radiofree.asia

Category: poverty

  • Labour is STILL refusing to scrap the two-child benefit cap

    Despite repeated pledges to tackle the deepest injustices, the Labour Party government has so far refused to scrap the two‑child benefit cap—a stubborn policy that continues to punish low‑income families and trap countless children in poverty. Now, a new report has shamed Keir Starmer over the cap – but will he and his government bother to act?

    Scrap the two-child benefit cap

    The Poverty Strategy Commission is a cross-party group looking at poverty. Now, as the Guardian reported it has called on the government to abolish the two‑child benefit cap—a rule denying roughly £3,500 annually for every third or subsequent child in households claiming Universal Credit. That means 1.7 million children are presently affected by this punitive rule.

    The Commission said that reversing the cap, coupled with strengthened investments in housing, childcare, and Universal Credit, could lift 4.2 million people out of poverty, including 2.2 million trapped in deep poverty—a figure that should shame any government that claims to put fairness first.

    Yet remarkably, despite widespread consensus on the cap’s cruelty, the Labour government remains unmoved, citing fiscal constraints and failing to deliver any timeline for change.

    This inaction comes at enormous human cost. Recent data show that the policy has plunged at least 350,000 children into poverty, while another 700,000 kids have been pushed into deeper hardship. That means over a million young lives are made permanently harder by a benefit rule that could be reversed tomorrow if political will existed.

    Critics are right to call the cap “brutal” and “shameful”. Meanwhile, charities such the Child Poverty Action Group are ramping up pressure.

    A May 2025 poll revealed that 73% of the public believe every child deserves a good childhood regardless of cost, and 71% say children should be prioritized in government investment—sentiments clearly at odds with Labour’s current posture.

    The government says…

    In response to the Commission’s report on the two-child benefit cap, a government spokesperson told the Guardian:

    This government is determined to drive down poverty and ensure that every child gets the best start in life. We are overhauling jobcentres and reforming the broken welfare system to support people into good, secure jobs, while always protecting those who need it most.

    In addition to extending free school meals and ensuring the poorest children don’t go hungry in the holidays through a new £1bn crisis support package, our child poverty taskforce will publish an ambitious strategy to tackle the structural and root causes of child poverty across the country.

    However, as the Canary has documented, Labour’s rhetoric around the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) masks the reality: that it has cut chronically ill and disabled people’s benefits – and, as we only just reported, it seems it is planning to go even further with that. This alone will plunge more kids into poverty – on top of the two-child benefit cap.

    Interconnected issues

    Even beyond the two‑child benefit cap, the interconnected overall benefit cap continues to deny meaningful support to families already reeling from soaring living costs. Removing one restriction without addressing the other leaves 100,000 children still vulnerable, according to earlier government estimates. 

    The government’s own numbers only underscore the urgency: parliament’s research estimates that abolishing both the benefit cap and the two‑child benefit cap could reduce child poverty by around 620,000, at an annual per‑child cost of about £5,400—a price far outweighed by the potential long-term social and economic gains.

    Meanwhile, the broader context is grim. In the financial year ending 2024, 2.72 million children across the UK—22% of kids aged 0–15—lived in relative low‑income families, a rise from prior years. The striking contrast between the scale of the problem and the government’s lack of bold action is inexcusable.

    Labour’s hesitation on this vital issue not only betrays its own rhetoric of fairness and progress but opens a moral and political vacuum. If the Party cannot lead on dismantling deeply damaging welfare constraints—especially ones that target children—what can it realistically promise?

    Let there be no more excuses. The two-child benefit cap must go. Children’s futures should not be collateral damage to fiscal incompetence. True leadership would scrap this cruel policy now.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The People’s Champion: Howard Zinn

    Go to school, but don’t become an educated dummy.

    — Eddie Zinn to son Howard when he was a boy, Howard Zinn: A Life on the Left

    Labor Day is a good time to pay tribute to the late Howard Zinn, a rebel historian who broke with the tedious orthodoxy of “patriotic” history to tell the tale of those consigned to the bottom of the social pyramid: Indians, slaves, factory workers, indentured servants, sharecroppers, farmers, immigrants, political prisoners, soldiers, socialists, pacifists and other anti-war protesters. His most famous work, A People’s History of the United States, has by now surpassed four million in sales, an unheard of success record for a history book.

    Raised in grinding poverty, Howard grew up resenting smug media commentators, politicians, and corporate executives who talked of how in America riches were the inevitable reward of hard work. No matter how well this lie was told, it implied with insulting clarity that people who had not become rich could only blame themselves for lack of effort. Howard knew better from personal experience, that hard labor was the least rewarded, and certainly no ticket out of poverty. His father carried trays of food at weddings and restaurants for decades until a sudden heart attack ended his life at 67. He frequently had to borrow to make the rent and never had the means to retire.

    Eager to rid the world of poverty for everyone, Zinn urged his students and readers to not only read history but also make it. He flatly refused to lead an uncommitted life, eagerly participating in protests, marches, and civil disobedience campaigns concerned with civil rights, economic and social justice, imperial war, and exploitation. In his early career he was a teacher at Spelman College, an all-black women’s school, where he was fired for his anti-Jim Crow politics; later he taught at Boston University, where his classes were so popular and so subversive of orthodoxy that president John Silber sought to limit participation in them, while denying Zinn salary increases at every opportunity.

    Unlike the vast majority of professors, Zinn was more comfortable on a picket line than in most academic settings, where the urgency of class conflict was easily ignored or dismissed, though not by Zinn.

    A revealing anecdote captures the spirit of the people’s historian better than any ponderous essay could even hope to. The year was 1970 and professor Zinn was due to appear in court in Boston for an act of protest he had engaged in. He chose to ignore his court obligation and participate in a Baltimore debate entitled, “The Problem of Disobedience,” which he had been invited to do. During the debate Zinn argued that the problem wasn’t civil disobedience, but obedience: “Our problem is the number of people across the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their governments and have gone to war, and millions have died from that obedience. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and famine and stupidity and war and cruelty. That is our problem.” When he returned to Boston, two police detectives arrested him outside his classroom for violating his court date.

    The anecdote reveals what Zinn thought about history, that it had much more to do with how we act than what we think, a conviction that encouraged his conclusion that change comes when masses of people realize this and mobilize to resolve their grievances directly. Elections and politicians don’t produce change, they react to it.

    It shouldn’t surprise anyone to learn, therefore, that during the early days of Obama-mania a skeptical Zinn sounded a discordant note, warning that Obama would not implement change unless surrounded by a sufficiently powerful and persistent social movement forcing him to. “Our time and energy should be dedicated to educating, agitating, and organizing our fellow citizens at the workplace, in the streets, and at school,” Zinn said, pointing out that the great changes in the time of Lincoln, FDR, and the 1960s came about precisely because the American people rose up and took such responsibilities seriously in those years.

    Unfortunately, these waves of popular agitation can’t last forever, although the next one is always already on the way. Zinn regularly reminded us of that, showing that history is made up of fortuitous surprises only detectable in retrospect. He liked to point out that when his colleagues in the 1950s used to lament the apparent lack of prospects for racial change due to the failure of Americans to mobilize, just in those moments small and isolated acts of rebellion and disobedience were occurring in the South, eventually converging and exploding into the Civil Rights Movement.

    Given the way change actually happens, Zinn thought, progress should not rightly be seen as a gift handed down from above, but rather, as the hard fought reward for popular education and organizing over a period of years. Strikes, boycotts, soldiers refusing to fight, multitudes renouncing injustice and war, these signal the arrival of a better world.

