Showing posts with label Millions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Millions. Show all posts

Monday, April 15, 2013

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Transcript



This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.



AMY GOODMAN: “What If We All Stopped Paying Taxes?” That’s Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.


Well, today is April 15th, Tax Day, a day when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war. In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings, post offices, weapons factories, to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, on missiles, on bombs.


According to a new pie chart released by the War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes go toward war in some form or other. To protest this, some Americans are taking a stand today by personally refusing to pay their federal taxes. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all or a portion of their federal income taxes, and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. One tax resister, Juanita Nelson of Massachusetts, has not paid federal income taxes since 1948.


JUANITA NELSON: I felt it was—from the beginning, it was part of a whole nexus of ideas, not just the tax refusal. Just I decided that I was a pacifist. And, for me, nonviolence, I would say, more than—what do you call it—pacifism, is a way of life. And I—my whole—since I was in my twenties, in particular, early twenties, it has always been my idea to try to go further and further to try to live what I believe. And that was certainly a very direct thing. You don’t like war? Don’t pay for it. Why should I pay for it?



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Juanita Nelson from a documentary, Death and Taxes. She hasn’t paid her federal taxes for more than 65 years.


Tax resistance has been a regular form of civil disobedience throughout American history. Most famously, the writer Henry David Thoreau refused to finance slavery and the Mexican-American War in 1847 by withholding his poll tax.


Well, for more, we’re joined by Ed Hedemann, a conscientious war tax resister who has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to nonprofits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. He’s a member of the War Resisters League, the U.S.’s oldest secular pacifist organization. In 1982, he helped found the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee to provide information and support to people considering war tax resistance. He is also author of War Tax Resistance: A Guide to Withholding Your Support From the Military.


Ed Hedemann, welcome to Democracy Now! You’re one of a couple dozen people in this country. You haven’t paid taxes for some, what, 40 years. Why did you stop? And what portion of your taxes don’t you pay?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I stopped after I refused induction in the military. This is in 1969. The government tried to draft me to go to war in Vietnam; I refused to go. A year later, I thought, well, it’s not good enough for me not to go and yet pay for others to go into the military, so I stopped paying the following year taxes to the IRS that eventually would help the government’s war in Vietnam and subsequent wars.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what happened to you? What does it mean? How did to figure out—what exactly do you do on Tax Day?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I refuse to pay 100 percent of my federal taxes, my federal income taxes. I pay Social Security, Medicare, state and local taxes, but none of the federal income taxes. But actually, in fact, I do pay them, just not to the IRS. I take the entire amount of money and reroute it to other organizations helping to build a better world rather than helping to kill people.


AMY GOODMAN: And what has the federal government responded?


ED HEDEMANN: Routinely I get letters, threatening letters from the IRS. They look for bank accounts. They look for property that I might own to seize. They look for salaries that I might have. I go out of my way to be uncollectible. I don’t have readily accessible bank accounts. I don’t have a salary. I’m self-employed. I have had salaries in the past. And I really don’t own any significant property. Now, the IRS has gone as far as to take me into federal district court. They did that in 1999 to get me to reveal sources of my assets, because the IRS has been unable to find anything significant to collect. I refused to give this information, and that was the end of it.


AMY GOODMAN: What did the judge do?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the judge—I said that, “Well, I’ve already paid my taxes to other organizations, not to the IRS. I cannot pay money to help kill people.” And I didn’t want to incriminate myself by giving this information to the IRS, a potential criminal investigation. The judge ignored everything except for the latter part and said that I didn’t have to give the information to the IRS because I might incriminate myself.


AMY GOODMAN: On Friday, we spoke to Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, retired Catholic bishop of Detroit. He’s been a leading voice for peace, justice and civil rights. He explained why he also refuses to pay his taxes.


BISHOP THOMAS GUMBLETON: I feel a good portion of those taxes goes to our war budget, which is our so-called defense budget, but it’s really a war budget. It’s the largest of any nation in the world. And years ago, Pope Paul VI said the arms race—and that’s what we are doing with our defense budget—is, in itself, an act of aggression against the poor. Using that money for weapons and strategies to use them is taking money away from the poor and causing them to starve. We should be using our natural resources and our wealth to promote development and to promote justice in the world. When you have a world where there’s such a gap between the rich and the poor, and such huge numbers suffering because of that, the church has a real responsibility to use whatever income it can bring to—I mean, our nation has a responsibility to use its income to help development happen, because that’s the basis for peace.



AMY GOODMAN: That is Detroit’s retired auxiliary bishop, Tom Gumbleton. He was in our studio for the hour on Friday. You can go to our website at democracynow.org to see the full interview with him.


The National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund is lobbying for a peace alternative for taxpayers. It would recognize the rights of conscientious objectors to war to not have to physically or financially contribute to war in any way. Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund explained how it would work.


