A letter-writer responds to someone who suggests cutting the military budget to better satisfy “domestic needs”:

Personally, I have a domestic need, as most other people do, to feel safe within my own country, unafraid of attack from without – and filling that need is not without cost.

Too right that is. According to the War Resisters’ League analysis of the federal budget, 48% of the federal budget is spent directly or indirectly on the U.S. military. Military costs take a huge bite out of the American budget. American levels of military spending are unmatched around the world: the U.S. spends nearly eight times more on its military than any other country on Earth. The United States has enough nuclear warheads to turn every other nation on the planet into the semblance of Swiss Cheese.

The letter writer speaks of feeling safe within his own country. Is he really safe? Not one of us is completely safe: life is a postponed death sentence. We’re all headed for destruction one way or another. It’s possible to speak of relative safety from attack, and compared to other countries the United States is quite safe. India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Liberia and Uganda have suffered under attacks much more serious than any attacks on the United States. Per capita deaths from attacks on U.S. soil are miniscule. Death rates from malnutrition in America are much, much higher than death rates from attacks on the United States.

But the letter-writer nailed the issue on the head: his need isn’t for real security from attack. His need is to feel safe. His need is not to be afraid. But there is no number of weapons that can take away fear. There is no military budget that can make someone feel safe. Humans have large imaginations and a great capacity for fear that can be stoked by theater as much as by reality. As long as television stations and movie theaters and newspapers tell us how unsafe we are, and as long as politicians take to the microphone and tell us how much we have to fear an attack, we will be afraid and we will feel unsafe.

My advice to the writer of that letter: if you want to feel safe, if you want feel unafraid of attack, stop tuning in to the people who are stuffing fear and insecurity into your ears. Turn off your FOX News. Go outside. Look up at the sky. Pick a flower.

By gum, that doesn’t cost a thing.

Samsung, an electronics corporation,
says it expects sales of 3 million sets
allowing a new digital vacation
in spite of our accumulated debts.

These sets give thick screens in 3 dimenstions
designed for “home theater enthusiasts”,
seizing their remote controlled attentions
as spare time leisure boredom therapists.

9 billion dollars spent on gadgetry
while the real 3D world disintegrates
an elite few wrapped in technology
at platinum card special discount rates.

We search for work as the upper classes
hide behind their new pairs of dark glasses.

In America, you have to earn more money than it’s polite to whine about — $373,650 a year — in order to start paying a federal marginal tax rate of 35%. A person’s income between $34,000 and $82,400 a year is taxed at a rate of 25%.

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, two-thirds of U.S. corporations don’t pay any taxes at all.

Republican Congressman Todd Tiahrt of Kansas has introduced a bill, H.R. 4781, to lower the top tax rate for corporations down to 22%. Under Tiahrt’s plan, a person earning $35,000 a year would end up in a higher tax bracket than a corporation earning $35 million.

Isn’t it nice to know someone on Capitol Hill is looking out for the big guy?

p.s. Just in case you were wondering, Tiahrt hasn’t introduced any bill to lower income tax rates for actual people.

The U.S. Senators who blocked a six-month extension of unemployment insurance for jobless workers this week:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
John Ensign (R-NV)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jim Risch (R-ID)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
John Thune (R-SD)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted for billions of dollars in subsidies for the oil industry in December of 2007:

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
John Ensign (R-NV)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Judd Gregg (R-NH)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted to spend billions of dollars on the construction of new C-17 transport planes that the Defense Department says it neither wants nor needs:

Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Jim DeMint (R-SC)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Jim Risch (R-ID)

U.S. Senators rejecting an extension of unemployment insurance who also voted to spend billions of dollars on F-22 fighter planes that fall apart, don’t fly in the rain, and were designed for dogfights with the Soviet Union:

Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Jim Risch (R-ID)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
John Thune (R-SD)

In protest of cuts of hundreds of millions of dollars to the University of California system, students there called for a statewide student strike for today, March 4. But the problem is hardly limited to California, and students across the country have reacted by organizing their own actions. Find a university protest near you by list, or check out the map below, provided courtesy of Angus Johnston’s studentactivism.net:

Number of months in a row that the private sector of the American economy has cut jobs: 25
Number of Americans more than 2 months behind on their mortgages, eligible for foreclosure: 5.5 million
Number of people who have paid deposits so that they can pay $220,000 for a ride into low Earth orbit with Virgin Galactic space tourism enterprises: 330

At the end of last month, Senators Christopher Dodd and Tom Udall reacted to the Supreme Court’s decision to allow unlimited corporate spending on campaign advocacy — with a constitutional amendment. Dodd and Udall’s proposed amendment reads:

`Section 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on–
`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and
`(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.
`Section 2. A State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on–
`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and
`(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.
`Section 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.’.