    Given his commitment to social change, Howard could not be satisfied with transmission of knowledge as a measure of his teaching success. “I wanted students to leave my classes not just better informed, but more prepared to relinquish the safety of silence, more prepared to speak up, to act against injustice wherever they saw it,” he said.

    He rejected academic neutrality as a false standard. He believed in being as scrupulous as possible in adducing the facts, but did not feel objectivity was actually attainable. This was clearly a recipe for trouble, but submission to injustice was everywhere a permanent disaster.

    Economic security for its own sake never interested Howard, who lived by the maxim that “risking your job is a price you pay if you want to be a free person.”

    Daniel Ellsberg called Zinn “my hero,” while dissident intellectual Noam Chomsky held him in similarly high esteem: “There are people whose words have been highly influential, and others whose actions have been an inspiration to many. It is a rare achievement to have interwoven both of these strands in one’s life, as Howard Zinn has done. His writings have changed the consciousness of a generation, and helped open new paths to understanding history and its crucial meaning for our lives. He has always been on call, everywhere, a marvel to observe. When action has been called for, one could always be confident that he would be in the front lines, an example and trustworthy guide.”

    Chomsky was also impressed by Zinn’s remarkable performance on the speaker’s platform: “What has always been startling to me . . . is Howard’s astonishing ability to speak in exactly the right terms to any audience on any occasion, whether it is a rally at a demonstration, a seminar (maybe quite hostile, at least initially) at an academic policy-oriented graduate institution, an inner-city meeting, whatever. He has a magical ability to strike just the right tone, to get people thinking about matters that are important, to escape from stereotypes and question internalized assumptions, and to grasp the need for engagement, not just talk. With a sense of hopefulness, no matter how grim the objective circumstances. I’ve never seen anything like it.”

    Zinn had no use for history written without a social conscience behind it; or merely as a professional duty, if it was done only to get something published or get a university position, tenure, a promotion, or to earn prestige. He saw the profit system behind such shallow motives, making private gain the key to what gets produced while leaving a lot of valuable things unproduced, and many stupid things produced in great abundance. Most historians just play it safe and cash history in for their personal advantage. Howard refused to do that.

    He knew that courting controversy went with the territory of being a good teacher, honest writer, and decent citizen. In an interview with David Barsamian he noted that long before the Nazis there was a European holocaust in the Americas, that “perhaps 50 million indigenous people or more died as a result of enslavement, overwork, direct execution and disease. A much higher toll even than the genocide of Hitler.”

    Were Howard Zinn still with us today, there can be little doubt that he would be reminding us that the spectacle of two million Gazans being massacred or starved to death grotesquely insults any pretense of there being a human civilization in the world, and especially not in the United States and Israel, the countries most directly responsible for the unrestrained barbarism.

    He would be on the front lines of the struggle to liberate Palestine.

    Sources:

    Howard Zinn, The Future of History – Interviews with David Barsamian, (Common Courage, 1999)

    Howard Zinn (with David Barsamian), Original Zinn – Conversations on History and Politics, (Harper, 2006)

    Howard Zinn, The Zinn Reader – Writings On Disobedience and Democracy, (Seven Stories, 1997)

    David Detmer, Zinnophobia – The Battle Over History in Education, Politics, and Scholarship, (Zero Books, 2018)

    Howard Zinn, You Can’t Be Neutral On A Moving Train – A Personal History,  (Beacon, 2022)

    Martin Duberman, Howard Zinn – A Life on the Left, (New Press, 2012)

    Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, (HarperCollins, 2003)

    “American curios / El historiador rebelde,” La Jornada (Spanish), August 29, 2022

    The post The People’s Champion: Howard Zinn first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Structural Foundations of Africa’s Biggest Slum

    Poverty is an artificial creation. Join political activist Ajam Baraka and members of the Communist Party of Kenya on a trip, making the case using Kibera, Africa’s largest slum.

    It is symptomatic of a larger issue because, despite Nairobi being the wealthiest county in Kenya, contributing 27% of the country’s GDP, 60% of its 5 million residents live in squalor across 200 slums. Successive governments since independence have done little to change the status quo, leaving the people to predatory organisations that, at best, provide a band-aid to a gaping wound, or at worst, serve to depoliticise the masses.

    Black Agenda Report & North-South Project for Peoples-Centered Human Rights have come together to re-release African Stream’s Mini-Doc.

    The post Structural Foundations of Africa’s Biggest Slum first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Gary’s Economics blasts ‘childish’ arguments against wealth taxes

    Gary Stevenson is an economist and former trader who’s one of the UK’s leading proponents for wealth taxes. In his latest video via Gary’s Economics, he’s taken apart the “childish” arguments against the UK implementing a wealth tax. He also gives reason to be optimistic about the future.

    Gary’s Economics: growing inequality

    In the blurb for “Welcome to Gary’s Economics”, he describes himself as follows:

    I’m Gary Stevenson. I made millions of pounds working in The City, betting inequality was going to destroy our economy.

    On this channel I’m going to explain what is really happening in the economy – what this means for you, and what you can do about it.

    Key to his message is that more and more money is held in the hands of fewer and fewer people, and this growing inequality is destabilising the country.

    Groups like the Equality Trust have done excellent work highlighting what this inequality looks like, highlighting:

    The UK has very high inequality of income compared to other developed countries; the 9th most unequal incomes of 38 OECD countries (OECD, 2022).

    The UK’s wealth inequality is much more severe than income inequality, with the top fifth taking 36% of the country’s income and 63% of the country’s wealth, while the bottom fifth have only 8% of the income and only 0.5% of the wealth according to the Office for National Statistics.

    The group has also shown that the problem of inequality was getting better for a time until the wealthy managed to regain the upper hand (not that the rich have ever been anything other than on top):

    Graph showing income inequality changing over the 20th century

    “idiotically simplistic discussions”

    Gary’s latest video on Gary’s Economics is titled “How to Build a Wealth Tax“, and it begins with him arguing:

    Correct implementation on tax policy is a job of experts and government and and civil service. It is not the job of fucking YouTubers.

    For those who come to his channel looking for answers, the opening might confuse them. The video does clarify the point, however, as Gary explains that establishing the finer details of a wealth tax require teams of smart people working on the problem:

    Listen, I would be more than happy, more than fucking happy to be involved in making sure this tax policy is designed well, obviously. But the way that you do that is you get the tax experts, you talk to me, you talk to the other guys, you build a team of proper good tax experts. You think about the question of how do we deal with people who leave the country? Can we still tax them on the UK assets like, like we did to Abramovich, like China does? You look at how these issues were dealt with in the past. You look at how wealth inequality was reduced significantly in the 20th century.

    You have sensible discussions, but I’m constantly faced with these like idiotically simplistic discussions which are totally bad faith, which is like, “Oh, okay. You’ve recognised that the ship’s going to sink. Well, why don’t you fucking fix the hole your fucking self then, you fucking idiot?” It’s unbelievably childish and it’s unbelievably chaotic. Like, listen, we’re supposed to be adult, grownup, mature countries here.

    Gary isn’t the only one working in this space, of course, with groups like Tax Justice UK pushing for:

    a new wealth tax: a 2% levy on individuals who own assets worth more than £10 million – it would affect 0.04% of the UK population and would raise £24 billion a year. We’re also campaigning to apply national insurance to investment income, raising up to £10.2 billion a year.

    He’s right, though, that there’s only so much independent campaigners and pressure groups can achieve. To genuinely tax wealth, it will require serious people and serious consideration. It may also depend on us getting money out of politics, with the Electoral Reform Society highlighting:

    Scandal after scandal reveals an ever-growing arms race when it comes to party funding, with voters often coming second to big donors and spending rules sidestepped. Left to themselves the big parties have failed to find a solution.