ALAN GAMBLE: There would be a fund established within the federal Treasury that would accept the money of designated or verified conscientious objectors to all wars, and they would get a receipt from the federal Treasury, which they would attach along with their income tax forms when they send their taxes in. Then, all of their taxes would go into this federal special trust fund, which would then be allocated out to whichever government programs needed it, with the exception of things with a designated military purpose, such as Department of Defense.



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund. Ed Hedemann, are you for such a fund?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think it would be better that—if such a fund existed, but I wouldn’t participate in it, because part of the reason that I—well, first, that fund would be—the government would determine who is acceptable as a conscientious objector to military spending, and I think it ought to be up to the individual, not up to the government, to choose. But also, part of the reason I refuse to pay is I want to be an irritant to the government. I want to make a protest that can’t be ignored. And I think that the government would use such a fund, if it were to be formed, to shuttle away people who are noisy and people who are protesters and people who agitate. And I refuse to do that. I want to do a protest that the government has to pay attention to.


AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go through the pie chart, for why you feel this way. It’s “Where Your Income Tax Money Really Goes” from the War Resisters League. The chart says 43 percent of human resources—43 percent goes to human resources, 20 percent to past military, 27 percent to current military—so that’s close to half of the money. Explain this to us, for people who are resisting and for people who aren’t but want to know where their money goes.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, well, this is the percentage of federal funds that are spent. So if you look at your 1040 form, there’s going to be a line on the back of the 1040 form that says “federal tax” and that—these percentages relate to that. They do not include Social Security funds, because that’s money that’s raised separately through—I mean, if you’re salaried, you have a deduction for Social Security.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what about someone who says, “I’m a tea party activist”?


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah.


AMY GOODMAN: Says, “I don’t want you to take—I’m not going to pay Social Security.” And someone else says, “I’m not going to pay for this.” And someone else says, “For this.” How does the government function?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think that people have a right in a democracy to choose what they’re going to support and not support. If these people in the tea party and others refuse to pay for these programs and are willing to take the risk, like I am, in their refusal, well, then that’s up to them. I think that’s part of what’s a democracy. But what I do on top of that is I don’t keep the money for myself. I reroute it. I wonder if these tea party people do the same with their money? I doubt it. But—


AMY GOODMAN: What about those who say they don’t have the same luxury as you? They have a salary. Their account would be attached. People like Randy Kehler, a peace activist in western Mass, had his house taken from him.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and he continues to refuse today, despite his house being taken. I think that’s the risk you take. But, to me, part of the issue is that the protest is as important as how much money is resisted. And I think that there are people who are war tax resisters that do have their salaries seized, but they continue to protest despite that, because the point of the—of refusing to pay, from my point of view, is protesting.


AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go back in history to the Henry David Thoreau, 1847. The writer famously protested paying for slavery and the Mexican-American War by withholding his poll tax. He was sent to jail for a night, but when he was released the next morning, he refused to budge. He argued he had the right to remain in jail and register his repulsion of slavery. Thoreau was eventually thrown out of jail and went on to publish his influential essay called “Civil Disobedience.” In it, he wrote, quote, “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.” How many people resist, Ed?


ED HEDEMANN: Hard to say. I would say several thousand people in this country. A lot of people do it quietly, and they don’t tell, well, me or National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee or the IRS. They just do it. And it’s hard to say.


AMY GOODMAN: The phone tax, what is it?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the phone tax is a 3 percent federal excise tax on local telephone service. It used be also on long distance. And so, if you have a land line, then there is going to be a 3 percent charge on telephone service.


AMY GOODMAN: For what?


ED HEDEMANN: That goes into the general federal budget pot, just like the income tax, and it began, however, being put on telephone service during the Spanish-American War over 100 years ago.


AMY GOODMAN: And it’s still there?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, it keeps going—coming and going. After the Spanish-American War, it went off.


AMY GOODMAN: We have 10 seconds.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and then after World War I, it went on, came off. But it is on there now.


AMY GOODMAN: And people resist by just not paying that portion of their phone bill?


ED HEDEMANN: Yes.


AMY GOODMAN: Does the phone company eventually cut off your service?


ED HEDEMANN: Generally not.


AMY GOODMAN: Where are you going to be today?


ED HEDEMANN: I’m going to be in front of the IRS at 4:00 and then march through Times Square with the Rude Mechanical Orchestra to the general post office at 6:00.


AMY GOODMAN: Ed Hedemann, I want to thank you for being with us, conscientious war tax resister.




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Transcript



This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.



AMY GOODMAN: “What If We All Stopped Paying Taxes?” That’s Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.


Well, today is April 15th, Tax Day, a day when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war. In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings, post offices, weapons factories, to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, on missiles, on bombs.