Do you think such an amendment to the constitution is advisable?

David Sax has got a lot of nerve.

The coiffed, snazzy-dressing author of “Save the Deli” calls himself “underpaid” for earning $500 for every article he writes in a paper, the poor dear, then goes on a rant against people who earn minimum wage or less in restaurants and ask for tips so they can eat. (The tip-whine article he placed in the Times? A mere snack of 495 words.)

On David Sax’s Save the Deli website, you can support Sax’s tailored lifestyle by buying a “Brisket on Board” t-shirt. The “light t-shirt” with Sax’s design retails for $17.99 and the “ringer t” for $17.99. These prices include a $3.00 tip paid to David Sax every time an order for one of these shirts is placed. The $3.00 tip is compensation to David Sax for the idea of a “Brisket on Board” graphic design. Sax doesn’t print the shirts. He doesn’t ship the shirts. He doesn’t make the shirts, either. He just gets a $3.00 tip for his design work. That’s a 20% tip, in case you don’t have your calculator handy.

Who does the work for Sax? CafePress has factories in California and Kentucky that print a design on an already-made shirt and ship the shirt to the consumer. The “light t-shirt” and “ringer t” shirts Sax gets his tip from aren’t sewn together in the United States, though. They’re made in third world nations chosen by producers for their weak labor laws and dirt-poor pay. You can bet your boots that the third world people who sew David Sax’s ringer tees don’t get paid $3 a shirt for their hands-on labor.

Yes, I am complaining, but I’m not complaining about David Sax getting paid $3 every time a shirt with his design sells. After all, Irregular Times sells shirts and gets a cut of sales too. I am complaining about David Sax’s lax inattention to the sourcing of the shirts he makes money off of. I am complaining about David Sax’s description of the ordeal of regularly going out to eat at restaurants, having people wait on him and serve him like a lord, and then in completely expected fashion being asked to pay a tip so that his servants can cover their rent. I am complaining about David Sax’s identification of a tip to working-class people as being the problem in our society when he regularly rakes in a big, fat 20% tip of his own.

You’ve got some nerve, David Sax.

For years, we writers at Irregular Times have kept our effort afloat and started new efforts like That’s My Congress by putting liberal t-shirts up for sale. We have only sold shirts made in the USA because in the United States there are clearly defined labor and workspace protections, and because American Apparel goes above and beyond them in its domestic production facilities. According to a report last year by the U.S. Department of Labor, clothing production in a number of countries overseas is riddled with child labor and forced labor. Other sweatshop abuses in the shirt industry overseas are common even when kids and forced labor aren’t involved. We simply don’t want to take part in that kind of a production system. Shirts that are made and shipped domestically are also lighter on the environment than shirts shipped across the ocean. These are all reasons for us to work with shirts made in the USA.

On the other hand, there is something to be said for investment in other countries. If one of the richest nations in the world keeps its wealth within its own borders, then that wealth will tend to stay concentrated and it will be that much harder for people living in poor countries to escape poverty. While we’re happy with the ethical parameters of our shirt sales, we’ve decided we’d like to do more to help alleviate poverty outside the United States. And so, for every t-shirt we sell through our shop at Skreened, Irregular Times pledges issue a $1 in the form of Kiva microloans to developing world. We’re not intending to obtain more income this way: the proceeds we receive from these microloans will be reinvested into more microloans and more overseas development.

Our first microloan goes to Loam Cham of Cambodia, who works as a wedding chef and earns $5 a day. With a camera, she’ll be able to expand her offerings to include wedding photography, increasing her income without a doubling of effort.

