The “Corruption Barometer”:
Category Archives: Americans for Americans
ORIGINALLY POSTED ON (AWOLL) AmericaOnCoffee
A GATHERING FOR INJUSTICE ON THE PEOPLE
BY PUBLIC SERVANTS
And We Need A Real People’s Court!
Who has the power to investigate and arrest corrupt public servants (especially those who are friends with judicial judges and the state bar associations)?
- FBI? Fail
- Police? Fail
- Sheriff? Fail
- FBI? Fail
- U.S. ATTORNEY? Fail
- State Attorney General? Fail
- Senate Judiciary Committe? Fail
Grocery Store Items Really Are Shrinking Before Our Eyes
By Mando Wood
No, your eyes aren’t playing tricks on you at the grocery store–that box of cereal really is shrinking.
It’s a phenomenon Edgar Dworsky, the consumer watchdog behind sites like ConsumerWorld.org and Mouseprint.org, calls “Downsizing”–products that are shrinking in size and not in asking price–and has been tracking since the early 1990s.
Chatting with Business Insider by phone Tuesday, Dworsky let us in on how he’s able to spot what the unpracticed consumer eye otherwise wouldn’t.
Commercial and Homemade Desserts – cutbacks because of ingredient costs
The courtesy of Pinterest
“I look through weekly sales ads. If, all of the sudden, I see mayonnaise that’s been 32 ounces is now 30, I go, is that a typo or have they downsized?” he said. Fueled by his hunch, he heads to the store advertising the product, then drives to several others in search of the older, larger product as evidence.
“It’s very rare to find the old and the new (product) on shelves at the same time,” he explained. “That in part is why downsizing is so sneaky. Even when the package is a different size, you almost never get to see them side by side.”
Once he’s sure a product’s been downsized, Dworksy snaps his own photos and shares them on MousePrint. He’ll find as many as a dozen products each year that have shrunk, but says there are always upticks when prices on commodities like gas and raw manufacturing materials shoot up.
Your reduced, bite-size lunch The courtesy of Pinterest
“In the past year or so all of the sudden it’s picked up again. Gas for was going for $4 a gallon and commodities were going up, (so) you kind of got the double whammy,” he said.
And since manufacturers would rather shrink their products than deal with consumer backlash over rising prices, they shave off a few ounces, come up with a clever new bottle design, or trim a few sheets of paper towels off the rolls. Peanut butter is a prime example, with brands like Peter Pan and Skippy downsizing from 18 oz. jars to 16.3 oz. amidst rising peanut costs, Dworksy said.
“Manufacturers feel that’s more comforting to consumers than seeing a price rise,” he added. “Of course, it’s kind of a false economy, because if you’re paying the same price and getting less, that’s a backdoor price increase and you’ll still have to go the store more often.”
The only way to really tell you’ve been duped is to check price stickers for unit price or price by weight–an extra step Dworsky knows from experience that busy shoppers aren’t likely to take (“Consumers are price conscious, they’re not net weight conscious”).
And even then, shoppers have to vote down product shrinkage with their feet–and their wallets. That means looking for other brands that haven’t changed their sizes and putting that in your cart instead.
Snacks perfected to the size of your taste buds
Courtesy of Pinterest
What Dworsky does isn’t easy work, and he hasn’t typically been eager to share his photos with the media in the past. However, he was kind enough to let Business Insider publish a few examples of his findings
Some may call this food size reduction, a business cutback
Breakfast the start of your day meal
U.S Soldier dragged through Mogadishu (2010)
It was a media war that the United States lost in Somalia, ironic since its involvement was forced by the pictures of famine-stricken people there. In one of the clearest and earliest examples of the CNN effect, the war was repeatedly dogged by the dozens of press photographers. It is an anticipating media, not snipers or enemy combatants, that greeted the U.S landing forces in Mogadishu in December 9th 1992.
For a war that began with memorable images, it is both fitting and ironic that it ended because of another set of dramatic images.
The photos taken by Canadian photographer Paul Watson, of a dead American soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu spelled the beginning of the end for U.S.-U.N. peacekeeping force. Domestic opinion turned hostile as horrified TV viewers watched images of the bloodshed—-including this Pulitzer-prize winning footage of Somali warlord Mohammed Aideed’s supporters dragging the body of U.S. Staff Sgt. William David Cleveland through the streets of Mogadishu, cheering.
President Clinton immediately abandoned the pursuit of Aideed, the mission that cost Cleveland his life and gave the order for all American soldiers to withdraw from Somalia by March 31, 1994. Other Western nations followed suit.
When the last U.N. peacekeepers left in 1995, ending a mission that had cost more than $2 billion, Mogadishu still lacked a functioning government. The battle deaths, and the harrowing images prompted lingering U.S. reluctance to get involved in Africa’s crises, including the following year’s genocide in Rwanda. In 1996, Osama bin Laden cited the incident as proof that the U.S. was unable to stomach casualties: when “one American was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear.” Never before or since had a photo altered a nation’s political destinies so much so.