According to a new pie chart released by the War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes go toward war in some form or other. To protest this, some Americans are taking a stand today by personally refusing to pay their federal taxes. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all or a portion of their federal income taxes, and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. One tax resister, Juanita Nelson of Massachusetts, has not paid federal income taxes since 1948.


JUANITA NELSON: I felt it was—from the beginning, it was part of a whole nexus of ideas, not just the tax refusal. Just I decided that I was a pacifist. And, for me, nonviolence, I would say, more than—what do you call it—pacifism, is a way of life. And I—my whole—since I was in my twenties, in particular, early twenties, it has always been my idea to try to go further and further to try to live what I believe. And that was certainly a very direct thing. You don’t like war? Don’t pay for it. Why should I pay for it?



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Juanita Nelson from a documentary, Death and Taxes. She hasn’t paid her federal taxes for more than 65 years.


Tax resistance has been a regular form of civil disobedience throughout American history. Most famously, the writer Henry David Thoreau refused to finance slavery and the Mexican-American War in 1847 by withholding his poll tax.


Well, for more, we’re joined by Ed Hedemann, a conscientious war tax resister who has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to nonprofits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. He’s a member of the War Resisters League, the U.S.’s oldest secular pacifist organization. In 1982, he helped found the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee to provide information and support to people considering war tax resistance. He is also author of War Tax Resistance: A Guide to Withholding Your Support From the Military.


Ed Hedemann, welcome to Democracy Now! You’re one of a couple dozen people in this country. You haven’t paid taxes for some, what, 40 years. Why did you stop? And what portion of your taxes don’t you pay?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I stopped after I refused induction in the military. This is in 1969. The government tried to draft me to go to war in Vietnam; I refused to go. A year later, I thought, well, it’s not good enough for me not to go and yet pay for others to go into the military, so I stopped paying the following year taxes to the IRS that eventually would help the government’s war in Vietnam and subsequent wars.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what happened to you? What does it mean? How did to figure out—what exactly do you do on Tax Day?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I refuse to pay 100 percent of my federal taxes, my federal income taxes. I pay Social Security, Medicare, state and local taxes, but none of the federal income taxes. But actually, in fact, I do pay them, just not to the IRS. I take the entire amount of money and reroute it to other organizations helping to build a better world rather than helping to kill people.


AMY GOODMAN: And what has the federal government responded?


ED HEDEMANN: Routinely I get letters, threatening letters from the IRS. They look for bank accounts. They look for property that I might own to seize. They look for salaries that I might have. I go out of my way to be uncollectible. I don’t have readily accessible bank accounts. I don’t have a salary. I’m self-employed. I have had salaries in the past. And I really don’t own any significant property. Now, the IRS has gone as far as to take me into federal district court. They did that in 1999 to get me to reveal sources of my assets, because the IRS has been unable to find anything significant to collect. I refused to give this information, and that was the end of it.


AMY GOODMAN: What did the judge do?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the judge—I said that, “Well, I’ve already paid my taxes to other organizations, not to the IRS. I cannot pay money to help kill people.” And I didn’t want to incriminate myself by giving this information to the IRS, a potential criminal investigation. The judge ignored everything except for the latter part and said that I didn’t have to give the information to the IRS because I might incriminate myself.


AMY GOODMAN: On Friday, we spoke to Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, retired Catholic bishop of Detroit. He’s been a leading voice for peace, justice and civil rights. He explained why he also refuses to pay his taxes.


BISHOP THOMAS GUMBLETON: I feel a good portion of those taxes goes to our war budget, which is our so-called defense budget, but it’s really a war budget. It’s the largest of any nation in the world. And years ago, Pope Paul VI said the arms race—and that’s what we are doing with our defense budget—is, in itself, an act of aggression against the poor. Using that money for weapons and strategies to use them is taking money away from the poor and causing them to starve. We should be using our natural resources and our wealth to promote development and to promote justice in the world. When you have a world where there’s such a gap between the rich and the poor, and such huge numbers suffering because of that, the church has a real responsibility to use whatever income it can bring to—I mean, our nation has a responsibility to use its income to help development happen, because that’s the basis for peace.



AMY GOODMAN: That is Detroit’s retired auxiliary bishop, Tom Gumbleton. He was in our studio for the hour on Friday. You can go to our website at democracynow.org to see the full interview with him.


The National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund is lobbying for a peace alternative for taxpayers. It would recognize the rights of conscientious objectors to war to not have to physically or financially contribute to war in any way. Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund explained how it would work.


ALAN GAMBLE: There would be a fund established within the federal Treasury that would accept the money of designated or verified conscientious objectors to all wars, and they would get a receipt from the federal Treasury, which they would attach along with their income tax forms when they send their taxes in. Then, all of their taxes would go into this federal special trust fund, which would then be allocated out to whichever government programs needed it, with the exception of things with a designated military purpose, such as Department of Defense.