    A fifth of all major political donations in the two decades between 2001 and 2021 came from just 10 men.

    Our politicians urgently need to clean up the way parties raise and spend money.

    Good democracy always has a price tag. An open, clean and fair model of funding the parties would give taxpayers far better value for money. It would ensure our politicians don’t have to dance to the tune of trusts, union bosses or City interests.

    All the parties have been tainted by party funding. It’s time for action.

    British taxes on British assets

    One of the examples Gary gives on Gary’s Economics is that of Roman Abramovich, the Russian oligarch and former owner of Chelsea football club. The UK government sanctioned Abramovich following Russia’s invasion, with the “£2.5bn in proceeds” from his sale of Chelsea currently frozen “in a UK bank account”, according to the BBC. In January 2025, a joint investigation from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the BBC, and the Guardian unveiled:

    Roman Abramovich may owe as much as a billion pounds in UK tax and potential penalties on profits made through a vast offshore hedge fund operation, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal after an analysis of leaked documents.

    If HMRC found wrongdoing and levied the maximum penalties available, this would surpass former F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone’s £653m record tax settlement last year.

    Between the late 1990s and early 2022, the billionaire – who is now sanctioned in the UK and EU – held as much as $6bn in a global network of hundreds of hedge funds. The sums totalled nearly half his estimated fortune.

    These generated huge returns, which were then used to bankroll other parts of his business empire – including his financing of Chelsea Football Club.

    The relevance of Abramovich is that:

    In simple terms, Abramovich’s companies were registered offshore but were apparently being run from the UK. That would mean they should have been paying UK taxes.

    Gary uses the Abramovich example to counter the argument that rich people will just flee the country if we try to tax them:

    The truth is, and I’ve always said this, I’ve never tried to hide this, actually raising taxes on the rich is going to be really, really hard for a variety of reasons, right? One of the biggest reasons is obviously they control a lot of the media narrative.

    They can sell lot of scare stories. “If you tax us, we’ll leave.” Or they can do a lot of sort of personally attacking of me as an individual. But the truth is there are things they can do and you need to deal with those things. Like the truth is they can leave, right? And I’ve always said, and I constantly believe, you know, look at the Abramovich situation, which shows like here’s a rich man who tried to leave. And we just said, “Okay, well you can leave, but if you’re going to own British assets, we can tax British assets.”

    And that’s always been my comeback to that. And that is true, but you need make sure that you have your legal systems in place.

    All together

    Another interesting point Gary makes is that:

    And people sometimes criticise me like, “Oh, that form of wealth tax is not good. We need another form of wealth tax.” I’m here for that. Let’s have those discussions, let’s build a tax policy, you know?

    It’s a good attitude to have, as the more people we have arguing for taxes on the wealthy the better. An example of someone with good faith criticism of Gary’s slogan “tax wealth not work” is Richard Murphy who argues that there are plenty of millionaires who work (as opposed to just siphoning money from their assets), and we need to be taxing those people too:

    This sort of discussion is good as it expands the case for reducing inequality, and the more people we have making the case the better.

    Gary’s Economics: progress

    While it’s always enjoyable to see Gary’s Economics take down “idiotically simplistic discussions which are totally bad faith”, the video also provides a welcome dose of optimism. As he notes:

    the reason I’m here and I’ve finally done a video on implementation is because we’re winning the debate

    If anything, the fact that the arguments against a wealth tax are becoming dumber and dumber is a sign that the arguments for implementing one are winning. The key now is for everyone to keep shouting about it until the case for ending inequality becomes undeniable.

    Featured image via Gary’s Economics YouTube Channel

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • ‘Inequality In Kenya: View From Kibera’ Documentary Premieres

    Poverty is an artificial creation. Join political activist and Black Agenda Report’s contributing editor Ajamu Baraka and members of the Communist Party Marxist-Kenya on a trip to Kibera, Africa’s largest slum. It is symptomatic of a larger issue because, despite Nairobi being the wealthiest county in Kenya, contributing 27% of the country’s GDP, 60% of its 5 million residents live in squalor across 200 slums. Successive governments since independence have done little to change the status quo, leaving the people to predatory organizations that, at best, provide a band-aid to a gaping wound, or at worst, serve to depoliticize the masses.

    Black Agenda Report & North-South Project for People(s)-Centered Human Rights have come together to re-release African Stream’s Mini-Doc: “Inequality in Kenya: View from Kibera”.

    The post ‘Inequality In Kenya: View From Kibera’ Documentary Premieres appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Trump’s Invasion Of Washington DC Costs Over $1 Million A Day

    President Trump mobilized the D.C. National Guard under the guise of restoring security in the nation’s capital — despite D.C.’s crime rate being at a 30-year low. What began as a deployment of 800 D.C. National Guard troops has grown to encompass 2,091 as of this writing, as Republican governors send hundreds more.

    Trump hasn’t just complained about alleged crime in the district — he’s placed a target on people experiencing poverty and homelessness. Claiming that we’re “getting rid of the slums,” Trump has called on troops and police to forcibly remove unhoused people from the city.

    Federal law prohibits deploying the military on U.S. soil, except under certain extraordinary circumstances.

    The post Trump’s Invasion Of Washington DC Costs Over $1 Million A Day appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The Poor Bear the Brunt of the Pain

    In the theatre of global conflict, where empires clash and ideologies contend, one truth remains tragically constant: it is not the architects of war who suffer its consequences, but the poor. The dispossessed, the voiceless, the expendable—these are the true casualties of geopolitical ambition. Their pain is not incidental; it is structural. It is the very currency by which power is transacted.

    Ukraine: A War Between Blood Brothers and Colonial Ghosts

    The war in Ukraine is often framed as a struggle for sovereignty, democracy, or territorial integrity. Yet beneath these abstractions lies a more intimate tragedy: a fratricidal conflict between peoples bound by history, language, and blood. Slavic brothers now spill each other’s blood—not for ancient grievances, but for the ambitions of post-imperial actors manipulating borders and allegiances from afar.

    This war is not merely a regional dispute—it is a symptom of unresolved colonial legacies. The descendants of former colonizers, now cloaked in the garments of liberal democracy, stoke the flames of division while the poor—Ukrainian and Russian alike—are conscripted, displaced, and buried. The pain is not evenly distributed. It is the peasant, the pensioner, the factory worker who pays the price through lost sons, shattered homes, and economic ruin.

    Gaza: A Fire Ignited by Promises and Betrayals

    The tragedy of Gaza is not an accident of history—it is the consequence of deliberate design. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was not a gesture of goodwill but a colonial maneuver that set in motion a century of dispossession. Palestinians were displaced to make room for Jewish refugees—many of whom were themselves victims of European persecution. Thus, the persecuted were resettled through the persecution of another people, not by moral necessity but by imperial convenience.

    Today, Gaza is ablaze. Not metaphorically, but literally. Homes reduced to ash, families annihilated in seconds, children buried beneath rubble. And yet, much of the world hesitates. It equivocates. It attempts to rationalize genocide with the language of security and self-defense. The perpetrators, led by Netanyahu and his coterie of war profiteers, are shielded by a U.S.-led order that privileges power over principle.

    The Moral Logic of Emergency

    In moments of crisis, humanity instinctively prioritizes the most imperiled:

    • In a burning building, evacuation begins with the floor most engulfed in flames.
    • In a hospital, triage dictates that the most grievously wounded receive immediate attention.

