WhirledView

Mitt Romney and the GOP Convention: a 2012 Late Midsummer Nightmare

By Patricia H. Kushlis

Puck:  “Oh, what fools these mortals be.  - Act II, Scene II, William Shakespeare’s Midsummer’s Night Dream.

If just about everything and anything could go wrong for the Romney campaign this summer – except for the continuation of seemingly bottomless special interest pockets shelling out money to keep their tax breaks intact, defense companies and casino holdings afloat as well as support for an even Greater Israel policy – it has. 

Hurricane Isaac’s fury that stole headlines and diverted reporters from a supposed perfectly planned convention on the Florida sands is just the latest example of the dictum “if something can go wrong, it will.”  On the other hand, why did the GOP choose Florida during hurricane season as the place for their convention in the first place? 

Even Ann Romney’s horse “Rafalca” which competed in the dressage event at the London 2012 Olympics a couple of weeks ago didn’t make the dress circle let alone the winner’s box.   Clearly, however, Presidential candidate Romney couldn’t have cared less about the horse or its chances. When interviewed in one of those rare times when a window cracked open just enough for  reporters to ask the most innocuous of questions Romney responded that he didn’t intend to attend Rafalca’s race and, for that matter, didn’t know (and obviously didn’t care) when it would be held.  For the record, it was held in Greenwich Park behind the Maritime Museum on the Thames just a short Underground ride from London.

I guess horses are just too large to be lashed to the top of even the largest SUV and forgotten. Besides his wife’s the animal lover and people person, not him. 

The Kinder and Gentler Mitt Romney?  Give me a break. 

On August 26, the Financial Times Edward Luce argued in an almost fawning column that Romney’s a pragmatist who has shown he will do anything and everything to win America’s ultimate political prize but that the Republican Party’s current values are the real obstacle to good governance in the US:  Luce argues that, therefore, it doesn’t matter who wins the White House rather the real problem and prize is Congress. 

I’m not so sure that I agree.  At least completely. Congress can impede or assist a president principally through the power of its purse but there’s a lot a president can do through regulation and executive order as Obama has finally learned over the last couple of years.

Too-many-double-cappuccino pre Party Conference/GOP Presidential convention mutterings

By: John Charles Dyer, UK Correspondent

29 August 2012.

I’ve been surprised how many Americans confuse “England”  (and everything worthwhile about it) with London.   Or I was until I realized the confusion begins in London.  

Copernicus had it all wrong you see. London is the centre of the solar system. It is the only place that matters.   I learned this riding Virgin Train to London and comparing it to the Virgin Train to Bristol by way of Birmingham.  Anyone who doubts that London is all that matters to London need only do the same. One matters only if one is going to or from London, dahling.  

But this frame of reference is, of course, just utter confusion. 

London isn’t “England” (wherever England now is).  London isn’t the centre of the solar system or the missing answer to all Cosmological or theological riddles.

London is really the America of Mitt Romney’s dreams.  

Now that I understand this, I propose a cultural exchange.  Romney becomes London’s mayor. Boris runs Disneyland.  Cameron learns to play basketball as Obama’s understudy.  Think of it, Dave. Serious Bro time!  

We’ll think of a placement for Nick in due course. Now let me see ...  

Completing “the greatest reform in a generation” (did I get the tag line right, Dave, or is this a “mess we’ve inherited” moment?), the rest of the UK could divorce London. London could ally with Merkel world, replacing Greece.  

No doubt Greece would be duly appreciative, sending copious amounts of olive oil. Or not.   

The rest of the UK could join the Scandinavian League.   

The world would be a better place.   

Whaaat?   Get serious? 

Seriously ... 

how seriously should one take a fellow who thinks unpaid internships will solve the problem of youth unemployment in a job market where 2.5 million workers are unemployed, 8.5 million very part time wage earners without fringe benefits?  That's one third of the labour force unemployed or underemployed.   

If that doesn’t tickle your serious bone, there’s the fellow who thinks the priority of government should be making benefits recipients work or lose benefits, thereby increasing the supply of bodies to do a workload  already insufficient to keep much more than 60% of the labour force productively busy.   This is called, “making work pay.” 

Then there’s the genius who thinks the UK should reduce wages to be "competitive" with Mumbai.  I admit, in the connections between his grand solution and his personal greed there may be at least a certain superficial logic to this one.  