[In the topmost photo, the soldier’s genitals are exposed. When Time magazine decided to print it, they decided to cover them up in a controversial decision. Right after Watson took that photo, the crowd turned more violent, and they forced him to enter into a leaving car. He bolted from it and took the middle picture. The people in that photo looked a lot meaner and their eyes were focused on Watson, who defied the order to leave. It was this middle picture that AP ran (AP had tough policies against nudity). Supreme irony was that, as Watson noted, “decision was made to censor something sexually offensive, while the outrageous violence of desecrating a corpse is deemed safe for the general public’s consumption.”
Time magazine’s Stephen Mayes replied: “[It] exposes the sensitivities of a nation that is militarily strong enough to confront one dead soldier but morally too insecure to risk the exposure of a single genital, even in such a non-sexual context?”]
Now that you are here: I am doing something crassly commercial here. I just signed up for Patreon. Patreon is a fundraising platform. In their words, “Patreon is an Internet-based platform that allows content creators to build their own subscription content service.” As you may notice in last few years, I have been posting very infrequently. But I want IP to go on for a long time and be sustainable. Linking a monetary value to a new post (not a ‘monthly salary’ — which is another way of doing Patreon) should give me a marginal incentive to write more. As far as the blog is concerned, nothing will change. No paywalls. Patreon is more useful for YouTubers and podcasters, but let’s see how it goes for me: https://www.patreon.com/iconicphotos
Love and Betrayal in America
By Laila Lalami
Immigrants to America celebrate after taking the oath of citizenship at a 2007 naturalization ceremony in Pomona, California.PHOTOGRAPH BY DAVID MCNEW / GETTY
On a blazingly hot morning in July, 2000, I became an American. The ceremony took place thirty miles east of Los Angeles, in Pomona, at a venue ordinarily used for hosting the local county fair. It was a Wednesday, I remember, and I’d worn a pair of new shoes that blistered my feet. My husband was in the only suit he owned, the one he’d put on for our wedding. Ushers directed us to Building Four, where folding chairs were lined up in endless rows. The air smelled of cologne and cut flowers. I turned in my residency card, signed some paperwork, and posed for photographs. Venders hawked plastic folders for naturalization certificates. Then the audience fell quiet for “The Star-Spangled Banner.” A judge rose to the dais and, before administering the oath, gave a homily about the rights and responsibilities that awaited citizens. I raised my right hand.
It was love that brought me to that moment. I’d fallen in love with a man, and in the process adopted his country. I was born and raised in Morocco, with its extraordinary arts, rich culture, diverse languages—and authoritarian rule. Every night, the eight-o’clock news on television began with an overview of the King’s activities: he held a council of ministers, he met with this prince or that President, he cut the ribbon to inaugurate a new hotel or golf course. Criticism of him landed tens of thousands of people in jail; many were disappeared, exiled, or murdered. The police, the judiciary, and parliament were little more than extensions of his power. If my father spoke about politics at the dinner table, my mother would tell him to lower his voice; the neighbors might hear.
Though I had many disagreements with the policies of its government, America was also, for me, an idea, a constant struggle toward a more perfect union. Long before I set foot in the United States, I studied its Constitution and its history. Still, I spent weeks studying for my citizenship exam. My husband helped by quizzing me while we were eating dinner or washing dishes. How many voting members are there in the House of Representatives? Four hundred and thirty-five. Who wrote the Declaration of Independence? Thomas Jefferson. What stops a branch of government from being too powerful? Checks and balances.
Sixteen years later, I have a family and a home here. But while my life is in many ways happy and fulfilling, it has never been comfortable. America embraces me with one arm, but it pushes me away with the other. At the airport, I’m regularly singled out for a “random” pat-down or an additional security screening. At cocktail parties, I can always count on one inebriated soul to marvel at the fact that my family “allowed” me to have an education. When I give book talks, I’m often asked about Islam and terrorism, the two subjects often intertwined in the questioner’s mind.
In December, 2015, just five days after the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California, Donald Trump, then still a reality-television star and real-estate billionaire struggling to distinguish himself from the dozen other Republican candidates for the Presidency, released a statement on “preventing Muslim immigration.” It called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering our country until our representatives can figure out what is going on.” The statement was remarkable for its clarity, and yet journalists, politicians, and the public immediately began to debate the intention behind it, as if the words themselves could not be counted on to be an appropriate reflection of it. Did Trump mean this literally? Should he be taken seriously?
Last week, he signed an executive order that banned all refugees from entering the United States for a period of a hundred and twenty days, and banned visitors and green-card holders from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and Yemen from entering the country for ninety days. (Syrian refugees were banned indefinitely.) The order took effect immediately, stranding passengers who were already en route to the United States, and breaking up families by separating husbands from wives, brothers from sisters, daughters from mothers. None of this seemed to matter to the President or his aides, who took to calling the executive order a “travel ban” rather than a Muslim ban, even though it targets Muslim countries only, makes exceptions for Christians refugees, and exempts Israelis born in Iraq and Iran. The ban was just a form of extreme vetting and a temporary measure, the President’s press secretary insisted, as if people stranded abroad could simply reapply for entry in three or four months. But, in that time, what will happen to their jobs in America? Their homes? Their families?