Regardless of your opinion regarding the recent Supreme Court decision to allow unlimited corporate spending on advertising for and against political candidates, the decision’s aftermath is something we all have to face. Corporations are going to have a lot more voice in American campaigns starting this year. Congressional Representative Gary Ackerman of New York confronts this new reality with a bill that attempts to add more transparency to all this new spending. H.R. 4630, the Corporate Politics Transparency Act, would require disclosures in corporations’ quarterly and annual reports of “all expenditures made in support of or in opposition to any candidate for Federal, State, or local public office.” If Ackerman’s bill passes, the shareholders who own the corporations and the public that charters the corporations will be able to keep track of the big money flows and make decisions about corporations accordingly.

The towns of Dublin and Westerville, Ohio are once-prosperous suburbs of Columbus, heavily reliant on the property taxes of well-to-do urban escapees and the service-sector jobs in its malls and shopping plazas. As property values slump and Ohioans stop shopping, the northern ring around Columbus finds itself slowly sinking. This is the demographic base for Republican Pat Tiberi in his 12th congressional district.

During this economic recession, which is hitting the civic infrastructure of central Ohio especially hard, Patrick Tiberi complains that Democrats haven’t done enough:

As more Ohioans lose their jobs, Democratic leaders in Congress are long past due to focus on creating jobs and getting Americans back to work…. As I’ve been saying our focus in Congress should be on creating an environment friendly to job-creation…. We need to focus on creating incentives for job creation.

What has Patrick Tiberi done in the 111th Congress to create jobs, to help get Americans back to work, to create incentives for job creation?

Nothing. Since he was last elected in November of 2008, Pat Tiberi has introduced five bills, none of which have been enacted into law. His most successful bill celebrates the 50th anniversary of an Antarctic treaty. Another of Tiberi’s bills, introduced last March, expresses support for the declaration of September as Brain Aneurysm Awareness Month. A third bill congratulates the Columbus Crew soccer team for winning a championship. Even if they had been passed, these three bills would accomplish nothing, having only symbolic effect as declarations.

A fourth bill introduced by Patrick Tiberi would have practical effect if passed — for the six members of the Cole family. Mary, Decontee, Emmanuel, Emmanuel Jr., Anna, and Yon Deh would be granted special immigration privileges to the United States if Tiberi’s bill passed. That’s nice for the Coles, but has no effect on anyone else. Then there’s Tiberi’s fifth and last bill introduced to the House of Representatives. H.R. 2642 is the only of Tiberi’s bills to have a general, substantive impact on all people — all anonymous dead people, that is. If H.R. 2642 passes, resources from the Department of Veterans Affairs would be redirected toward the effort of reviewing all unclaimed dead bodies to see if they are possibly those of veterans and therefore worthy of burial at Arlington National Cemetary.

As for the people who are living and breathing and voting and trying to find work in Dublin and Westerville? No, Pat Tiberi hasn’t figured out a bill for them yet. He’s been so busy criticizing Democrats for introducing the wrong bills that he just hasn’t had the time to come up with one of his own. Maybe he’ll come up with something in 2011. Maybe.

I’d like to offer a quick recommendation to the new 2nd edition of The Blue Pages, put out by Angie Crouse and the Center for Responsive Politics. This handy little book, sized to fit in a jacket pocket, is chock full of information about the ethics and politics of thousands of corporations you might or might not do business with. You can use the index at the back to find corporations by name, or just browse through the pages by category.

There are some interesting tidbits in there, with some information that’s old news but some new information, too. For instance, I knew that Carter’s, the maker of cute baby clothes, “has sourced from countries with widespread, well-documented human rights and labor abuses,” but I didn’t know that in recent elections the corporation has exclusively donated to the Republican Party. It’s in there, on page 8. I knew that FedEx and UPS have given millions of dollars to the Republican Party, but I didn’t know that these contributions are almost balanced out by contributions to the Democratic Party. I didn’t know that both corporations have a sexual orientation non-discrimination policy, or that UPS screwed around with its workers’ retirement accounts. It’s in there, on pages 151-155. I knew that both WalMart and Target had a record of sweatshop sourcing, and I knew that WalMart gives heavily to the Republicans, but I didn’t know that Target gives an even greater portion of its money to the Republicans than WalMart. I didn’t know that Target has been hauled to court for racial discrimination, maltreatment of immigrant workers and screwing with workers at plants in the American territory of Saipan. It’s all in there, too.

