to map several late-19th century and early 20th century building-ruins. The old structures, their ancient roofs collapsed onto their stone and brick foundations, were overgrown with mats of poison ivy, tangles of bittersweet and armored against human passage by viciously-barbed tangles of green brier. Using a brush hook, I cut away as much of the vegetation as was necessary to stand a survey rod up against the partly exposed foundation corner of a 19th century structure and then I walked back to the transit at the site master-stake to determine the location of it for the site map I was preparing.
Working in this manner I proceeded alone, taking transit-readings and moving my rod to various positions as I proceed along a narrow path which led toward the north end of the parcel. At one point I looked up from my field notebook, surprised to see a stout, middle aged woman walking toward me along the path. She wore a wide-brimmed hat pulled down over her light-colored hair and carried a split-wood basket on her arm.
“Hello there!” I called out, thinking to alert her to my presence.
Hearing my call, the woman stopped abruptly. She appeared startled. But seeing my red field-vest, my transit and the appurtenances of a surveyor, she seemed reassured, and slowly approached.
“We're conducting a field survey, on this property,”I called out to her reassuringly. “You may see two of my assistants down the path a-way. They’re digging test holes, down there.” I pointed south down the narrow path to where Bill Jensen and Toby Moore were working.
“Oh, I see. You do, the survey.” She spoke with a distinct, Slavic accent. Her clothes and appearance reminded me of the sturdy Polish and Ukrainian farm-wives I knew so well from my work in Riverhead Town.
“Yes”, I said, as I completed the last entry in my field book and stuffed it in the pocket of my field-vest. “And what are you doing way out here?” I asked.
“Oh, I search for—for ‘gryzbow' , the “fungee”. You English you say “mushrooms,” she added, with a smile that revealed a gold-capped tooth. As she spoke, she reached into her basket, and pulled back a damp cloth to reveal a colorful pile of local mushrooms. I peered in. Some were dark brown, others had white stems and red caps and some had some the brown caps with yellow, spongy-looking gills, while one, a large orange colored shelf fungus I recognized as Lyetiporus, the sulfur shelf or “chicken of the woods” mushroom. I knew that one was edible.
“So do you collect mushrooms here regularly?” I asked, as she carefully replaced the damp cloth.
“No, I come here to this place" she paused, seeming to search for the right words, "for my first time. I visit my sister, who lives near-by," she turned to point toward the South-Country-Road from which direction came the faint rumble of traffic through the woods.
“Ahh, well, good luck in your search,” I said, moving away to retrieve my transit-rod and place it at the opposite corner of another building-ruin.
“Vould you tell me someting?” she asked, as I passed by.
“Why yes, if I could.” I said, pausing and turning toward her.
“You know this place gut?”
“Well yes, I could say, I’ve lived in this Township for a good part of my life…and…and I know a bit about the local area too.”
“Are there ‘wezem’, I…I.. mean... snakes here?”
“Snakes?”
She nodded her head in the affirmative and raised a thick, soil-grimed finger to her chin seeming to eagerly anticipate my response.
Well yes…but there are none that are poisonous here,” I said, attempting to assure her.
She listened carefully as I spoke.
“There are a good many garter snakes and black snakes around here, they seem to like to hide out in the ruins…you know…the old buildings.”
Unt ‘jak duza’ ahh.. I mean, how big these snakes are?” she interrupted, as I pulled the survey rod from its position.
“Oh the “garters” are about so big,” I said, holding my hand in the middle of the meter mark on the end of my survey rod to designate the length, “and the some of the black snakes are about a meter long,” I added, running my hand down along the stick to the black, meter-mark on the rod.
“Oh,” she said, nodding her head and staring at the survey stick. As she looked at me carefully her eyes closed to slits. She seemed not to believe me.
“But don’t worry,” I added quickly, “they’re not dangerous, and also there are no poisonous snakes here on Long Island.” I reassured her, again, with a broad smile.