AMY GOODMAN: That’s Alan Gamble of the National Campaign for a Peace Tax Fund. Ed Hedemann, are you for such a fund?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think it would be better that—if such a fund existed, but I wouldn’t participate in it, because part of the reason that I—well, first, that fund would be—the government would determine who is acceptable as a conscientious objector to military spending, and I think it ought to be up to the individual, not up to the government, to choose. But also, part of the reason I refuse to pay is I want to be an irritant to the government. I want to make a protest that can’t be ignored. And I think that the government would use such a fund, if it were to be formed, to shuttle away people who are noisy and people who are protesters and people who agitate. And I refuse to do that. I want to do a protest that the government has to pay attention to.


AMY GOODMAN: So, let’s go through the pie chart, for why you feel this way. It’s “Where Your Income Tax Money Really Goes” from the War Resisters League. The chart says 43 percent of human resources—43 percent goes to human resources, 20 percent to past military, 27 percent to current military—so that’s close to half of the money. Explain this to us, for people who are resisting and for people who aren’t but want to know where their money goes.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, well, this is the percentage of federal funds that are spent. So if you look at your 1040 form, there’s going to be a line on the back of the 1040 form that says “federal tax” and that—these percentages relate to that. They do not include Social Security funds, because that’s money that’s raised separately through—I mean, if you’re salaried, you have a deduction for Social Security.


AMY GOODMAN: So, what about someone who says, “I’m a tea party activist”?


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah.


AMY GOODMAN: Says, “I don’t want you to take—I’m not going to pay Social Security.” And someone else says, “I’m not going to pay for this.” And someone else says, “For this.” How does the government function?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, I think that people have a right in a democracy to choose what they’re going to support and not support. If these people in the tea party and others refuse to pay for these programs and are willing to take the risk, like I am, in their refusal, well, then that’s up to them. I think that’s part of what’s a democracy. But what I do on top of that is I don’t keep the money for myself. I reroute it. I wonder if these tea party people do the same with their money? I doubt it. But—


AMY GOODMAN: What about those who say they don’t have the same luxury as you? They have a salary. Their account would be attached. People like Randy Kehler, a peace activist in western Mass, had his house taken from him.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and he continues to refuse today, despite his house being taken. I think that’s the risk you take. But, to me, part of the issue is that the protest is as important as how much money is resisted. And I think that there are people who are war tax resisters that do have their salaries seized, but they continue to protest despite that, because the point of the—of refusing to pay, from my point of view, is protesting.


AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go back in history to the Henry David Thoreau, 1847. The writer famously protested paying for slavery and the Mexican-American War by withholding his poll tax. He was sent to jail for a night, but when he was released the next morning, he refused to budge. He argued he had the right to remain in jail and register his repulsion of slavery. Thoreau was eventually thrown out of jail and went on to publish his influential essay called “Civil Disobedience.” In it, he wrote, quote, “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.” How many people resist, Ed?


ED HEDEMANN: Hard to say. I would say several thousand people in this country. A lot of people do it quietly, and they don’t tell, well, me or National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee or the IRS. They just do it. And it’s hard to say.


AMY GOODMAN: The phone tax, what is it?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, the phone tax is a 3 percent federal excise tax on local telephone service. It used be also on long distance. And so, if you have a land line, then there is going to be a 3 percent charge on telephone service.


AMY GOODMAN: For what?


ED HEDEMANN: That goes into the general federal budget pot, just like the income tax, and it began, however, being put on telephone service during the Spanish-American War over 100 years ago.


AMY GOODMAN: And it’s still there?


ED HEDEMANN: Well, it keeps going—coming and going. After the Spanish-American War, it went off.


AMY GOODMAN: We have 10 seconds.


ED HEDEMANN: Yeah, and then after World War I, it went on, came off. But it is on there now.


AMY GOODMAN: And people resist by just not paying that portion of their phone bill?


ED HEDEMANN: Yes.


AMY GOODMAN: Does the phone company eventually cut off your service?


ED HEDEMANN: Generally not.


AMY GOODMAN: Where are you going to be today?


ED HEDEMANN: I’m going to be in front of the IRS at 4:00 and then march through Times Square with the Rude Mechanical Orchestra to the general post office at 6:00.


AMY GOODMAN: Ed Hedemann, I want to thank you for being with us, conscientious war tax resister.




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Today is April 15th, Tax Day, when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war.  In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings and weapons factories to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, missiles and bombs. According to a new pie-chart released by The War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes goes towards war in some form or the other. To protest paying for lethal weapons, some Americans are taking a stand by personally refusing to fund the military. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all, or a portion, of their federal income taxes — and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. We speak with Ed Hedemann of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee. He has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to non-profits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. [Transcript to come. Check back soon.]