    This is not ideology—it is moral logic. So why, when Gaza is engulfed in fire, does the world avert its gaze? Are Palestinians not human enough to warrant the same compassion? Has our moral compass been so thoroughly colonized that we no longer recognize suffering unless it is politically convenient?

    The Architecture of Global Oppression

    The so-called “rules-based order” is not a neutral framework for peace and prosperity. It is an architecture of oppression, meticulously designed to preserve the privileges of the powerful and diminish the aspirations of the poor. It criminalizes resistance, monetizes suffering, and pathologizes poverty. It is a system in which the pain of the Global South is treated not as a crisis, but as a constant—an ambient hum beneath the cacophony of global capital.

    This order does not merely fail the poor; it feeds upon them. It is sustained by their labor, their displacement, their silence. And when they speak—when they resist—they are labeled as threats, extremists, or terrorists.

    Conclusion

    The poor bear the brunt of the pain. Because they have no lobbyists, no media machines, no seats at the table. But they have graves. They have scars. They have stories. And those stories must be told—not as footnotes to history, but as its moral center.

    Let us not be seduced by the ill-conceived language of diplomacy while children are incinerated. Let us not mistake silence for neutrality. In the face of systemic violence, silence is complicity.

    The post The Poor Bear the Brunt of the Pain first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Clutching At Pearls, The World’s Largest Criminal Enterprise, The US, Cracks Down On Crime

    Sociologists correlate high homicide rates to high unemployment and poverty rates; known historically as the Black Belt, Chicago’s predominantly African American South side is home to both. Characterized by disinvestment schemes such as tax increment financing districts which divert property tax money from the neighborhoods to white elephant projects that benefit the wealthy, southside Chicago was also home to the late police commander, Jon Burge, whose detectives extracted confessions from more than 100 people, mostly Black, by shocking them with cattle prods, smothering them with plastic typewriter covers and pointing guns in their mouths while pretending to play Russian roulette.

    The post Clutching At Pearls, The World’s Largest Criminal Enterprise, The US, Cracks Down On Crime appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Activists just demanded that ‘champagne-guzzling, private jet-owning billionaires’ pay up

    Activists from the Make Them Pay coalition have projected message onto the Houses of Parliament to demand the Labour Party government make the super rich cough up their fair share.

    Time to tax the super rich: projections on parliament

    On Wednesday 20 August, activists sent a clear message to the government to “Protect workers, not billionaires” and “Tax the super rich”:

    'Tax the super rich' projected onto the Houses of Parliament.

    'Protect workers' projected onto the Houses of Parliament.

    Activists made sure to tell the government in no uncertain terms that it’s time to “Make them pay”:

    'Make them pay' projected onto the Houses of Parliament.

    Direct action group Climate Resistance coordinated the stunt as part of the Make Them Pay coalition campaign. It comes in advance of a major mobilisation the coalition is coordinating in central London for 20 September. It expects to draw tens of thousands of people to the streets.

    Climate Resistance spokesperson Sam Simons said:

    Champagne-guzzling, private jet-owning billionaires are profiting from hardship, plundering the resources of communities around the world, and trashing our planet for profit. We’re facing a climate emergency and runaway poverty, because the super rich are treating the world as their playground. It’s time to abolish billionaires, redistribute their ill-gotten wealth, and fund urgent climate action.

    As we gear up for the Autumn Budget, this government has a simple choice: tax the super-rich and invest in climate action, or cosy up to Nigel Farage and chuck future generations under the billionaire bus. Join Make Them Pay on 20th September and make sure they make the right choice.

    Uniting against big billionaire polluters

    The Make Them Pay coalition aims to bring together a diverse coalition of groups from the climate justice, trade union, and social justice movements. They will unite in a call for increased action from the UK government. The coalition will demand that it accelerate a green transition with justice for communities, workers, and the planet at its core.

    The rally will add to the variety of mass mobilisations and protests groups are planning in London that week. These will be targeting Trump during second state visit.

    Global Justice Now’s campaigns and policy manager Izzie McIntosh said:

    From climate change to global trade, this government seems intent on protecting billionaires and destructive corporations over working people. The economy is broken, the climate is collapsing and many of us are looking to the future – or even the end of the month – with fear.

    The money is there to protect us all, but it is currently concentrated in the hands of a staggeringly wealthy few. Our message to Keir Starmer is to be brave enough to make them pay, and rebuild society for the people who keep it running, not the rich and powerful.

    Billionaires are ‘breaking Britain’: enough is enough, say Make Them Pay

    350.org’s head of public engagement Namrata Chowdhary added:

    Billionaires are breaking Britain, in the same way they have been wrecking the world. From the devastating floods in Asia to the wildfires across Europe, the impacts of climate inaction are hitting communities everywhere. Meanwhile, fossil fuel companies continue their vandalism unchecked. It’s time to draw the line under this unfair and extractive system, that lines the pockets of the super-wealthy while fuelling the many crises we are living through today. We need urgent solutions, including a tax on extreme wealth, so that those who are most responsible for this destruction are held accountable. A fair tax on billionaires’ disproportionate wealth can free up the funds we need, and help secure justice for people and the planet.”

    Echoing this, Tyrone Scott, senior movement building and activism Officer at War on Want, said:

    Last year, UK billionaires pocketed an extra £35 million every single day, while families skipped meals, food banks were overwhelmed, and climate disasters intensified. This is the injustice we refuse to accept. It’s time to make the super-rich, corporations and polluters pay their fair share, so we can rebuild a society that works for people and the planet, not billionaires.

    Featured image and additional images supplied

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • How Mexico’s Welfare Policies Helped 13.4 Million People Out Of Poverty

    Toothless and frail, Gloria Palacios, 84, stooped as she set up her rickety sidewalk shop in Mexico City’s roughshod Doctores neighborhood. On sale: peanuts, cigarettes, chewing gum, chocolates and chips.

    When asked how much she made in a day, Palacios’s disabled son Gustavo, who helps run the tiny store, simply laughed. “If we make 100 pesos ($5) it’s a lot,” he said. Happily, said Palacios, the family has a different lifeline.

    With their house crumbling and bills piling up, the only thing keeping them afloat is a bimonthly transfer of 6,200 pesos ($330) implemented by the government of previous president Andrés Manuel López Obrador for adults over 65.

    The post How Mexico’s Welfare Policies Helped 13.4 Million People Out Of Poverty appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Is Assisted Suicide About Autonomy or Coercion? A New Film Asks Hard Questions.

    Reid Davenport’s new documentary Life After intervenes in a contentious debate around assisted suicide. The film offers a timely and critical look at the issue through interviews with disabled people, their loved ones, and advocates, as well as Davenport’s personal reflections, informed by his lived experience as a disabled person. Currently authorized in 11 states and Washington, D.C.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The Monsters Of The Global Crisis Interregnum

    The famous quote by Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci seems to have been written for the moment humanity is currently experiencing: “The old is dying, and the new cannot be born. In this interregnum, monsters arise.”

    The world is going through a civilizational crisis in which the neoliberal capitalist order, although mortally wounded, continues to impose its predatory logic, that of the use of force and the resurgence of fascism, while emancipatory alternatives fail to consolidate. In this vacuum, monsters proliferate: wars and attempts at recolonization, climate crisis, structural hunger, collapse of multilateralism and international law placed at the service of the world’s powers that be.

    The post The Monsters Of The Global Crisis Interregnum appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Campaign Nonviolence Action Days In Challenging Times

    For 12 years, Campaign Nonviolence has worked with tens of thousands of people to build a culture of active nonviolence. Looking at the devastating violence in our world — from racism to war to poverty to the climate crisis — we asked people to join us in engaging the transformative power of nonviolence in our lives, communities and society. 