“Oh, I not vorried,” she said, pulling a long, rusty kitchen knife out of her basket. Her gold tooth flashed as she smiled.
“So why do you ask?” I continued, thinking perhaps someone had misinformed her about the snakes on Long Island.
“Vell, back dere, next to that long rock vall......”
“Ahh yes, yes the old barn foundation…”
“I vas finding many big boletus there...they are good for to dry. ” She turned to point up the path to the foundation I had mapped earlier in the day.
“I collect gut ones close to the rocks, but there vas roots unt vines, so I pulled them away and as I did it, I see two beady eyes. They belong to a big ‘waz’—a big snake— on the other side of the vall.”
“Oh?” I murmured, a little disappointed, that I had missed making this interesting observation.
“Den it rose up tall, to look at me straight in the eye. Its fork-ed tongue—dis big it vas”, here she stuck out her thick, soil-begrimed index finger and marked the length on it. She continued, excitedly, “it flicked the tongue at me. I thought, perhaps it does not want to share these nice mushrooms with me….and anyway—I say to mysel—“Olga, you have near a basket full. For me and Velda, she is my sister, how much could we eat?”
“Oh it was perhaps a black snake or a black coach-whip snake….”
“It vas with brown patches with yellow and white,” responded Olga, firmly, who now seemed relieved to have gotten her story off her chest---- and much less confident about my knowledge of local herpetology.
“Oh,I see,” I said as I scratched my head pushing my green ASI baseball cap back on my head. “Brown and yellow, huh?” I mentally flipped through my old and well thumbed copy of “Reptiles of New York, Field Guide”. There were not that many species here on Long Island. There were small green snakes and mottled snakes, but none were brown and yellow and white.
“So how big was this snake?” I asked finally.
Olga raised her thick forearm so the wicker mushroom basket slipped back to her elbow. She pursed her lips and wrapped her thick fingers around her forearm. She held the clasped forearm and hand upright and closed her fingers on her raised hand together to form the rough shape of the head of a big snake. I got the picture. The snakes head and "neck" were as big as her hefty forearm.
“The part that was above the vall, it vas bigger den my arm, und the head, it vas bigger than my hand.” She said, looking at her arm again and nodded her head in approval of her estimate.
“Oh,” I said, the bafflement apparent in my voice. From the size of Olga’s thick forearm and wrist, what she seemed to be describing was a large---perhaps very large python or boa constrictor. But how could such a snake live free here in the woods of West Sayville?
Then I thought about it. Not far away were several large housing developments. This isolated forest area would be just the place to release a pet python when it got too big.
After Olga left, I walked back to search around the old barn foundation. Unlike Olga, I carried my long-handled “Sears Best” long-handled shovel for protection. After carefully peering over the wall to reassure myself there were no large reptiles on the other side, I climbed over. Between the wall and collapsed roof, I found a narrow muddy path and in the damp soil, I observed distinct tracks--long, smooth drag-tracks that could have been those of a very large python, but I saw nothing of the actual snake itself.
I peered into the shadowy pile of fallen timbers, and under a section of moss-encrusted cedar-shingled roof. In there were plenty of places for a large snake to hide. Small critters, rodents and vermin were common in there and would supply a hungry python with plenty of prey. Soon afterward, I began to inquire about similar observations.
I put together the following brief file.
See: Snake escapes in Hauppauge, LI http://wcbstv.com/watercooler/python.snake.middle.2.238268.html
Man takes 14 foot python for a walk on LI gets arrested.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Curtis-Dewberry-Arrested-For-Taking-Python-For-A-Walk-In-Long-Island/Article/20080131300944?lpos=Home_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_1300944_Curtis_Dewberry_Arrested_For_Taking_Python_For_A_Walk_In_Long_Island
Baby found with California King snake in its crib on LI. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,364875,00.html
Abandoned python 2.5 feet found in Central Park NY City…
Recently: Burmese Python kills Florida child in crib:http://www.metronews.ca/edmonton/world/article/254921--escaped-pet-python-strangles-two-year-old-girl-in-florida-home.