Speaking of “at least” ... at least Boris seems to understand a constricted sphincter is bad enough all on its own without additionally piling on wanton, gratuitous, and demeaning nastiness.

Maybe we should keep Boris and send David and George to Disneyland.  

Orange county might like this pair.  George’s deeply sensitive and touching concern for stinkingly wealthy “wealth creators” would go down a treat in Irvine. As would his commitment to “starving the beast.” 

I can just visualize David and George “manning” Pirates of the Caribbean.  This has possibilities. Work with me on this ... . 

Ryan could join Mitt in London. I am sure Ryan could be put in charge of something. How about the London Underground. Now there’s a thought.  

Now I know what you're thinking and you may be right.   We shouldn't necessarily bar a bloke from public office just because he is one of those businessmen who seem simply unable to manage their own affairs without public subsidy, bailouts, legal breaks, tax avoidance, tax breaks, tax incentives, tax loopholes, the elimination of all regulations that protect the public from fraud and abuse and the environment from harm, the awarding of long term, lucerative government "privatization" contracts without accountability, and- last but not least-  government induced reductions in worker wages to the level of third world sweat shops.   They are, after all, "the" wealth producers, man.  You may have a point somewhere in there ... somewhere. 

But what about Nick? Oh ... yeah ... Nick.  Sigh.

I always hear “Man of La Mancha” when I think of Nick. To dream the impossible referendum ... to fight the unbeatable Lords ... This is my quest ... Yep- that Nick.   

Maybe he can do an off Broadway tour.  Nick could introduce US men to Panto.  The role of Marie Antoinette comes to mind. Let them eat Internships.   

But would it be nice to separate Nick from Dave?  Maybe too much trauma for sensitive souls.  I've got it! How about Nick skating along Venice Beach, singing with tears running down his cheeks- I’ve got a brand new pair of roller skates. You’ve got a brand new key. Now, that's Satisfying.

Not to worry, Nick.  Arnold’s going to pump you up.  Hasta La Vista, baby.

It isn’t really funny, is it.  

Stephen Sondheim had it wrong when he penned “send in the clowns.”  The answer to the very complicated and difficult problems that afflict our nations isn’t to send in the clowns.  It’s to send them away. 

The simplicity of it is, BBC, either the Plan failed or they are lying about the Plan

By:  John Charles Dyer, UK Correspondent

21 August 2012. 

BBC announced today government “unexpectedly” borrowed £600 million in July to meet operational expenditures.   

Why?  

Mechanically, the government’s total tax take was .8% below 2011 due to a 20% drop in corporations taxes. Tax receipts normally cover July costs. Last year, for instance, tax receipts exceeded expenditures by 2.8 billion pounds.   Other taxes held as expected. 

Additionally, expenditures on welfare in July were 5.1% more than they had been at the same time in 2011.  

Spin 

The Conservative-led Treasury promptly characterized the figure as “disappointing” (a new but frequently used favourite word, it seems, for the Coalition). A Treasury spokesperson laid the blame to North Sea Oil revenues, firmly rejecting any idea this news should lead to a change in course. She argued- bewilderingly- that the figures show the importance of sticking to the plan.  

Both the Office for National Statistics and the usual suspect spokespersons for the anonymous “markets” downplayed the results.   

The Office cautioned the figures included elements hard to calculate.   

The business community concluded the results really weren’t unexpected given the economy (although the business community hadn’t expected it the day prior).  An analyst for those anonymous “markets” said, “the trend so far isn’t disastrous” (Inspiring, that).  Another spokesman for business played down the news, saying only maybe the government might need to change course somewhere in the future “if.”  

Say what?  

What sort of a disaster did they have in mind?  

Maybe a change “if” what?  Business analysts have been saying this for over a year without delimiting when too much will be too much.  How much worse would they like it to grow?  

The facts are, four months into the UK financial year the government has borrowed £44.9 billion. That’s £9.3 billion ahead of 2011.  More significantly, but for the coincidence of the subsuming of Royal Post Office Pensions during this period the deficit would have been the second highest in recorded history.  By its own standards for judging success or failure, the Treasury’s “credible” Plan is an abject failure.  By the standards of everyone who isn’t a die hard supporter of the plan it has been an abject failure for some time. I needn’t bore the reader with the rehash.  

The simplicity 

It is easier to write from anxiety than from wisdom. But the product is often no more cathartic than enlightening.  Sometimes it’s best to let silence roll over you, then to learn the point you’ve missed. 