    Thousands of groups joined in. Over the years, they’ve marched against gun violence. Created zones of peace in violence-prone areas. Shut down military bases. Trained thousands of students in anti-bullying practices. Held racial healing circles. Distributed tens of thousands of meals in mutual aid. Pressured banks to divest from fossil fuels and weapons. And so much more. 

    The post Campaign Nonviolence Action Days In Challenging Times appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • There Is No Revolution Without Revolutionary Consciousness

    A wind of despair blows relentlessly across the world. This wind of panic is the result of poverty and social inequalities. This has given rise to widespread wars that take various forms depending on the reality. Faced with the ravages of this phenomenon, Haiti is not spared (in fact, it is one of the biggest victims).

    Haiti is plunged into insecurity in all its forms: poverty, arms trafficking and trade, organ and drugs trafficking and a lack of transportation, all of which have plunged the country into total financial insecurity. For many, Haiti has never experienced such a chaotic situation in history.

    This critical situation is not without consequences for society. It forces the population to adopt a different understanding of life; many essential sectors in the society including the universities, the media, organizations and political parties, etc. have suffered an unprecedented state of discouragement.

    The post There Is No Revolution Without Revolutionary Consciousness appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Summer Days and Dark Nights

    One never knows where fascism “lite” might appear. We have one bumper sticker for our state which has confounded the foreign tourists along our coast:

    Oregun™ - Oregunian® Archives -

    Qu’est-ce que ça veut dire . . . Qué significa . . . was bedeutet es?

    Decals/Stickers Archives -

    These French, Mexican and German tourists asked me last week, What does it mean when they pointed to a big jacked up dual-rear tire pick-up truck with this huge sticker in the rear window: Oregunian-Oregun-zed with six AR-15 rifles on the image.

    Well well, I was at the Brooks Great Oregon Steam-Up (7/26) event, and ran into some of that fascism lite. At the outdoor swap meet one vendor was selling 1 Reich Mark postage stamps with Adolph Hitler’s bust (a real stamp) printed on it, alongside another one of those Trump fake items: postage stamps with the 47th POTUS in various odd situations printed on it.

    This was not a Norman Rockwell moment. There were other items with swastika and SS and Gestapo emblems marked on them.

    I have a client who works and lives in Newport and who lives with developmental disabilities. I am his support professional helping him navigate life and daily activities of living. He doesn’t drive.
    I had to keep my mouth zipped at the Brooks event when I saw this 6 foot eight guy wearing a t-shirt with this verbiage on it: “If This Flag Offends You I’ll Help You Pack Your Bags.”

    If This Flag Offends You I'll Help You Pack T-shirt Hoodie — T-Shirt Factory: Shop Printed T-Shirts, Sweatshirts and Hoodies

    That is the American flag.

    These Colors Dont Run Mens Patriotic Front-Zip Hoodie With Custom Eagle Art & Embroidered American Flag Patch

    I did get a whisper in the hulk’s ear without my client hearing: “I’m offended by your t-shirt, buster.”
    I kept walking through the Caterpillar museum and looked at the fabled E9 tractor-bulldozer. Another offense, but I’ll get to that later.

    A flag I made for Jewish Americans. Details in the comments. : r/vexillology

    The beauty of my job is that I meet people where they are. I can’t or won’t start attempting to teach clients what I know and have read and experienced as a way to mold them to my thinking.

    This particular client is worried about losing Oregon Health Plan, Social Security retirement – he’s 60 and has worked since age 18. He hates Trump in that sort of funny way: “He’s a real jerk.”

    But my client has a smartphone and reads headlines like this:

    • Trump administration’s budget cuts endanger Meals on Wheels: ‘Life and death implications’

    Trump administration's budget cuts endanger Meals on Wheels: 'Life and death implications' | Trump administration | The Guardian
    • Trump’s “Health Reform Vision” Includes $1 Trillion in Cuts to Medicaid and ACA

    In Trump's Budget, Big Health Care Cuts but Few Details - The New York Times
    • The Trump Administration Is Recklessly Axing Funding and Staff for America’s National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands

    The Trump Administration Is Recklessly Axing Funding and Staff for America's National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands - Center for American Progress
    • Nation’s Disability Services System Begins To Buckle As Funding Threats Intensify

    Nation's Disability Services System Begins To Buckle As Funding Threats Intensify

    The reality for my clients – and my own employment – is that this existential threat is more than some theoretical attack. They are seeing the evidence as they go to their service providers and hearing about this or that benefit being cut. They see it with refuse bins overflowing at national parks. They hear fellow Senior Center folk whispering about hot meals at the 60 Plus Center going the way of the dodo.

    One adage has to be broken down, as my clients ask me for input, and I can only be that dude who is a journalist from the old school of daily newspaper grinds, balanced with my outspoken Substack columns and articles in dissident publications and even here in Lincoln County on my radio show, Finding Fringe, KYAQ FM.

    I never heard this in my home growing up, but I sure did hear it at in-laws’ homes and other places: “Don’t talk about religion or politics at the dinner table.”

    That’s been extended to, “Don’t talk about Biden or Trump or money or MAGA or socialism or sex or drugs or education at the dinner table.”

    My other clients ask me about this local headline: “Man accused of assaulting elderly Army veteran during Newport political protest”

    Sure, a Lincoln County grand jury indicted a Klamath Falls man on three charges as a result of his arrest for assaulting a 74-year-old anti-Trump protester in early June.

    Police: Man arrested for assaulting elderly man during Newport protest

    The conversations are what we call tough and difficult if people just do not understand the context, history and intent of protest in the USA.

    How many suffragettes were injured and jailed in the fight to get the vote for women? Over 500 women were arrested in the U.S. for their involvement in the Silent Sentinels protests for women’s suffrage, with 168 serving jail time. In England, that number is 1,000.

    Silent Sentinels - Wikipedia

    For my clients’ own personal DD and ID journeys, most do not know that the disability rights movement, even though less visible than other civil rights movements, has roots going back to the 1800s.

    In 1990 the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed and signed into law, prohibiting discrimination based on disability in employment, public accommodations, transportation, and other areas.

    Those dinner and work water cooler conversations do matter, as this headline belies: “The Trump administration withdrew 11 pieces of ADA guidance. How will it affect compliance?”And that old adage,

    “Love it or Leave it” never applied for social justice and civil rights activists.

    Love It or Leave It – Let's Try Democracy

    Yep, some of us have had trouble with that flag, and find many offenses in and around it.

    Now to get back to that E9 Caterpillar? This headline rarely gets put into small and medium-sized newspapers: “Caterpillar Inc’s Role in Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.”

    CAT equipment has been used to uproot olive treesopens in a new tab and destroy other agricultural products and landopens in a new tab. During ‘Operation Cast Lead’ in the Gaza Strip two years ago, Israel used armored D9 bulldozersopens in a new tab to demolish wide swathes of homes, factories, agricultural land and civilian infrastructure, including water pipes and networksopens in a new tab needed for basic survival.

    There have been several Palestinian deathsopens in a new tab during home demolitions, most of them occurring during the second intifada in the early 2000’s. A Caterpillar D9 bulldozer is directly involved in the death of U.S. citizen Rachel Corrie in March 2003. An Israeli soldier drove the armored bulldozer over Rachel as she protested an imminent home demolition in the Gaza Strip. An IDF investigation ruled it an accident, but the Corrie family has filed a lawsuit and the current trial underway in Haifa, Israel, ‘Rachel Corrie v. the State of Israel  has uncovered discrepancies and short-comings in the investigation.