Get the picture?
rjk
Recent reports from Florida claim that pet-Burmese pythons have invaded Florida's Everglades. The common Burmese python is an easily purchased and inexpensive pet--when a yard-long youngster. But when it reaches full size--a length of twenty feet (or more) and weight of 200 pounds--it is too big and dangerous to keep. Then it is too-often released into the wild. See: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1028_051028_pythons.html (accessed June 18, 2009)
Florida Fish and Wildlife staff report that the first evidences of escaped Burmese pythons in Florida were made way back in 1979, when one was caught and removed from the park. Few were found after that, until 1995. Then, in the last couple of years (2001-2005) the species underwent a population explosion, with more than 200 of these big constrictors caught in the park, the largest one being 15 feet long. Recent reports have found that some of the smaller snakes collected in the 1.3 million acre reserve have "egg-scars", an indication that they were hatched in the wild and give further credence to the presence of a viable breeding population. Other reports indicate that these pythons..which can swim quite well--may be leaving the park's southern boundary and expanding their range south into the Florida Keys. Eight Burmese pythons were collected there as recently as March 2009. See: http://forums.ancientclan.com/showthread.php?t=8937.
The Burmese python is one of the largest snakes in the world. Females tend to be heavy bodied and may exceed fifteen feet in length. At sexual maturity they can lay a clutch of sixty eggs. In sixty days the eggs hatch into twenty inch long hungry hatchling's. This species is a common pet in Florida and elsewhere. Over six thousand were legally imported for the pet-trade and probably many thousand more were bred here in the US by snake fanciers.
The problem with this lovely, mottled dark brown and yellow snake native of Asia, Myanmar, and India, where it is represented by a subspecies found in restricted locations, is its growth. Well-fed it soon grows too big for its original owner to keep safely (See below July 1, 2009 story of a two-year old Florida child killed by a Burmese python.) Often the owner, with few options other than to euthanize the snake, may release the animal into the wild. Such actions have devastating consequences on native birds, mammals and reptiles. Particularly in the case of the Burmese since as an adult the Burmese python becomes an "apex predator" in the Everglades...since there are no species...not even the alligator--which it will not attack and attempt to eat.
These recent reports from Florida reminded me of an incident here on Long Island regarding an escaped exotic constrictor which occurred about a decade ago.
It wasn’t so very long ago, perhaps 1999, while I was working with a small archaeological field team in south-central LI in a thickly wooded, one-hundred acre site, south of the Country Road in the village of West Sayville. The islolated wooded parcel was surrounded by busy roads and suburban sprawl.
That day I was somewhere in the center of the parcel, using a transit to map several late-19th century and early 20th century building-ruins. The old structures, their ancient roofs collapsed onto their stone and brick foundations, were overgrown with mats of poison ivy, tangles of bittersweet and armored against human passage by viciously-barbed tangles of green brier. Using a brush hook, I cut away as much of the vegetation as was necessary to stand a survey rod up against the partly exposed foundation corner of a 19th century structure and then I walked back to the transit at the site master-stake to determine the location of it for the site map I was preparing.
Working in this manner I proceeded alone, taking transit-readings and moving my rod to various positions as I proceed along a narrow path which led toward the north end of the parcel. At one point I looked up from my field notebook, surprised to see a stout, middle aged woman walking toward me along the path. She wore a wide-brimmed hat pulled down over her light-colored hair and carried a split-wood basket on her arm.
“Hello there!” I called out, thinking to alert her to my presence.
Hearing my call, the woman stopped abruptly. She appeared startled. But seeing my red field-vest, my transit and the appurtenances of a surveyor, she seemed reassured, and slowly approached.
“We're conducting a field survey, on this property,”I called out to her reassuringly. “You may see two of my assistants down the path a-way. They’re digging test holes, down there.” I pointed south down the narrow path to where Bill Jensen and Toby Moore were working.