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War



Today is April 15th, Tax Day, when millions of Americans scramble to file their income taxes on time. It’s also a day when people across the country are planning to protest the use of tax dollars to fund war.  In dozens of communities across the country, demonstrations are planned at IRS offices, federal buildings and weapons factories to protest ongoing massive U.S. government expenditures on drones, missiles and bombs. According to a new pie-chart released by The War Resisters League, 47 percent of federal taxes goes towards war in some form or the other. To protest paying for lethal weapons, some Americans are taking a stand by personally refusing to fund the military. These tax resisters are risking jail time by withholding all, or a portion, of their federal income taxes — and instead redirecting the money to humanitarian efforts. We speak with Ed Hedemann of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee. He has redirected the federal portion of his tax bill to non-profits and humanitarian efforts for 40 years. [Transcript to come. Check back soon.]




Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Democracy Now!

Tax Day: While Millions Rush to Meet Deadline, Resisters Continue Longstanding Refusal to Fund War

Sunday, March 31, 2013

Cyprus President’s Family Transferred Millions to London Days Before Bank Confiscations






Before the people of Cyprus knew that their savings were going to be confiscated, the president’s family transferred millions of dollars out of the country through one of their companies.


Nicos_Anastasiades_Cyprus_President

President Nicos Anastasiades in Cyprus Parliament



By JG Vibes
Intellihub.com
April 1, 2013


Over the weekend it was reported that people in Cyprus may lose as much as 60 percent of the money in their savings accounts.


The president of Cyprus, acting on behalf of the people, rolled over to the EU and agreed to go along with their plan and continue to mandate the EU currency under his jurisdiction.


Just days before the confiscations were announced to the public, a company closely connected to the president of Cyprus transferred millions of dollars to London.


RT reported that:


During two days, 12 and 13 of March, the company A.Loutsios & Sons Ltd., co-owned by Loutsios John, the husband of Nikos Anastasiadis’ daughter, Elsa, took five promissory notes worth €21 million from Laiki Bank. The money was then transferred to London, reported Cypriot newspaper Haravgi, affiliated to the communist-rooted AKEL party.  The withdrawal was fulfilled just three days before the Eurogroup meeting when euro finance ministers agreed a 10 billion euro ($ 13 billion) bailout for Cyprus. The newspaper recalls that Cyprus Finance Minister, Michalis Sarris, publicly admitted that the government was aware in advance about the Eurogroup’s intentions to impose a “haircut” on bank deposits of more than 100,000 euros.


Responding to the allegations, Anastasiades said: “The attempt to defame companies or people linked to my family… is nothing but an attempt to distract people from the liability of those who led the country to a state of bankruptcy.”


Yet as president of a country involved in central banking, Anastasiades is absolutely complicit in the countries state of bankruptcy.  In addition,  a list of companies and politicians that had loans written off by banks at the heart of Cyprus’ bailout crisis was published in Greece and was subsequently handed to the Cypriot parliament’s ethics committee.


This situation has caught the attention of people worldwide, who are now wondering if their savings accounts are at risk, considering that Cyprus is not much different from any other central banking government.  These measures are not just possible in other places, they have actually already been planned, Cyprus just happens to be the first place in the EU to get robbed.



Earlier last week Anastasiades admitted that the measures in Cyprus were simply an “experiment” concocted by the European Union in an attempt to deal with their current debt crisis.


It was also revealed in plans dating back to last year that


“Confiscation of the customer deposits in Cyprus banks, it seems, was not a one-off, desperate idea of a few Eurozone “troika” officials scrambling to salvage their balance sheets. A joint paper by the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Bank of England dated December 10, 2012, shows that these plans have been long in the making; that they originated with the G20 Financial Stability Board in Basel, Switzerland; and that the result will be to deliver clear title to the banks of depositor funds.”


It was also reported last week that a Cyprus style “bail in” was proposed in the new 2013 Canadian budget.


There has been a rush towards precious metals and Bitcoin because people are attempting to retain as much of their wealth as possible, but for many who have had their funds seized it was too late.


To help the people of Cyprus get their assets off the grid, Jeff Berwick has announced that he will be opening a Bitcoin ATM in Cyprus in the coming weeks.


******


Read more articles by this author HERE.


J.G. Vibes is the author of an 87 chapter counter-culture textbook called Alchemy of the Modern Renaissance, a staff writer, reporter for Intellihub.com and Executive Producer of the Bob Tuskin Radio Show. You can keep up with his work, which includes free podcasts, free e-books & free audiobooks at his website www.aotmr.com





Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin WordPress | Android Forums | WordPress Tutorials

Intellihub.com

Cyprus President’s Family Transferred Millions to London Days Before Bank Confiscations

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Walmart"s Death Grip on Groceries Is Making Life Worse for Millions of People (Hard Times USA)








This article was published in partnership with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.