    Who Profits - The Israeli Occupation Industry - Caterpillar

    We have much work to do in order to reverse all those offenses, but the fear in my clients’ voices is palpable. Unfortunately, fear can cause stasis or inaction. And that’s the death knell of justice.

    As Israel Keeps Killing Americans, U.S. Officials Give It a Pass

     

    (July 13 2022) Nearly two decades before Israeli forces killed Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, shooting a single bullet into her head while she was reporting from the occupied West Bank city of Jenin, an Israeli soldier drove a bulldozer over American peace activist Rachel Corrie, crushing her to death.

    Both killings left little real doubt about the dynamics at play. Abu Akleh was standing with a group of colleagues, wearing a vest clearly marked “PRESS,” nowhere near the fighting that had taken place earlier that morning. Corrie was nonviolently protesting the demolition of a Palestinian family’s home in Gaza. She was wearing a fluorescent orange jacket with reflective stripes and had been on the scene for several hours, at times speaking into a megaphone.

    Note: First published in the Lincoln County Leader, August 13, behind a Pay Wall.

    The post Summer Days and Dark Nights first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • DWP admits to the Canary it failed to consider impact on 140,000 children in PIP cuts plan

    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) failed to consider the compounding impact of its plans to cut Personal Independence Payment (PIP) on Universal Credit households hit by the two-child limit policy.

    Stark new figures obtained by the Canary show that in combination, the two policies would have decimated tens of thousands of households.

    As ministers seek to blame its row-back on PIP for its failure so far to commit to scrapping the two-child limit, the revelation should serve as a major embarrassment for the Labour Party government.

    While it ultimately abandoned its cruel PIP proposal in a last-minute U-turn, it once again illustrates the point that the government’s rushed attempts to ram through disability welfare cuts would have had devastating consequences – ones it utterly failed to account for. Worse still, in failing to assess the two in conjunction, it ignored the fact that more than 140,000 children would likely be hit by the two policies at once.

    DWP two-child limit policy:

    The Conservatives brought George Osbourne’s austerity-fueled two-child limit on benefits into effect in April 2017. The policy restricts households from claiming child tax credits or Universal Credit for more than two children, including those born after the policy’s introduction.

    As the Canary’s Steve Topple recently reported, the DWP’s latest data on this from April 2025 showed that:

    • 469,780 Universal Credit households were affected by the two child limit policy. This was an increase of 13,520 (3%) on last year.
    • There were 1,665,540 children living in the households affected in April 2025, an increase of 37,150 (2%) on last year.

    Damningly, single households, female, Black and brown, and disabled households were disproportionately affected. What’s more, nearly 130,000 households had at least one disabled child who qualified for extra monthly amount of Universal Credit disabled child element. In total, the two-child limit impacted 172,550 disabled children getting this.

    DWP PIP cuts: a callous eligibility policy

    Meanwhile, DWP PIP is a welfare payment that’s meant to help disabled people with their extra costs of living. In practice however, the entitlement often falls woefully short.

    The government had originally planned to freeze the benefit. However, immediate backlash at its callous proposal prompted it to quickly ditch this before introducing its Green Paper. Of course, DWP boss Liz Kendall infuriatingly presented this as a major concession. This was all as she laid out a catastrophic catalogue of welfare cuts.

    Specifically, it planned to increase the number of points a person would need to score in their DWP PIP assessment. This would have required people to score four points or more in a daily living category to claim this component.

    The notorious ‘4-point policy’ would have stripped hundreds of thousands, if not more than a million claimants of access to the disability benefit.

    DWP PIP cuts: U-turn chaos

    Concerted campaigning from chronically ill and disabled people eventually shamed MPs into opposing it, and eventually, the government into dropping these plans from its bill. However, the U-turn at the eleventh hour – mid-passage of the bill – was not some magnanimous concession. The decision was an entirely cynical move to curb a growing internal MP rebellion, and save face from an embarrassing defeat. In short, it was to obtusely push its remaining bill through parliament.

    However, it wasn’t without the Labour Party government managing to propose a grossly unfair two-tier DWP PIP system first. Notably, ahead of its second reading on 1 July, it put forward revisions to its plans for the policy. In particular, these meant the new criteria would only apply to new claimants. Existing claimants would remain unaffected until at least 2030. Of course, its intention was likely always to bring the two in line eventually.

    Tens of thousands of disabled people and children caught up in the two policies

    The latest figures from April 2025 show that:

    • 65,280 Universal Credit households that the two-child limit hits had at least one individual claiming PIP.

    Now, the Canary can reveal that 39,600 of those – 61% – did not score four points in any daily living category at assessment. This equated to 41,800 current DWP PIP claimants in total. So that’s more than 40,000 current PIP claimants in UC households affected by the two-child limit who would likely have lost some or all of their PIP under the new rules.

    What’s more, there are 148,100 children living in those households. This is out of 235,270 children who live in UC households under the two-child limit with at least one PIP claimant. In summary, 63% of these children would have been in households impacted by the PIP 4-point policy.

    And atrociously, it doesn’t look like the DWP actually explored the impact of its PIP cuts on claimants it hits with the two-child limit on UC.

    No consideration of the compound impacts

    The Canary obtained these PIP-related figures via a Freedom of Information request to the DWP. We also requested that the department breakdown these figures by household earner composition. However, the DWP refused this part of the request claiming it would exceed cost limits under the FOI Act.

    In other words, the figures the DWP evidently had to calculate the figures it did provide to the Canary. Of course, what this confirms is that the DWP had not previously estimated this. It means it likely didn’t assess the impact of its reforms on families it hits with the two-child limit.

    Moreover, we already know that the department did not consider this in its impact assessment. Moreover, it did not include this in its evidence packs it set out for its Green Paper. Yet, it’s clear the compound harm of these two policies in tandem would have affected huge numbers of children the state keeps in poverty.

    Blaming disabled people for the two-child limit

    To date, the Labour has maintained the two-child limit. It went so far as to expel MPs who voted against it.

    This is despite the fact that the policy is maintaining staggering levels of unconscionable poverty. According to the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), scrapping it could immediately lift 400,000 children out of poverty. A further 950,000 children would also be living in less deep poverty thanks to the change.

    Government ministers have since shamefully suggested that the U-turn on DWP PIP means it may no longer be able to scrap the two-child limit policy. On 6 July, education secretary Bridget Phillipson was the first to throw disabled people under the bus for this. She told BBC hack Laura Kuenssberg over the PIP climbdown and the two-child limit that:

    The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make decisions, future decisions harder.

    Then, on 15 July, DWP minister Alison McGovern was cagey on the future of the DWP’s callous poverty-entrenching policy. She echoed Phillipson, stating that:

    we will not commit to any policy without knowing how we are going to pay for it.

    This was after the Tories – who want to maintain the policy –  laid down a symbolic motion in parliament. It saw 344 Labour MPs vote against it, inadvertently implying they wanted to scrap the policy. However, given Phillipson and McGovern’s responses, it seems unlikely it will actually come to fruition.

    Instead, as the Canary has previously pointed out, its big plan to reduce child poverty ultimately seems to revolve around forcing more chronically ill and disabled households into work.

    Threat of future DWP PIP cuts haven’t gone away

    And of course, while the government has currently set aside its DWP PIP plans, it doesn’t guarantee it won’t reintroduce them. Contrary to claims, the DWP did not drop its plans altogether. Instead, it merely postponed them, with the option of bringing them forward again once it meets certain caveats. For instance, one is that disability minister Stephen Timms completes his review into PIP assessments.