“Oh, I see. You do, the survey.” She spoke with a distinct, Slavic accent. Her clothes and appearance reminded me of the sturdy Polish and Ukrainian farm-wives I knew so well from my work in Riverhead Town.
“Yes”, I said, as I completed the last entry in my field book and stuffed it in the pocket of my field-vest. “And what are you doing way out here?” I asked.
“Oh, I search for—for ‘gryzbow' , the “fungee”. You English you say “mushrooms,” she added, with a smile that revealed a gold-capped tooth. As she spoke, she reached into her basket, and pulled back a damp cloth to reveal a colorful pile of local mushrooms. I peered in. Some were dark brown, others had white stems and red caps and some had some the brown caps with yellow, spongy-looking gills, while one, a large orange colored shelf fungus I recognized as Lyetiporus, the sulfur shelf or “chicken of the woods” mushroom. I knew that one was edible.
“So do you collect mushrooms here regularly?” I asked, as she carefully replaced the damp cloth.
“No, I come here to this place" she paused, seeming to search for the right words, "for my first time. I visit my sister, who lives near-by," she turned to point toward the South-Country-Road from which direction came the faint rumble of traffic through the woods.
“Ahh, well, good luck in your search,” I said, moving away to retrieve my transit-rod and place it at the opposite corner of another building-ruin.
“Vould you tell me someting?” she asked, as I passed by.
“Why yes, if I could.” I said, pausing and turning toward her.
“You know this place gut?”
“Well yes, I could say, I’ve lived in this Township for a good part of my life…and…and I know a bit about the local area too.”
“Are there ‘wezem’, I…I.. mean... snakes here?”
“Snakes?”
She nodded her head in the affirmative and raised a thick, soil-grimed finger to her chin seeming to eagerly anticipate my response.
Well yes…but there are none that are poisonous here,” I said, attempting to assure her.
She listened carefully as I spoke.
“There are a good many garter snakes and black snakes around here, they seem to like to hide out in the ruins…you know…the old buildings.”
Unt ‘jak duza’ ahh.. I mean, how big these snakes are?” she interrupted, as I pulled the survey rod from its position.
“Oh the “garters” are about so big,” I said, holding my hand in the middle of the meter mark on the end of my survey rod to designate the length, “and the some of the black snakes are about a meter long,” I added, running my hand down along the stick to the black, meter-mark on the rod.
“Oh,” she said, nodding her head and staring at the survey stick. As she looked at me carefully her eyes closed to slits. She seemed not to believe me.
“But don’t worry,” I added quickly, “they’re not dangerous, and also there are no poisonous snakes here on Long Island.” I reassured her, again, with a broad smile.
“Oh, I not vorried,” she said, pulling a long, rusty kitchen knife out of her basket. Her gold tooth flashed as she smiled.
“So why do you ask?” I continued, thinking perhaps someone had misinformed her about the snakes on Long Island.
“Vell, back dere, next to that long rock vall......”
“Ahh yes, yes the old barn foundation…”
“I vas finding many big boletus there...they are good for to dry. ” She turned to point up the path to the foundation I had mapped earlier in the day.
“I collect gut ones close to the rocks, but there vas roots unt vines, so I pulled them away and as I did it, I see two beady eyes. They belong to a big ‘waz’—a big snake— on the other side of the vall.”
“Oh?” I murmured, a little disappointed, that I had missed making this interesting observation.
“Den it rose up tall, to look at me straight in the eye. Its fork-ed tongue—dis big it vas”, here she stuck out her thick, soil-begrimed index finger and marked the length on it. She continued, excitedly, “it flicked the tongue at me. I thought, perhaps it does not want to share these nice mushrooms with me….and anyway—I say to mysel—“Olga, you have near a basket full. For me and Velda, she is my sister, how much could we eat?”
“Oh it was perhaps a black snake or a black coach-whip snake….”