When Michelle Obama visited a Walmart in Springfield, Missouri, a few weeks ago to praise the company"s efforts to sell healthier food, she did not say why she chose a store in Springfield of all cities. But, in ways that Obama surely did not intend, it was a fitting choice. This Midwestern city provides a chilling look at where Walmart wants to take our food system. 


Springfield is one of nearly 40 metro areas where Walmart now captures about half or more of consumer spending on groceries, according to Metro Market Studies.  Springfield area residents spend just over $ 1 billion on groceries each year, and one of every two of those dollars flows into a Walmart cash register.  The chain has 20 stores in the area and shows no signs of slowing its growth. Its latest proposal, a store just south of the city"s downtown, has provoked widespread protest.  Opponents say Walmart already has an overbearing presence in the region and argue that this new store would undermine nearby grocery stores, including a 63-year-old family-owned business which still provides delivery for its elderly customers. A few days before the First Lady"s visit, the City Council voted 5-4 to approve what will be Walmart"s 21st store in the community. 


As Springfield goes, so goes the rest of the country, if Walmart has its way. Nationally, the retailer"s share of the grocery market now stands at 25 percent. That"s up from 4 percent just 16 years ago.  Walmart"s tightening grip on the food system is unprecedented in U.S. history.  Even A&P — often referred to as the Walmart of its day — accounted for only about 12 percent of grocery sales at its height in the 1940s.  Its market share was kept in check in part by the federal government, which won an antitrust case against A&P in 1946.  The contrast to today"s casual acceptance of Walmart"s market power could not be more stark. 


Having gained more say over our food supply than Monsanto, Kraft, or Tyson, Walmart has been working overtime to present itself as a benevolent king. It has upped its donations to food pantries, reduced sodium and sugars in some of its store-brand products, and recast its relentless expansion as a solution to “food deserts.” In 2011, it pledged to build 275-300 stores “in or near” low-income communities lacking grocery stores. The Springfield store Obama visited is one of 86 such stores Walmart has since opened.  Situated half a mile from the southwestern corner of a census tract identified as underserved by the USDA, the store qualifies as “near” a food desert. Other grocery stores are likewise perched on the edge of this tract.  Although Walmart has made food deserts the vanguard of its PR strategy in urban areas, most of the stores the chain has built or proposed in cities like Chicago and Washington D.C. are in fact just blocks from established supermarkets, many unionized or locally owned.  As it pushes into cities, Walmart"s primary aim is not to fill gaps but to grab market share. 


***


The real effect of Walmart"s takeover of our food system has been to intensify the rural and urban poverty that drives unhealthy food choices.  Poverty has a strong negative effect on diet, regardless of whether there is a grocery store in the neighborhood or not, a major 15-year study published in 2011 in the Archives of Internal Medicine found. Access to fresh food cannot change the bottom-line reality that cheap, calorie-dense processed foods and fast food are financially logical choices for far too many American households.  And their numbers are growing right alongside Walmart.  Like Midas in reverse, Walmart extracts wealth and pushes down incomes in every community it touches, from the rural areas that produce food for its shelves to the neighborhoods that host its stores. 


Walmart has made it harder for farmers and food workers to earn a living. Its rapid rise as a grocer triggered a wave of mergers among food companies, which, by combining forces, hoped to become big enough to supply Walmart without getting crushed in the process. Today, food processing is more concentrated than ever.  Four meatpackers slaughter 85 percent of the nation"s beef.  One dairy company handles 40 percent of our milk, including 70 percent of the milk produced in New England.  With fewer buyers, farmers are struggling to get a fair price. Between 1995 and 2009, farmers saw their share of each consumer dollar spent on beef fall from 59 to 42 cents. Their cut of the consumer milk dollar likewise fell from 44 to 36 cents.  For pork, it fell from 45 to 25 cents and, for apples, from 29 to 19 cents.  


Onto this grim reality, Walmart has grafted a much-publicized initiative to sell more locally grown fruits and vegetables.  Clambering aboard the “buy local” trend undoubtedly helps Walmart"s marketing, but, as Missouri-based National Public Radio journalist Abbie Fentress Swanson reported in February, “there"s little evidence of small farmers benefiting, at least in the Midwest.”  Walmart, which defines “local” as grown in the same state, has increased its sales of local produce mainly by relying on large industrial growers. Small farmers, meanwhile, have fewer opportunities to reach consumers, as independent grocers and smaller chains shrink and disappear. 


Food production workers are being squeezed too. The average slaughterhouse wage has fallen 9 percent since 1999.  Forced unpaid labor at food processing plants is on the rise.  Last year, a Louisiana seafood plant that supplies Walmart was convicted of forcing employees to work in unsafe conditions for less than minimum wage. Some workers reported peeling and boiling crawfish in shifts that spanned 24 hours. 