The simplicity of that point is, either the Conservative led government’s plan is the abject failure it appears to be, or the Conservatives are succeeding at a plan they have not disclosed to the rest of us.  

Wouldn’t that be a novel event in politics?   

Is there another explanation for why they insist they must stick to the course, why in fact these figures prove it?  Insanity comes to mind. So does the last scene from the Prisoner when the prisoner discovers that “the man” who is number 1 is really a hooting chimp.   

The good news is, the BBC’s journalistic instinct appears to have reawaken. At least three BBC reporters have now publicly confronted the government with the inconvenient fact that their figures that do not add up do not add up. 

That too is the simplicity. Facts and figures that do not add up most likely do not add up because they do not add up. Plans that fail to perform as advertised most likely fail to perform because they are the wrong approach. One does not have to take hallucinogens while sitting on top of a mountain beneath a starry night to figure it all out. One need only smell what one’s shoveling.  

Are you paying attention, America?  

I sincerely hope so. The UK Plan A is what the Ryan Plan looks like on the ground.  They have taken a banking crisis and morphed it into an economic disaster. That disaster presents real danger it will morph again into social upheaval. 

Vote smart.

Ignore the confidence men trafficking in “starving the beast.”

It is you and your loved ones who they will hurt.

 

MY SUMMER VACATION

By Wendi Maxwell, Guest Contributor

Wendi Maxwell brings personal insight and occasional stories from California, particularly the strange world of California politics and the new left. Maxwell is a former policy maker for California adult literacy projects

Let’s face it. I went to Europe looking for trouble.

This past year, I’ve followed the adventures of Occupy Oakland with great interest. I thought our vacation to Germany this summer might provide me with other examples of grassroots demonstrations. Europe had been simmering with demonstrations against ACTA (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) for months now. Perhaps I could find a demonstration while I was in Berlin.

Berlin did indeed bring me a street demonstration on the famous Unter Den Linden. A small crowd of demonstrators with costumes, drums, and signs gathered outside an expensive marble-clad business tower. Across the street, police watched with amusement. This was not the big blac block mob I had wanted, but I thought I’d check it out anyway.

“Guten tag! English anyone?”, I called out.  It turned out the demonstrators were a mixture of Germans, Americans, Greeks, and Spaniards. Everyone spoke English. What were they demonstrating? The corporatization of art, as exemplified by a gallery show underwritten by Deutsche Bank. The demonstrators were upset. Not only did artists have to pay their way in, but there were no free admissions for anyone – even for students. The German demonstrators in particular were incensed that no one was providing them with subsidies for their art. (In Berlin, they take their art seriously.) (Photo by Wendi Maxwell, June 2012 above: Berlin Protester).

I approached one demonstrator with a cardboard sign on a stick. “I write about Occupy Oakland. Can I take your picture? Can I write about you?” “Occupy Oakland?” came the response – “Man they’re hard core.”

“Yeah” I said. “Did you know that if you had that sign in Oakland, with a stick holding it up, you’d be arrested for carrying a weapon? And possibly beaten with your own stick?”

“Well,” mused the demonstrator, “these police don’t take us very seriously. There’s only five of them and they’re pretty relaxed.” And on travelling further down the street I realized that the police were not really there because of the demonstration. They were there because St. Hedwig’s Berlin Cathedral was celebrating the Mass of Corpus Christi and hundreds of clerics were processing through a parallel boulevard. The police were there for the Church, not for Art. (Photo by Wendi Maxwell, June 2012 above: Protester with a weapon).

A couple of days later we were in Dresden and ran across flyers advertising a Pirate Party mass demonstration against ACTA. Aha! Here was the demonstration I had looked for in Berlin. 

We went to the square at noon, but found it full of guitar-strumming evangelicals dancing and serving free curry lunch. Eventually I located two protestors – one with a bullhorn, and one with a sign, again on a stick. A block away I located another two demonstrators and directed them toward the first ones. No further demonstrators emerged. I did get a chance to learn about ACTA though… (ACTA sought to establish laws governing piracy of goods and the Internet. It was later defeated in the European Parliament.)(Photo left by Wendi Maxwell, June 2012: ACTA Protesters in Dresden).

General Election whispers the breeze; meet our demands replies the electorate

By: John Charles Dyer, UK Correspondent

15 August 2012.  

It’s a time of smoke signals. They drift across the patchwork quilt of emerald fields and timeless cottages and churches, early morning remnants of last night’s campfires.  