“It vas with brown patches with yellow and white,” responded Olga, firmly, who now seemed relieved to have gotten her story off her chest---- and much less confident about my knowledge of local herpetology.
“Oh,I see,” I said as I scratched my head pushing my green ASI baseball cap back on my head. “Brown and yellow, huh?” I mentally flipped through my old and well thumbed copy of “Reptiles of New York, Field Guide”. There were not that many species here on Long Island. There were small green snakes and mottled snakes, but none were brown and yellow and white.
“So how big was this snake?” I asked finally.
Olga raised her thick forearm so the wicker mushroom basket slipped back to her elbow. She pursed her lips and wrapped her thick fingers around her forearm. She held the clasped forearm and hand upright and closed her fingers on her raised hand together to form the rough shape of the head of a big snake. I got the picture. The snakes head and "neck" were as big as her hefty forearm.
“The part that was above the vall, it vas bigger den my arm, und the head, it vas bigger than my hand.” She said, looking at her arm again and nodded her head in approval of her estimate.
“Oh,” I said, the bafflement apparent in my voice. From the size of Olga’s thick forearm and wrist, what she seemed to be describing was a large---perhaps very large python or boa constrictor. But how could such a snake live free here in the woods of West Sayville?
Then I thought about it. Not far away were several large housing developments. This isolated forest area would be just the place to release a pet python when it got too big.
After Olga left, I walked back to search around the old barn foundation. Unlike Olga, I carried my long-handled “Sears Best” long-handled shovel for protection. After carefully peering over the wall to reassure myself there were no large reptiles on the other side, I climbed over. Between the wall and collapsed roof, I found a narrow muddy path and in the damp soil, I observed distinct tracks--long, smooth drag-tracks that could have been those of a very large python, but I saw nothing of the actual snake itself.
I peered into the shadowy pile of fallen timbers, and under a section of moss-encrusted cedar-shingled roof. In there were plenty of places for a large snake to hide. Small critters, rodents and vermin were common in there and would supply a hungry python with plenty of prey. Soon afterward, I began to inquire about similar observations.
I put together the following brief file.
See: Snake escapes in Hauppauge, LI http://wcbstv.com/watercooler/python.snake.middle.2.238268.html
Man takes 14 foot python for a walk on LI gets arrested.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Curtis-Dewberry-Arrested-For-Taking-Python-For-A-Walk-In-Long-Island/Article/20080131300944?lpos=Home_Article_Related_Content_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_1300944_Curtis_Dewberry_Arrested_For_Taking_Python_For_A_Walk_In_Long_Island
Baby found with California King snake in its crib on LI. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,364875,00.html
Abandoned python 2.5 feet found in Central Park NY City…
Recently: Burmese Python kills Florida child in crib:http://www.metronews.ca/edmonton/world/article/254921--escaped-pet-python-strangles-two-year-old-girl-in-florida-home.
Get the picture?
rjk
Saturday, June 13, 2009
GREEN BREAD
Green Bread?
Our daily bread too often comes to us in cellophane or plastic packages and often from a long distance away. The source for our daily bread is no longer the local bakery, the majority of consumers in the US get this critical part of their diet from the vast bread industry, a $40 billion dollar a year enterprise. See: http://www.just-food.com/store/product.aspx?id=73540
Bread, as anyone who has ever tasted the home-baked product knows...has a short of time in which it can be described as fresh. Home-baked bread will stay edible, at most, for only a day. After that, it will make a good doorstop, or it must be grated into bread crumbs or perhaps be soaked in milk and eggs and used in making bread pudding, or mixed with other ingredients to make Italian meatballs--as my mother did. In fact, I remember well her bread draw where she purposely saved stale bread for that purpose. But it was good eating bread only for a very short time.