In short, The Blue Pages is a handy guide for ethical interaction with corporations, and at 13 bucks it’s not all that expensive, either.

T-Shirt Monster is a Canadian company that prints graphic designs on t-shirts and ships them out to customers on demand. For every t-shirt that T-Shirt Monster sells, the person who came up with the graphic design on the shirt gets a commission, making the print-on-demand model a good way for designers and T-Shirt Monster to collaborate. T-Shirt Monster gets some profit, designers get some ramen, and somebody in Ottawa gets some new duds. Sounds like a sweet deal all around, doesn’t it?

There’s one party I haven’t mentioned in this sweet deal, and that’s the person who actually makes the shirt. Not the person who prints the shirt — this is T-Shirt Monster’s job — I mean the person who actually makes the shirt. T-Shirt Monster makes graphic designs available for sale on a wide range of shirts. Some of these shirts are made in Los Angeles, USA by American Apparel in a legal, sweatshop-free environment. Some of these shirts are made sweatshop-free in Canada from organic fair trade cotton by the really interesting company called Me to We that gives half its profits to international children’s charities. And then some of these shirts are made in impoverished nations with poor labor standards and wage protections by producers like Hanes and Bella and Gildan. Coincidentally, even though there’s greater shipping costs, the t-shirts these latter companies make cost ever so much less. Can you figure out how that’s possible?

We have to keep this plant economically viable. In 1965, our T-shirts were advertised, a 5-pack for $4.99. Today you can go out to a store and find a 7-pack for $4.99. Those are the economics of the apparel business.

– Hanesbrands spokesman Matt Hall

Although we really like the idea of American Apparel and especially the Me to We shirts, Irregular Times does not currently have any working relationship with T-Shirt Monster, and that’s because the T-Shirt Monster website doesn’t allow graphic designers to limit sales of their designs to particular shirts. If you want to offer a Free Speech Me to We T-Shirt, you also have to offer a Free Speech Hanes T-shirt. Given the recent history of Hanes production, if we have to decide to print on Me to We and Hanes shirts or no shirts, we choose no shirts.

In a Twitter post last month, T-Shirt Monster asked for feedback on a site redesign — and in private conversations, T-Shirt Monster staff have let us know that they’re looking for a way to let graphic designers control which shirts are being sold for their images. If you care about ethical sourcing of t-shirts and would like to increase designers’ control over the use of their images on products, send an encouraging e-mail to info@tshirtmonster.ca and let the T-Shirt Monsters know how important this issue is to you.

At first glance, H.R. 4617, the Separate Taxpayer Dollars from the Election Process Act, looks like a really tough blow to Wall Street. The bill, introduced to the House of Representatives by Minnesota Democrat Tim Walz, would require companies that got TARP bailout money to keep that money separate from other funds, and would forbid the use of those funds for political campaigning: “No person may use any Federal funds that are required to be segregated under section 137(a) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to make any expenditure or electioneering communication.”

Keeping bailout money out of political campaigns sounds like a great idea, all right. The problem is that H.R. 4617 won’t do the job.

Yes, bailout money would be kept in a separate fund, and the money in that fund couldn’t be spent on political campaign efforts. However, the presence of that bailout fund would allow a company to free up other money in other accounts that could then be spent to influence political elections. The effect is exactly the same.

It’s not as if bailout money was handed out to corporations in marked bills. The transactions involved are all electronic. It would be totally legal for a bank to take 1 billion dollars from the government bailout, then put that in a segregated account, and then spend 1 billion dollars from its general accounts on political campaigning, replenishing that amount with the bailout money from the segregated account. No, the segregated bailout wouldn’t be directly used for political campaigning, but the liquidity to support the electioneering would be 100 percent made possible by the bailout.

If this legislation is a missile lobbed at Wall Street, it’s a cream puff missile, making a scary appearance in the sky, then leaving a sweet confection behind at bankers’ doorsteps.