Smoke Signals

One newspaper’s headlines report Liberal Democrat activists advising their leader to “get tough” with the Tories.  Another newspaper solemnly cautions Tory MPs who counseled their leader, time to cut the red tape.   

More significantly, one of the Coalition’s more credible figures- Defence Secretary Philip Hammond- told the Independent that the failures of G4S shows government cannot rely on the private sector to perform all public services. Lest one jump to conclusions (as some did) Hammond wasn't “off message.” Within 24 hours one of the Coalition’s least credible figures, Jeremy Hunt, agreed. Government might need to rethink how much to rely on the private sector to provide public services.  

Articles have appeared which echo the Prime Minister’s prediction Britain faces austerity through 2020. They ask rhetorically whether the British public will tolerate it, whether Britain is headed into depression, whether the government should change course.  Raising the issues, they then assert - without citing who - “most economists” don’t think the UK faces a depression. Things will improve. Government should stay the course.    

Some commentators argue all of this is just the usual blah-blah before the spate of annual Party Conferences. These take place in September as Parliament’s holiday recess concludes.

I think there is more to it than annual ritual. Some comments smack of political fishermen trying out new spinners to see if any fish “hit” the new lure, prior to choosing the spinners for "the season."   

The breeze whispers “general election”  

The scheduled general election is 3 years away.  Am I thinking a Coalition split is imminent? Not really, although it is possible.  There are rumblings. But I can't say either partner intends to stampede Party and public into a general election. 

For one thing, Liberal Democrats may not have enough money. They will, in any event, face a loss of seats, maybe a significant loss. By bolting they lose any chance of redeemption with the public (a dubious prospect, but, hey, hope springs eternal).  

Conservatives may be more unhappy than Liberal Democrats. But polls suggest Labour could beat both Conservatives and any combination of Conservatives with any other party.  The prospect of putting all possible partner Parties together may exist in some parallel universe, but not this one. Besides, Conservatives don’t really want to share.  

The real Conservative worry is the electorate. If held today the electorate would likely punish Conservatives except in "safe" seats.  Some already teach their children to never trust Conservatives again.  

Still, the breeze does whisper “general election.”  

Reasons  

Embarrassment.

This government failed embarrassingly at what counts. It turned an economic crisis into a disaster. The list of leading figures caught in one corrupt web or another is  long and growing. The Chancellor’s handling of last year’s budget was an unmitigated debacle, poorly handled even in the Tory Prime Minister’s strong suite- Public Relations.  Yes, William Hague and Philip Hammond perform credibly in their respective roles. Yes, the Olympics went well. But any successeses only highlight the general impression of incompetent, corrupt “posh boys,” taking care of their own, not equal to the task of taking care of the country.    

Political necessity

Conventional punditry counsels the Coalition partners to stay together. Nothing to be gained in splitting now. 

But, professionals know that even three years out it is none too soon to reinvent and distance a Party from a failed government.  

An alternative grows in credibility. Regroup. Re-assert core Party principles even if that means sacrificing power temporarily to regain credibility with the base and Party-leaning independents.  Save the seats that can be saved.

Partnered or split, political wisdom considers it time to lay the ground work for a general election campaign in which the interests of Conservatives diverge from the interests of Liberal Democrats.

Snowballing

The resulting repositioning creates a tricky dilemma.  The reverberations from the game of reinvention predictably has unpredicted and uncontrolled consequences.  Partners may well reposition themselves into corners from which the only way out is divorce.

The next scheduled general election is 3 years away.  But a breakdown in the Coalition during the growing ambiguity, ambivalence, and hard feelings flowing from repositioning could bring on the general election much earlier. This, in turn, increases pressure to accelerate repositioning and distancing, engendering a snowballing effect.

All of which leads to the people's time of leverage 

Whether 2015 or earlier, a time of reinvention, repositioning, and distancing is a time of opportunity for the dissatisfied and ignored “little people.”  

The people’s hope has never been in a change in governing Party per se. 

There is often little difference between the Parties. Professional politicians are generally inherently cautious. Many across Party lines have more in common with each other than with the electorate. Ideologies and dialogue have become so corrupted and confused that one cannot count on the actual "do" to bear a relationship to the rhetoric. Promises vary only enough to induce the electorate to choose.  

Moreover, as Parties reposition, so will the Special Interests who influence the actual agenda in office of every Party. They will try to pick and back the next winner enough in advance with enough resources the winner will be in their debt. 