Our daily bread too often comes to us in cellophane or plastic packages and often from a long distance away. The source for our daily bread is no longer the local bakery, the majority of consumers in the US get this critical part of their diet from the vast bread industry, a $40 billion dollar a year enterprise. See: http://www.just-food.com/store/product.aspx?id=73540
At the present time, many of us are concerned about how our personal choices and actions affect the environment. How much heat-trapping carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases) are we producing? Or what decisions are we making which may encourage their production? What can we do to ameliorate the global warming phenomenon? Each day we y we make decisions in this realm which may have considerable impact on the environment. Each of us consumes our required compliment of bread and grains, the largest component of the food pyramid, and we may ask are we making "green" choices in this realm? Can we choose to eat "green bread"?
Bread, as anyone who has ever tasted the home-baked product knows...has a short of time in which it can be described as fresh. Home-baked bread will stay edible, at most, for only a day. After that, it will make a good doorstop, or it must be grated into bread crumbs or perhaps be soaked in milk and eggs and used in making bread pudding, or mixed with other ingredients to make Italian meatballs--as my mother did. In fact, I remember well her bread draw where she purposely saved stale bread for that purpose. But it was good eating bread only for a very short time.
Since modern industrial bakers are often situated a very far way from their consumer base...in fact often hundreds of miles away--traditional breads would be stale a long time when it reached the shelves of stores and the consumer. As a result commercial bakers have modified and altered the ingredients and finish of their baked products to adapt their production to the relatively long transportation distance and elapsed time and to overcome the normal short shelf-life of this product has. These modifications, we will see below, have geatly altered bread products and have added to the overall impact of commercial bread baking on the environment.
To achieve their goal of presenting a "fresh looking" long-lasting product on the shelves modern bulk-produced bread is started as a frothy, wet dough and then baked incompletly to a soft, damp consistency rather than the hard-baked texture one would see in a home-baked loaf. (I remember Mom tapping the crust of one of her loaves with a wooden spoon to hear the "thump" of doneness.) Detractors describe the typical modern loaf as having a soft, "gummy" inner texture and a brown but mushy so-called "crust" (a misnomer..since this bread exteior is not "crusty" at all). The partial-baking leaves a soggy loaf which adds only to the shelf life not to its taste or desireable texture. Then too, bakers add chemicals to their soft doughs with the aim of lengthening shelf life. The most common is a chemical emulsifier known as monoglyceride (and diglyceride). Emulsifiers aid blending of the component oils and water in the dough and aid in its frothing action which increases loaf-volume (so each loaf has more air and less actual product) and the glycerides also act as a softener to generate a softer crust and thus retard rapid drying of the baked product.
Unfortunately for the industry, when this partially-cooked, soft, moist-style, monoglyceride-altered-and-fluffed warm bread leaves the oven and is rapildyb packaged in its plastic bag--we have generated the perfect conditions to grow all sorts of molds and bacteria! One type, Bacillus mesentericus or "rope" and other molds were a common bread contaminant and a great problem in the early days of wholesale bread production. To prevent the growth of bacteria and molds on bread a chemical preservative which will kill these organisms was added to the ingredients. You will see listed on the label of all baked goods the fungicide of choice for modern wholesale bakers known as calcium proprionate. This substance, the calcium salt of proprionic acid, is one of the most common preservative substances antifungals and antibactreials used in baked products. In low concentrations, calcium propionate is effective against bacteria and fungi and is only slightly toxic to humans and is probably overall completely harmless to adults who ingest it with their morning toast. But it has been linked to irritability, restlessness, inattention and sleep disturbance in children. Some studies have linked it to allergic reactions in bakery workers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcium_propionate.