The tragic irony is that many food-producing regions, with their local economies dismantled and poverty on the rise, are now themselves lacking grocery stores. The USDA has designated large swaths of the farm belt, including many agricultural areas near Springfield, as food deserts. 


***


One might imagine that squeezing farmers and food workers would yield lower prices for consumers.  But that hasn"t been the case.  Grocery prices have been rising.  There are multiple reasons for this, but corporate concentration is at least partly to blame.  For most foods, the spread between what consumers pay and how much farmers receive has been widening.  Food processors and big retailers are pocketing the difference.  Even as Walmart touts lower prices than its competitors, the company"s reorganization of our food system has had the effect of raising grocery prices overall. 


As Walmart stores multiply, fewer families can afford to eat well.  The company claims it stores bring economic development and employment, but the empirical evidence indicates otherwise.  A study published in 2008 in the Journal of Urban Economics examined about 3,000 Walmart store openings nationally and found that each store caused a net decline of about 150 jobs (as competing retailers downsized and closed) and lowered total wages paid to retail workers.  Other research by the economic consulting firm Civic Economics has found that, when locally owned businesses are replaced by big-box stores, dollars that once circulated in the community, supporting other businesses and jobs, instead leak out.  These shifts may explain the findings of another study, published in Social Science Quarterly in 2006, which cut straight to the bottom line: neighborhoods where Walmart opens end up with higher poverty rates and more food-stamp usage than places where the retailer does not expand. 


This year, Walmart plans to open between 220 and 240 stores in the U.S., as it marches steadily on in its quest to further control the grocery market.  Policymakers at every level, from city councilors to federal antitrust regulators, should be standing in its way.  Very few are.  Growing numbers of people, though, are drawing the line, from the Walmart employees who have led a string of remarkable strikes against the company, to the coalition of small business, labor, and community groups that recently forced Walmart to step back from its plans to unroll stores across New York City. 


Back in Springfield, as Michelle Obama was delivering her remarks, framed by a seductive backdrop of oranges and lemons, a citizens group called Stand Up to Walmart was also at work, launching a referendum drive to overturn the City Council"s vote and block Walmart from gaining any more ground in the city. 


Tue, 03/26/2013 – 12:24


 
AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed



Walmart"s Death Grip on Groceries Is Making Life Worse for Millions of People (Hard Times USA)

Walmart"s Death Grip on Groceries Is Making Life Worse for Millions of People (Hard Times USA)








This article was published in partnership with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.


When Michelle Obama visited a Walmart in Springfield, Missouri, a few weeks ago to praise the company"s efforts to sell healthier food, she did not say why she chose a store in Springfield of all cities. But, in ways that Obama surely did not intend, it was a fitting choice. This Midwestern city provides a chilling look at where Walmart wants to take our food system. 


Springfield is one of nearly 40 metro areas where Walmart now captures about half or more of consumer spending on groceries, according to Metro Market Studies.  Springfield area residents spend just over $ 1 billion on groceries each year, and one of every two of those dollars flows into a Walmart cash register.  The chain has 20 stores in the area and shows no signs of slowing its growth. Its latest proposal, a store just south of the city"s downtown, has provoked widespread protest.  Opponents say Walmart already has an overbearing presence in the region and argue that this new store would undermine nearby grocery stores, including a 63-year-old family-owned business which still provides delivery for its elderly customers. A few days before the First Lady"s visit, the City Council voted 5-4 to approve what will be Walmart"s 21st store in the community. 


As Springfield goes, so goes the rest of the country, if Walmart has its way. Nationally, the retailer"s share of the grocery market now stands at 25 percent. That"s up from 4 percent just 16 years ago.  Walmart"s tightening grip on the food system is unprecedented in U.S. history.  Even A&P — often referred to as the Walmart of its day — accounted for only about 12 percent of grocery sales at its height in the 1940s.  Its market share was kept in check in part by the federal government, which won an antitrust case against A&P in 1946.  The contrast to today"s casual acceptance of Walmart"s market power could not be more stark. 


Having gained more say over our food supply than Monsanto, Kraft, or Tyson, Walmart has been working overtime to present itself as a benevolent king. It has upped its donations to food pantries, reduced sodium and sugars in some of its store-brand products, and recast its relentless expansion as a solution to “food deserts.” In 2011, it pledged to build 275-300 stores “in or near” low-income communities lacking grocery stores. The Springfield store Obama visited is one of 86 such stores Walmart has since opened.  Situated half a mile from the southwestern corner of a census tract identified as underserved by the USDA, the store qualifies as “near” a food desert. Other grocery stores are likewise perched on the edge of this tract.  Although Walmart has made food deserts the vanguard of its PR strategy in urban areas, most of the stores the chain has built or proposed in cities like Chicago and Washington D.C. are in fact just blocks from established supermarkets, many unionized or locally owned.  As it pushes into cities, Walmart"s primary aim is not to fill gaps but to grab market share. 


