Friday, January 06, 2012

Snack Time

               Ummm, grab your knives and forks.  It’s time for a feast.  The Republicans are dining on one another and Iowa is just a preview of what’s to come in South Carolina. Ummm.  Delicious. 
            Consider, Newt Gingrich whining because Romney’s PAC was running ads that said mean things about Newt.  Newt whining?  Newt is the father of the PAC and the father of formalizing mean things to say that will demonize your opponent.
            And, surprise, Rick Santorum “wins” Iowa and is now chugging off, suddenly a serious candidate.  Rick Santorum?  The guy who went from the topic of gay marriage straight to man on dog sex in zero steps.  What kind of mind keeps that connection rattling around in his brain so in no time he can go there?  I mean, before I’d be able to make that connection and come to that kind of  conclusion, I’d have to make a whole bunch of steps and think seriously to find anything resembling the “six degrees of separation” connections needed to make that leap.  But not Rick.  Nope.  Apparently equal marriage rights for gays equals man on dog sex.   Eeeuuuuu.  Creepy Brain Time.
            Well, South Carolina should be a hoot. We’ll have our Man On Dog Santorum, Can’t Remember S—t Perry, PAC-man Newt, and “Lurch” Romney.   And LOTS of secret corporate money, none of it accountable to the public, thanks to the Robert’s Supreme Court.
            Does it get any better than this?

What If?

            Interesting article in the L.A. Times by Marc Lifsher reporting that about “a dozen companies are the first in state to apply to become ‘benefit corporations.”
            “A dozen companies committed to maximizing social good while turning a profit have filed papers with the state to become California’s first ‘benefit corporations.”  Amazingly enough, California has a new law that “gives companies a way to legally structure their businesses to consider social and environmental efforts as part of their missions.
            “While that may sound like marketing hype, it’s important from a legal standpoint because it helps shield benefit corporations from lawsuits brought by shareholders who say that company do-gooding has diluted the value of their stock.
            “California becomes the seventh state to adopt this relatively new corporate structure.
            “Until now, California corporate law mandated that shareholders’ interests trump those of all other parties. . . . . Benefit corporations offer for-profit companies a way to do well and do right, said Assemblyman Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) . . . ‘There is a way to create jobs and grow the economy while raising the bar for social and environmental responsibility.”
            If you want to understand one reason why we have, as a country, been heading down the drain, it’s because our corporate structures are legally required to put maximum profit ahead of all other considerations.  That focus on profit above all is the source of so many of our woes. That and the total focus on quarterly reports as opposed to long-term business/economic health.
            In short, we have set up an economic system now that behaves like a bad germ – a virus that kills its host too quickly.  In nature, the goal of a smart germ, like a smart parasite, is to keep its host alive as long as possible so it can feed and reproduce.  A dumb germ/parasite, gobbles it all, kills its host to soon, and therefore dies as well.  That’s been our model – gobble and die.  Not smart.
            But a benefit corporation?  Ah, that allows a corporate parasite a good way to feed heartily but still keep its host alive for years and years.  Think what a transformation would happen in this country if long-term planning and social/environmental considerations became part of the business mix – companies that understood, for example, that keeping their employees healthy and happy paid off financially.  Companies that understood that toxic waste actually is a resource that’s worth money and can be profitable for them.  Corporations that were allowed to factor in long-term thinking instead of simple Grab ‘n Run greed.  
            The story finishes thusly:  “The growing interest in benefit corporations reflects a sense that there’s a better way of doing business out there,” said John Montgomery, a Melo Park lawyer who helped draft the new California law.”  . . .  “Patagonia [one of the the new benefit corporations] is trying to build a company that could last 100 years . . . Benefit corporation legislation creates the legal framework to enable mission-driven companies like Patagonia to stay mission-driven through succession, capital raises and even changes in ownership by institutionalizing the value, culture, processes and high standards put in place by founding entrepreneurs.”
            Imagine that.

On the Other Hand    
            Of course, creating a decent society may be all moot.  According to some folks, the Mayan Calendar tells us that the world will in 2012, so why bother?
            It never ceases to amaze me how in love with World Death so many people are. Apparently the earth is such a hideous place for them that it becomes a deep-seated need to fantasize about and long for its violent end.  Armageddon! Mayan Calendars!  Wheeeee, destroy it all!  Even the hummingbirds and sweet-smelling lemon blossoms.  Wipe them all out.
            I don’t get it.  If those folks are so in love with world destruction, there’s a quick shortcut to that end: Suicide.  One bullet and your whole world ends.  Problem solved, while still leaving this beautiful, magical, extraordinary place intact for others to enjoy.

A reminder

            Well, since the world won’t end, despite what the Mayans say, on Wednesday January 18 from 6 pm – 7 pm at the Monarch Grove Elementary School, 348 Los Osos Valley Rd) there’ll be a public meeting to review “The restoration of your neighborhood streets and roadways following the installation of the waste water collection system,” wherein you’ll see a 45-minute overview of the repair, restoration and enhancement efforts for your streets.”
            With any luck, maybe everybody will speak up and push for “low impact” type pavement that will help get every drop of rainwater back down into the ground instead of having it all flood down the street.  Though on my street, we do end up with some quite spectacular lakes that you can float a boat on.  Which is great entertainment for the dreary winter months. 




M said...

The alternative to one of your crazy Republicans is another four years (at least) of a bought and paid for Dictator Obama? No thanks.
Sincerely, M

Churadogs said...

You know, M, when you use language like "Dictator Obama," that tells me you are no longer thinking. You're just knee-jerking to some pre-set, meaningless and/or dishonest mantra, like the one I know you're familiar with: "anti-sewer obstructionist."

Either that, or you really don't know what the meaning of the word "dictator" is.

M said...

One who dictates, right?
Sincerely, M

Sewertoons said...

Most dictators don't work within a system of checks and balances.

Churadogs said...

M: no. Dictator refers to a specific form of governance -- single person rule. Gadaffi was a Dictator. Obama is not, because, as Toonces points out, he's operating within a system of checks and balances from co-equal branches of government.

For example, the co-equal Congress and Senate branch of government passed a law (Frank/Dodds) that set up a "Consumer Affairs" dept and President Obama (also co-equal), in following the law, nominated someone to run the department (legally formed by congress) and was told by Republicans that they would REFUSE to advise and consent, as they're supposed to do, and REFUSE to allow ANY director to be nominated and voted on. So, during recess, Obama appointed a director (just like Bush did repeatedly during Congressional recesses) and the right wing had a cow and started calling Obama a DICTATOR!!!!. No, he was just doing his job since Congress refused to do their job. (Now, interestingly, the third branch of government -- the Court -- may come into play and will have to decide what one branch of government is supposed to do when another branch of government REFUSES to act. It'll be an interesting case. i.e. can one branch totally shut down another branch by refusing to act? Hmmmm, we'll see. But in NONE of this is there to be found a "Dictator." That brain-freeze is caused by watching too much Fox Noise)

M said...

Ah yes, go to the watching too much Fox news card. Funny, whenever some one disagrees with the way things are going with this administration and the liberal agenda in general, one is accused of only watching and believing Fox news. Indeed, I do not watch Fox news and I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck. I do have my own thoughts and opinions on matters. Not saying i'm always right, but i'm not always wrong either. If you agree with everything Obama and his cronies are doing, then I will say that you may listen to too much Rachel Maddow. This Country is going into the gutter and the current administration is accelerating it's demise.
Sincerely, M