After the bread is baked it must be packaged, boxed, transported and finally delivered to distant stores and then to the final consumer. All of these pakaging and transportation steps have envirnomental impact and consequences. As noted above to keep bread fresh it must be protected from dehydration. Air-restricted packaging of bread product is essential. Drying is to be avoided since that causes the bread to feel and appear stale--however old it actually is. Some companies wrap their loaves in two bags--an inner cellophane bag and outer polypropelene bag both of which become part of the solid waste stream and will likely become part of a landfill. Finally, the loaves are boxed for transportation. These cartons may be of plastic (often these are a hard-clear-plastics composed of polycarbonate which generally contain the hazardous BPA (bisphenol-A) or in cardboard boxes. Both of these have an impact on the environment. As to the actual cost of physical delivery i.e. to transport bread and bread products hundreds or even thousands of miles to its destination and finally to the consumer, their are obcious transportation costs, oil, gas, wear-and-tear on vihicles, and the carbon burden of these actions are added to that of the actual baking of the bread. See: http://baking-management.com/production_solutions/choose-environmentfriendly-packaging-0209/
Another recent development in the wholesale bakery industry is the delivery of partially baked or frozen bread and cakes to retailers who then bake the products locally. I suggest that this is simply one more additional envirnmentally deleterios step which adds additioanl envirnmental costs to the production of breadstuffs since the freezing, transportation-in-the- frozen state, storage at the retailer as a frozen product, then baking on premises only adds to the impact of bread products over those that are baked fully in some distant place. The additional costs to the environment (energy to cool, freeze and remain in the frozen state) are probably very significant.
The soft texture of these wholesale breads has led to another even more wasteful practice. Bread toasting! The process of toasting bread grew from an optional preparration in earlier times an essential element of home bread preparation when most available bread to consumers was designed the modern soft-textured variety. To make packaged bread palatable it must be toasted. I submit that almost all modern breads are baked with the tacit understanding that that the product will most probably be toasted before eating. The practice of toasting bread uses a great quantity of electrical energy. For example a modern toaster uses about 1000 watts of electical power an hour, while a laptop consumes about 75 watts an hour. Thus your one time per day, four-minute bread-toasting each morning may consume about as much electical energy as your a laptop uses in an hour.
Now lets consider the alternative.
After the bread is baked it must be packaged, boxed, transported and finally delivered to distant stores and then to the final consumer. All of these pakaging and transportation steps have envirnomental impact and consequences. As noted above to keep bread fresh it must be protected from dehydration. Air-restricted packaging of bread product is essential. Drying is to be avoided since that causes the bread to feel and appear stale--however old it actually is. Some companies wrap their loaves in two bags--an inner cellophane bag and outer polypropelene bag both of which become part of the solid waste stream and will likely become part of a landfill. Finally, the loaves are boxed for transportation. These cartons may be of plastic (often these are a hard-clear-plastics composed of polycarbonate which generally contain the hazardous BPA (bisphenol-A) or in cardboard boxes. Both of these have an impact on the environment. As to the actual cost of physical delivery i.e. to transport bread and bread products hundreds or even thousands of miles to its destination and finally to the consumer, their are obcious transportation costs, oil, gas, wear-and-tear on vihicles, and the carbon burden of these actions are added to that of the actual baking of the bread. See: http://baking-management.com/production_solutions/choose-environmentfriendly-packaging-0209/
Another recent development in the wholesale bakery industry is the delivery of partially baked or frozen bread and cakes to retailers who then bake the products locally. I suggest that this is simply one more additional envirnmentally deleterios step which adds additioanl envirnmental costs to the production of breadstuffs since the freezing, transportation-in-the- frozen state, storage at the retailer as a frozen product, then baking on premises only adds to the impact of bread products over those that are baked fully in some distant place. The additional costs to the environment (energy to cool, freeze and remain in the frozen state) are probably very significant.
The soft texture of these wholesale breads has led to another even more wasteful practice. Bread toasting! The process of toasting bread grew from an optional preparration in earlier times an essential element of home bread preparation when most available bread to consumers was designed the modern soft-textured variety. To make packaged bread palatable it must be toasted. I submit that almost all modern breads are baked with the tacit understanding that that the product will most probably be toasted before eating. The practice of toasting bread uses a great quantity of electrical energy. For example a modern toaster uses about 1000 watts of electical power an hour, while a laptop consumes about 75 watts an hour. Thus your one time per day, four-minute bread-toasting each morning may consume about as much electical energy as your a laptop uses in an hour.