    Given Timm’s disingenuous back-pedalling on promises to genuine co-production with disabled people on this, it’s not unfathomable that it’s all just a ruse to build the case for some version of the same cuts. Its track record to date gives chronically ill and disabled communities every reason to be wary of this.

    Labour: shamefully engineering poverty for disabled people and children

    So as it stands, the Labour government looks set to maintain the two-child limit on benefits. It’s also plausible it might backtrack on dropping its DWP PIP cuts at a later date. Yet, these new figures are a damning indictment for both policies. Together, the two repressive policies could harm tens of thousands of chronically ill and disabled people. What’s more, the PIP 4-point policy would compound the injustice of the two-child limit’s state-induced poverty for vast numbers of children.

    It demonstrates how little the government understands – or seeks to – about the dire impacts of its policy-making. When push comes to shove, this Labour government is perfectly content to ignore how the DWP’s disgusting cuts and caps interact in the real-world for chronically ill and disabled claimants, and children living in poverty.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Trump’s Homelessness Crackdown Has Been Tried Before. It Didn’t Work.

    Earlier this week, President Donald Trump announced that his administration is removing homeless encampments from around Washington, DC. The announcement illustrated how the federal government’s approach to homelessness is dramatically changing. It follows an executive order issued last month that makes it easier for cities and states to involuntarily commit unhoused people and eliminate encampments. It also prioritizes treatment over housing for people struggling with mental health issues or substance abuse. The policies represent a 180-degree turn away from an approach the federal government has used for years called Housing First, an evidence-based program that prioritizes the opposite: housing before treatment. It was first developed by clinical psychologist Sam Tsemberis almost 30 years ago. On this week’s More To The Story, Tsemberis sits down with host Al Letson to examine the potential effects of Trump’s executive order.

    Producer: Josh Sanburn | Editor: Kara McGuirk-Allison | Theme music: Fernando Arruda and Jim Briggs | Digital producer: Nikki Frick | Deputy executive producer: Taki Telonidis | Executive producer: Brett Myers | Executive editor: James West | Host: Al Letson

    Listen: The Churn (Reveal)

    Read: Trump’s Plan to Eliminate Homelessness Is Just Cruel. Here’s Another Option. (Mother Jones)

    Learn more: Pathways Housing First Institute

    Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • Top CEO pay just got so ridiculous that even shareholders are rebelling en masse

    Even shareholders at the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE), which is made up of the largest 100 UK companies, are up in arms over CEO pay. The largest revolt came from two thirds of shareholders at aerospace company Melrose. They voted down a bonus for CEO Peter Dilnot. Nonetheless, the company has paid him £45.4m – also the largest pay packet – setting a new record for fat cat greed.

    That’s all despite Melrose owning GKN Aerospace, which produces parts for the notorious F-35 fighter jets that Israel is using to eradicate Palestine.

    CEO pay skyrockets, workers out of pocket

    More broadly, FTSE 100 bosses took £550m, at an average packet of £5.5m each – another record. Just a few days into 2025 and these CEOs had already earned more than the median average yearly salary of a UK worker.

    FTSE 100 bosses pay is up 11% on just the year before. Meanwhile, real average worker pay is actually almost 3% lower than back in 2008 – when the neoliberal system collapsed.

    Companies other than Melrose are facing shareholder revolts, with the number more than doubling from last year. 11 FTSE 100 companies had rebellions of more than 20% of shareholders. At Centrica, owner of British Gas, 40% of investors voted against CEO Chris O’Shea’s £4.3m packet, along with other payments. Even O’Shea himself has admitted that it’s “impossible to justify” his obscene cash intake while the public are struggling to pay their energy costs. He didn’t return the pay though, which was delivered through those higher bills.

    It’s worth noting that fat cat salaries are one reason why energy should be in public ownership, including gas, while we transition to renewables.

    High pay for rinsing the NHS

    Some FTSE 100 CEOs may have their pay climb even higher. For example, Emma Walmsley, boss at pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), could see her pay double to £22m. That’s despite GSK being one of numerous drug companies that overcharge the NHS for products.

    In 2016, GSK was fined £37.6m for conspiring to inflate the price of anti-depressants that the NHS buys. That said, when profit is involved in healthcare, the price is always inflated. It’s cheaper to develop these products in-house. Especially when pharmaceutical companies simply buy up research and medicine from organisations like universities and then make profit from it.

    The system needs rebalancing in favour of the people doing the work, while essentials like healthcare and energy should be brought in-house.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • ‘Criminalizing Homelessness Only Perpetuates It’CounterSpin interview with Scout Katovich on criminalizing poverty

    Janine Jackson interviewed the ACLU’s Scout Katovich about forced institutionalization of poor and disabled people for the August 1, 2025, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

    Janine Jackson: Poverty and homelessness—and their confluence with mental health challenges, including addiction—reflect societal and public health failures. But rather than take on rising rents and home prices, unlivably low wages and the retraction of social services and healthcare, the Trump White House has issued an executive order titled “Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets,” that calls for involuntary institutionalization and the elimination of federal support for evidence-based lifesaving programs. Oh, and also increased “data collection” on unhoused people. 

    As Southern Legal Counsel puts it, the order is a “continuation of [this administration’s] strategy of depicting anyone whose rights they seek to take away as inherently dangerous.” 

    This White House is what it is, but this development also trades on years of media coverage that defines poverty, and the cascade of harms attendant to it, as a “crisis” not so much for the people who experience it, as for those made uncomfortable by being exposed to it. 

    Scout Katovich is senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Trone Center for Justice and Equality. She joins us now by phone from the Bay Area. Welcome to CounterSpin, Scout Katovich.

    Scout Katovich: Thank you, I’m happy to be here.

    JJ: There’s been some coverage of this July 24 executive order, but I know that many listeners won’t have heard about it. Could you just please tell us what this order says, and what it calls for?

    SK: Absolutely. So this order came out last week, and it is somewhat wide-ranging in terms of the mechanisms that it puts in place, but the gist of it is that it’s taking aim at people who are at the intersection of homelessness, mental health disabilities and substance use. And what it does is it directs federal agencies to use the power they have over funding, as well as over technical assistance, to encourage states and local governments to criminalize people for living on the streets, to push people into involuntary treatment and civil commitment, including lowering standards to get there, and to destroy programs like housing first and harm reduction that we know save lives. 

    So the way that the Trump administration is trying to go about this remains a bit to be seen, because it’s directing agencies to take certain actions. And so we’ll see what those agencies do. But it is really troubling in terms of the entire framing of pushing for criminalization and institutionalization as a “solution” to homelessness. We know that’s not a solution. We know that that only makes homelessness, mental illness, substance abuse worse, and it’s really troubling to see this coming out from the federal government, though I can’t say it’s too much of a surprise.

    JJ: The order basically says, “Let’s get them into treatment,” which sounds good as a phrase, if you are just blissfully ignorant of anything to do with unhoused people or the history of involuntary warehousing. But for a lot of folks, it sounds like, “Well, golly, just help them.” What do people who think “get them into treatment,” what do they need to understand?

    SK: That’s a great point. And this is not the first time that compassion has been co-opted. We actually see this on the left as well, as Governor Newsom in California pushed for the CARE Courts as this compassionate solution, and, really, it was doing a lot of the same thing: targeting unhoused people perceived as having mental illness for forced treatment and institutionalization. 