While these lives were being destroyed, the President logged on to Twitter. He called the coverage he’d received in the Washington Post “false and angry”; asked for “somebody with aptitude and conviction” to take over the “failing” New York Times; belittled Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain as “weak on immigration”; mocked Senator Chuck Schumer as “Fake Tears”; and fired Sally Yates, the Acting Attorney General, who refused to defend his ban in the courts. Chaos continued at airports, with some Customs and Border Protection officers following court orders that stayed the ban, and others refusing to comply with them.
I have seen this story before, in the country where I was born. There, too, the law was applied arbitrarily, dissenting public servants were removed from office, and journalists either repeated what they were told or were treated as the enemy. At the moment, some of my friends, colleagues, and neighbors can no longer leave the United States for fear of not being allowed back. My own family worries what will happen to me if the ban is expanded to new countries. “What will we do?” my daughter keeps asking me. “What will you do?”
I’ve protested the President’s ban and donated money to the A.C.L.U. and other civil-rights organizations. I call my congressman and senators every day. But I am under no illusions about what the future might hold for us.
Citizenship ceremonies are still held at the Fairplex in Pomona—every year, thousands of people take the oath there, just as I did. The fairgrounds once served a different purpose. During the Second World War, it became an assembly center for thousands of Japanese-Americans—people who had committed no crime, but whose President designated them a danger through an executive order. From the Fairplex, these Americans were transported to an internment camp in Wyoming, where they were held until the end of the war. Last summer, a plaque was installed at the Fairplex to commemorate them. It reads, “May such injustice and suffering never recur.”
Laila Lalami is the author, most recently of “The Moor’s Account.”Read more » source
As you continue to bash your President (going-with-the-flow) and crooked politician and judges bash the people …. the more America will fall. Quietly observe the evil, greedy temperment of officials. Then youb will understand the politics of modern-day Nazism. The more unaware you are…the more difficult life will be for laws, jobs, housing and costs—
An AmericaOnCoffee Commentary
Get to the nuts and bolts of the story!!
The trending word is NOT “Donald Trump or Trumping”! The gust of the story is “Treason”!
KNOW YOUR NATION, ITS HISTORY, CONSTITUTION, STRENGTHS AND HISTORICAL FAILS!
If you cannot uphold patriotism in journalism… YOU are a perpetrator of fake news… and, too…you are shainted painted, lost-millennial hipsters. When it comes to patriotism, you have no understanding of love and respect to: God, family and country. Politically and technologically, you are bot-byte co-dependent. Three tips:
- Report clear.
- Stay with facts.
- Stop the distracts.
Above is an AWOLL commentary (AmericaOnCoffee)
He Dares Call It Treason
Jonathan Ernst / Reuters DAVID A. GRAHAM
Even if the president is semi-joking, that doesn’t make his accusations against Democrats and an FBI agent any less dangerous.
U.S. should take care of people who lost jobs to automation By Janet Nguyen and David Brancaccio
With the advances in technology that we’re seeing, many people are worried about a coming robopocalypse.
Half of today’s work activities could be automated by 2055, according to a report from McKinsey Global Institute released last year. And we’re already seeing some of the consequences in areas like the manufacturing industry, where about 5 million jobs have been lost since 2000.
As these threats loom, a project called GenForward surveyed millennials across different racial groups to find out more about their experiences with technology.
In this survey, GenForward asked how worried millennials are about their job prospects and whether they think the government should have a role in helping displaced workers.
Worries about holding down a job
People of color are especially concerned or at least somewhat concerned about being able to find a job in their line of work as technology progresses.
Keep in mind that many millennials started entering the job market during the Great Recession.
“There was a kind of contraction in terms of jobs that were available, and then there are also the narratives about technology,” said Cathy Cohen, the lead investigator for GenForward. “I think they have a real fear of being able to find a job — and not just a job, but a good job that can support them and their families in a kind of moment when in fact we see an explosion of AI and robotics and computers taking jobs away.”
About 16 percent of African-American millennials say they’re “very concerned” — the highest figure out of all four racial groups.
While jobs report after jobs report has shown a low overall unemployment rate, the unemployment rate for African-Americans over the past year is at 7.4 percent — twice as high as the white unemployment rate, which stands at 3.7 percent.
“There are many threats to that from discrimination and racism, but now also technology and kind of the outsourcing of jobs to other parts of the world,” Cohen said.
Meanwhile, white millennials are the least worried about technological advances negatively affecting their employment prospects, with just 5 percent of members being “very concerned.”
What advances in technology will mean for jobs overall
Responses shifted a bit when GenForward asked millennials more generally if they think advances will increase or decrease the number of jobs in the U.S.
Read further from source: about the millenial job market