The people's hope has always been for the coming sooner rather than later of the time when every Party must convince a substantial plurality their Party is the one on the electorate's side.  This gives the people leverage. Campaigners must come to them. They will hope the people don’t notice the hat in hand. They will hope to secure support in exchange for only vague hints of minimum accountability. But however campaigners come, they know they must stay within the lines in the sand or face oblivion.  That is the people’s leverage. 

That time is now   

My advice to the people is, use this time to assert those lines in the sand.

My advice to the politicians, regardless of Party.  This government used up all the PR gimmicks, all the "get out of jail free cards," all of the non-commital hints. Yes, Boris is entertaining, but unless you hope to replace Ronald MacDonald it probably isn’t going to work for you.  This government trampled lines in the sand. Don't think because you wear a different colour tie you can disregard those lines. Conform, change or be changed out.

 

On the Edge

By Patricia H. Kushlis

I saw the Gaultier exhibit at San Francisco’s De Young Museum last week.  Jean Paul Gaultier is one of the edgiest designers around although the exhibit is primly entitled “The Fashion World of Jean Paul Gaultier.”  The De Young is in one of this country’s edgiest cities.  The exhibit was crowded but not overbooked; the fashions on display dated from Gaultier’s earliest days – he was born in 1952 – to just a few years ago and almost all were designed for androgynist shows on the runway, not the street. (Photo of man's tartan suit by PHKushlis August 8, 2012)

 The talking mannequins were, for me at least, the highlights: their eyes blinked, rolled and winked and their lips moved in synch with their words.  These near androids were themselves worth the price of admission.  But then, I don’t have a Madonnaesque figure or personality, bras that resemble upside down ice cream cones make me uncomfortable and six inch heels – according to a recent Vogue article – are not just bad for the feet but also the back.  

I hadn’t been in California since 2008. 

Since then the Golden State has been teetering on the brink of bankruptcy and three of its cities went belly-up in the past month.  At least three more major ones – San Jose, Los Angeles and Fresno – are on the brink – or so I was told by people who know what they’re talking about.  Money is being moved from Peter to pay Paul and expenditures on quality of life items – like education, the arts and the roads disappear like Aladdin’s genie shrinking back into his lamp. 

Road beds are a disaster:  they remind me of Manila days when the only axel-safe vehicles were the Pajeros:  sturdy and high enough chassed SUVs to survive the city’s cavernous potholes during a typhoon.  

California prices, too, are off the charts.  Gas was $1.00 higher per gallon than in New Mexico.  Souvenir bottles of California wines were on sale for an average – or so it seemed – of $100 per bottle (not per case) at the Oakland International Airport where most flights service these United States.  Tickets to special museum exhibits approached New York’s MOMA and the facsimiles of Gaultier’s teddy bear were “on special” for $99 plus tax ruling out all but the affluent or the privileged.

Drive 80 miles to the east and the brown rolling hills give way to the Central Valley, this country’s most fertile farm land.  Irrigation ditches – or acequias as they’re called in the Sunshine State – transport the water from the Sierra-Nevadas to the valley's fields.  Water is the state’s real gold and the ill-effects of global warming play havoc with the precipitation and snow pack in the mountains.  Hence our food supply.

Centuries ago these trenches were a gift from Middle Eastern Arabs where water was also scarce.  Then they - bringing this innovative technological knowhow with them - dashed across North Africa and into Spain.  The Romans brought us roads; the Muslims brought us acequias. Both remain as indispensable as this century's information highway - courtesy of the US government.

The GOOD Aspect of the BAD Financial News, Plus Some Thoughts about the Intent Loophole

By Patricia Lee Sharpe

The BAD news is that the Justice Department has decided it lacks the incontrovertible evidence needed to convict any big fish at Goldman Sachs on the charge of malfeasance re derivatives and other recent financial debacles.  This is disappointing, but not surprising.  U.S. financial laws are full of loopholes and practically no one, evidently, is legally bound to exercise fiduciary responsibility vis-à-vis clients or customers.  That being the case, buyers beware! 

The Reagan Mantra

This admonition applies to individuals, city treasurers, pension fund managers, anyone.  Not only naive retirees but largish cities have been hurt by inappropriate investments acquired under the aegis of supposedly reputable outfits over the past few years.  It’s hard to believe but  very few in the financial world are required by law to put the client first.  Expect all advisers to bend every obscure sub-clause of every impossible-to-decipher law as far as it will go to their own advantage. Duplicity reigns.