Now lets consider the alternative.
When I was a young boy, I walked up to the corner of 18th Avenue and in 86th Street in Bensonhurst Brooklyn, where I had been sent to buy a loaf of crusty Italian bread from Sam Pastore our local baker. Inside the big smiling man with oven pinked cheeks and a bald head stood in front of his great coal-fired ovens and proudly handed you over the fruit of his early-morning labors. There was no list of ingredients on the package, since there was no package. If you asked Sam, he would proudly tell you that the bread's ingredients were only four: the best flour, fresh water, yeast, and sea salt, and if you counted them, the wonderful toasted sesame seeds on the outside (were another). He might admit, if you pressed him, that for some soft-style bread loaves, he might add a little olive oil. "But it is Extra Virgin Bertolli oil" he would add. And at certain times in the fall of the year, before Thanksgiving, he might make a special loaf with pork cracklings in it called "pane di ciccioli" or cicoli bread.
The crust of Sam's bread was its own packaging. It didn't need preservatives, since the inside was sterile (from those long minutes in the hot oven) and the outside was a real hard crust. Hard and dry! You could leave that bread out all day and no molds or bacteria would grow on that surface. However, it rarely lasted around the kitchen long enough to go moldy. So in those days there was no wasted pagaging. I recall seeing our neighbors Mrs Caruso and Mrs Tanzi and even Johnny Rico's mother come into Sam's and simply pick out a loaf, pay for it and put their bread in their own cloth shopping bags. But to protect that tasty loaf from a kid's dirty hands, Sam always pulled out a sheet of nice white from his big roll of "bakery paper" and wrapped mine up neatly, then tied it with a thin white string that dangled down from overhead. It didnt always get home all neatly wrapped that way. Hurrying home, I often could not resist the mouthwatering aroma of that hot, crusty bread and too often I would surreptitiously unfold the end of the wrapping and work my fingers inside to tear off a small piece of crust. At home, Mom would carefully unwrap the loaf and seeing the missing piece give me a scolding. "How can I put this loaf on the table when it looks like a rat's been gnawing on it?" A pathetic sad face and a whining, "I couldn't help it Ma, I was so hungry," generally got me out of trouble. My mother understood bread and she liked Sam's bread as much as I did.
Sam's paper and even the string were recycled. But we didn't call it that then, Mom "saved" the string by winding it onto a big ball that we kept in the kitchen cabinet. The white paper was "used again" being kept as a good piece of scrap for Mom to write her market lists on, or to wrap my school lunch in. The paper from the ciccolo bread presented a problem for writing on with its prominent oil stains, but it didn't go to waste. Dad used all kinds of paper to start the furnace with.
Finally that Italian bread did not need toasting. It remained crusty and tasty for breakfast the next day. But that was sure to be the last of it. On the way home from school, I have to pick up up next evening's loaf.
So to help our planet, begin to think of ways to reduce wasteful consumption. Green bread may be a place to start.
Wholesale manufactured bread is definately not "green". It was and remains designed to be stored for long times and for its long shelf and transportation life, not for its taste or wholesomeness. It is simply another example of how the vast food industry has attempted to modify our habits to suit their needs..not those of the consumer or the protection of the environment. If you are interested in making "green"choices in your food purchases...you might begin by begining at your local bakery--they still exist and havent changed much from my boyhood days--- and ther buy their locally made bread products.
Wholesale manufactured bread is definately not "green". It was and remains designed to be stored for long times and for its long shelf and transportation life, not for its taste or wholesomeness. It is simply another example of how the vast food industry has attempted to modify our habits to suit their needs..not those of the consumer or the protection of the environment. If you are interested in making "green"choices in your food purchases...you might begin by begining at your local bakery--they still exist and havent changed much from my boyhood days--- and ther buy their locally made bread products.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)