***


The real effect of Walmart"s takeover of our food system has been to intensify the rural and urban poverty that drives unhealthy food choices.  Poverty has a strong negative effect on diet, regardless of whether there is a grocery store in the neighborhood or not, a major 15-year study published in 2011 in the Archives of Internal Medicine found. Access to fresh food cannot change the bottom-line reality that cheap, calorie-dense processed foods and fast food are financially logical choices for far too many American households.  And their numbers are growing right alongside Walmart.  Like Midas in reverse, Walmart extracts wealth and pushes down incomes in every community it touches, from the rural areas that produce food for its shelves to the neighborhoods that host its stores. 


Walmart has made it harder for farmers and food workers to earn a living. Its rapid rise as a grocer triggered a wave of mergers among food companies, which, by combining forces, hoped to become big enough to supply Walmart without getting crushed in the process. Today, food processing is more concentrated than ever.  Four meatpackers slaughter 85 percent of the nation"s beef.  One dairy company handles 40 percent of our milk, including 70 percent of the milk produced in New England.  With fewer buyers, farmers are struggling to get a fair price. Between 1995 and 2009, farmers saw their share of each consumer dollar spent on beef fall from 59 to 42 cents. Their cut of the consumer milk dollar likewise fell from 44 to 36 cents.  For pork, it fell from 45 to 25 cents and, for apples, from 29 to 19 cents.  


Onto this grim reality, Walmart has grafted a much-publicized initiative to sell more locally grown fruits and vegetables.  Clambering aboard the “buy local” trend undoubtedly helps Walmart"s marketing, but, as Missouri-based National Public Radio journalist Abbie Fentress Swanson reported in February, “there"s little evidence of small farmers benefiting, at least in the Midwest.”  Walmart, which defines “local” as grown in the same state, has increased its sales of local produce mainly by relying on large industrial growers. Small farmers, meanwhile, have fewer opportunities to reach consumers, as independent grocers and smaller chains shrink and disappear. 


Food production workers are being squeezed too. The average slaughterhouse wage has fallen 9 percent since 1999.  Forced unpaid labor at food processing plants is on the rise.  Last year, a Louisiana seafood plant that supplies Walmart was convicted of forcing employees to work in unsafe conditions for less than minimum wage. Some workers reported peeling and boiling crawfish in shifts that spanned 24 hours. 


The tragic irony is that many food-producing regions, with their local economies dismantled and poverty on the rise, are now themselves lacking grocery stores. The USDA has designated large swaths of the farm belt, including many agricultural areas near Springfield, as food deserts. 


***


One might imagine that squeezing farmers and food workers would yield lower prices for consumers.  But that hasn"t been the case.  Grocery prices have been rising.  There are multiple reasons for this, but corporate concentration is at least partly to blame.  For most foods, the spread between what consumers pay and how much farmers receive has been widening.  Food processors and big retailers are pocketing the difference.  Even as Walmart touts lower prices than its competitors, the company"s reorganization of our food system has had the effect of raising grocery prices overall. 


As Walmart stores multiply, fewer families can afford to eat well.  The company claims it stores bring economic development and employment, but the empirical evidence indicates otherwise.  A study published in 2008 in the Journal of Urban Economics examined about 3,000 Walmart store openings nationally and found that each store caused a net decline of about 150 jobs (as competing retailers downsized and closed) and lowered total wages paid to retail workers.  Other research by the economic consulting firm Civic Economics has found that, when locally owned businesses are replaced by big-box stores, dollars that once circulated in the community, supporting other businesses and jobs, instead leak out.  These shifts may explain the findings of another study, published in Social Science Quarterly in 2006, which cut straight to the bottom line: neighborhoods where Walmart opens end up with higher poverty rates and more food-stamp usage than places where the retailer does not expand. 


This year, Walmart plans to open between 220 and 240 stores in the U.S., as it marches steadily on in its quest to further control the grocery market.  Policymakers at every level, from city councilors to federal antitrust regulators, should be standing in its way.  Very few are.  Growing numbers of people, though, are drawing the line, from the Walmart employees who have led a string of remarkable strikes against the company, to the coalition of small business, labor, and community groups that recently forced Walmart to step back from its plans to unroll stores across New York City. 


Back in Springfield, as Michelle Obama was delivering her remarks, framed by a seductive backdrop of oranges and lemons, a citizens group called Stand Up to Walmart was also at work, launching a referendum drive to overturn the City Council"s vote and block Walmart from gaining any more ground in the city. 


Tue, 03/26/2013 – 12:24


 
AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed



Walmart"s Death Grip on Groceries Is Making Life Worse for Millions of People (Hard Times USA)