As the Granddaddy of them all said: Trust and verify—which is very hard to do when it comes to investing money.  Who has the time or expertise to keep up with the pros under the present dispensation?  Hence, there’s a lot of money stashed under mattresses or parked at ridiculously low interest rates these days. 

The  Due Diligence Escape Hatch

The sticking point in many court cases against bankers and their cousins in the financial world is the question of “intent.”  Did the seller intend to hurt the buyer?  And then comes the shifting of the blame to the victim.  Did the buyer exercize due diligence? Didn’t he/ she have the good sense to know there's always a risk that an investment won't pan out?  In fact, many new derivitives are so complex no one could or would buy them without "expert" endorsement.  Aren't drug pushers culpable?  Why not financial advisors?

Paper Clip Kelptos and the Big Time Thieves

By Patricia Lee Sharpe

Now that the statute of limitations will protect me, I’ll confess: I am a thief.  I purloined some paper clips and several (barely used) steno pads while I was working for the government.  I also xeroxed some personal papers in full view of the signs that decried “waste, theft and mismanagement.”   Officialdom hoped, evidently, that worker bees would readily expose the petty thieves  hiding within our honeycomb of cubicles.  Especially the paper clip purloiners, the steno snitches and the photocopy filchers.

No one reported me.  Whoopie!

Surely bosses who colluded (we mid-levels saw the emails) to inflate and falsify  their accomplishments for promotion purposes were also guilty of fraud and mismanagement, to say the very least, but they weren't turned in either.  Imagine the consequent slamming shut of executive ranks.  Imagine how our superiors would have held us up to ridicule as victims of the sour grapes syndrome.  And know this, too: we'd have lost any legal challenge.  So I, at least, consoled myself by banishing any remorse I might have felt for paperclip filching.

This may sound like penny ante stuff, as it is, but small is father to big, according to kiss-up-kick-down government overseers.   Paperclip heisting, so the theory goes, is a starter theft, the analogy being to starter drugs—especially marijuana.  Casual, recreational stuff leads, supposedly, to dreadful addiction and severe criminality.  We'd become pushers next.  Pssst!  Hey want a paper clip? Then mules. Steno pads for sale—cheap!  Heavy stuff.    Better or worse, depending on the point of view, serious abusers might be propelled into the totally off-the-books financial big time: global gun and drug running; secret accounts in the Caymans or Zurich, mammoth back-scratching kickbacks from contractors to legislators,  presidential aspirants bought outright by gambling czars.  And all of these paths might lead, in time,  to those tell tale tip-of-the-ice-berg manifestations: the mansion(s), the yacht(s), the jet(s), the horse(s). 

At this point I have, of course, ventured into fiction.  American small fry (almost) never get so far.  Or so high.  Or so rich.  Except in their dreams and delusions.  The U.S. is now the most inflexibly stratified society in the industrialized world.  Real upward mobility in America disappeared well before the end of the last century.

Meanwhile, the big fish, the sleazy suits, such as the bankers and financiers who wheeled and dealed and turned themselves into fat cats while they destroyed the world economy along with millions of hard-working Americans, evade accountability.  They’re hard to catch because, believe it or not (and I didn’t, for a long time), the rules are written to make it impossibly tough to catch or convict them.  There’s this, too:  At the higher income levels, it’s hard to tell “honest” crooks who profit from a totally rigged system from “real” criminals who honestly disobey laws.  Can you say symbiosis? 

Deconstructing the defense budget might help to illustrate this point.  But where’s the executive-judicial-legislative will to do the job properly?  Everyone’s bought.  (Yes, judges running for office have to raise big bucks now, and pure philanthropy is rare in the political world.  Even some Supreme Court members accept the equivalent of financial favors.)  Anyhow, there aren’t enough luxury prisons in which to house white collar criminals that belong behind bars; all the corrections money goes to incarcerate losers caught with a few grams of marijuana.  (Moral?  Be white and sniff coke.)  Anyway the space won’t be needed.  The scandalously few ethically-challenged executives actually prosecuted for financial crime bribe the government into settlement, thus escaping a guilty label by paying truly tiny fines (a few mil is penny ante for them) that serve as keep-out-of-jail cards.  These are the real kleptos.  They steal from investors—then give themselves a bonus large enough to run an elementary school for a year or more.