    And what this kind of cloaking in care does is it obscures the fact that involuntary treatment is not effective. If you care about providing people who need help with help, the most effective way to do that is by providing accessible, voluntary services that match a person’s need. And it’s really disingenuous for the federal government to be saying this now, saying people need care, while at the same time blasting Medicaid, and stripping all the voluntary mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, that actually works.

    The Register Citizen (7/29/25)

    JJ: The University of New Haven journalism professor Susan Campbell, in one of the few media pieces that I’ve seen so far, describes this order as essentially “fact-free.” And she was noting some kind of baseline falsehoods, like it starts out saying the “overwhelming majority of individuals [who are unhoused] are addicted to drugs, have a mental health condition, or both.” And it also says both federal and state governments “have spent tens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness but not its root causes, leaving other citizens vulnerable to public safety threats,” which is another thing. 

    I know it’s a lot. But it seems like there are some undergirding ideas for this measure that are simply without foundation.

    SK: That’s absolutely correct. The idea that homelessness is caused by individual failures or individual conditions is just absolutely false. We know that we have an affordable housing crisis in this country, and there are, in addition to the nearly 1 million people who are homeless on any given night, there are millions more Americans who are spending over half of their income on rent. 

    We can’t close our eyes and pretend that this is an issue that’s just about an individual’s inability to get treatment for themselves. We have a structural problem here that we need to address, and without addressing the underlying housing crisis, we are not going to solve homelessness.

    JJ: Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi is no doubt speaking for many in saying, “Don’t law-abiding citizens have a right to live without

    Boston Globe (7/30/25)

    stepping over needles or encountering violence in front of their homes?” in an op-ed that is headlined, “Involuntary Commitment Should Be on the Table in the Opioid Crisis.” 

    Alright, I have thoughts. Not for nothing, but the words “Purdue” or “Sackler” appear nowhere in the piece. Still, it’s playing on this idea of public safety, and don’t we all deserve to feel safe? There’s something powerful at work in that narrative.

    SK: Yeah. Look, I agree that we all deserve to feel safe, and that includes us all having a safe place to sleep. That includes us having a safe place where we can get treatment that’s appropriate for us. The pitting against each other of people who lack housing and people who have housing is so insidious and counterproductive. The goal is not to just have there never be enough housing, affordable housing, for people to be able to live inside, and to tolerate that. No, of course not. The idea is for everyone to have access to safe, affordable housing, and to services that allow them to be healthy, without it being something that’s pushing them into institutions or criminalizing them.

    JJ: Yeah, we talk about ending homelessness, but if that’s genuinely your goal, then criminalizing unhoused people just doesn’t work. So I think we just have to accept the idea that some of the people who talk about ending homelessness, that’s not their goal. It has to do with something else, and we need to peel that apart, to understand the difference between punitive responses and responses that actually have been shown to be effective, if ending homelessness, or if helping folks with mental health conditions, if that is genuinely your goal.

    SK: Yeah, I think that’s accurate. We know that criminalizing homelessness only perpetuates it, and it’s logical, if you think about it, if you have someone who doesn’t have housing, who’s trying to get into housing, and then you give them a criminal record, that’s only going to make it harder to get housing. So it’s really counterproductive. 

    But I think what is attractive about it to politicians is that it’s a quick way to push people out of sight. It isn’t something that’s going to take a long-term investment, which is what we need right now. It’s something that you’re going to be able to say to your constituents at the next election, “See, look at how clean our streets are.” And that’s because you’ve pushed people into institutions, oftentimes while violating their rights. So, yes, maybe someone is temporarily pushed out of sight, and you don’t have to confront the massive problems we have as a society with poverty and inequality, but that’s not a solution.

    JJ: Let me just ask you, finally, what forward-looking media reporting would look like? What would it include that is maybe not included now? What might they toss out that they’ve been entertaining? What would you look for from journalists on this set of issues?

    SK: I think it’s really important to understand the humanity of individuals who find themselves living on the street, and to show that this is not about needles, this is about human beings, and the devastating effects that a lot of these punitive policies can have on these human beings, that sets them back, that hurts all of us. I think it’s so important to lift that up. 

    I think in terms of this executive order, I also think there’s a need to encourage states and local governments not to feed in, and not to comply with the tenor of this executive order, and to do what they can to stay the course, or start on the course, of adopting policies that are actually effective: affordable housing, housing first, voluntary accessible services. There’s room for courage here, and I think states and local governments have the opportunity to take it.

    JJ: All right, then. We’ll end it there for now. We’ve been speaking with Scout Katovich from the ACLU’s Trone Center for Justice and Equality. Thank you so much, Scout Katovich, for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

    SK: Thank you.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • Food Prices And Stagnating Wages Weigh On US Residents

    New economic data and surveys reveal growing financial anxiety among US nationals, who are grappling with rising food prices and slowing wage growth. Nearly seven months after Donald Trump returned to the White House, the promised “golden age” has not materialized for most, according to polls.

    According to a recent Associated Press–NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey, the vast majority of US adults feel stressed about food costs. This concern is particularly acute for low-income US residents, among whom 64% say grocery prices are one of their top sources of stress.

    The post Food Prices And Stagnating Wages Weigh On US Residents appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Hunger Threatens to Plague “Golden Years” of Older Americans Due to Trump’s Cuts

    It’s 100 degrees on a late Tuesday in June, but 79-year-old Elisabeth — she asked that her surname not be used to protect her privacy — is in line at St. Patrick’s Church in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, waiting to get a bag of groceries. “I don’t have enough comida (food),” she tells Truthout in a mix of English and Spanish. “You know, leche (milk), pan (bread), pollo (chicken)…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Oh, Some are Saying Taxation Taxation for Rich & Jubilee for us Peons!

    “Those people … ” Donald said, trailing off. “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.” — Donald TRUMP

    Fred Trump III, William, and Lisa in the NICU

    Trump’s buddy:

    This figure corresponds to the number of inmate deaths since the “State of Emergency” was implemented in March 2022. “These were people awaiting trial who had not been convicted,” said the Salvadoran NGO, which provides legal assistance to the families of detainees.

    According to SJH, 94% of those who died “had no gang affiliation,” and the organization warned that the total number of deaths in state custody “could surpass 1,000,” noting that “there is information being concealed in mass trials.”

    A criminal justice reform passed in 2023 by the Legislative Assembly—controlled by President Nayib Bukele’s party—eliminated individual criminal proceedings and authorized the implementation of mass and collective trials based on gang affiliation. To date, no verdicts have been issued under this procedure, which human rights defenders have repeatedly denounced as violating the right to due process.

    [El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, sitting next to President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, said on Monday he will not return Kilmar Abrego García, a migrant from Maryland who was wrongfully deported.

    “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” Bukele said when a reporter asked.

    “How could I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?” he added, repeating the Trump administration’s claim that Abrego García is a “terrorist” gang member of MS-13 — which it has not claimed in the court battle over his fate.

    Bukele, the self-described “world’s coolest dictator” who has become a key partner in Trump’s controversial deportations, called it a “preposterous question,” saying “of course, I’m not going to do it,” as Trump nodded in agreement.]

    Tax all these fucking continuing criminal enterprises? Check it out: UN Special Rapporteur Issues Report Detailing Corporate Machinery that Profits Off Immiseration of Palestinians

    Italians Call for Nobel Peace Prize for Francisca Albanese

    The Italian attorney, who has served as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, has directly and explicitly accused Israel of committing war crimes and genocide in the Gaza Strip.

    During his weekly television show Con Maduro +, the Bolivarian leader said that Albanese “produced a report with conclusive and reliable evidence of the genocide being committed against the Palestinian people.”

    “The criminals and the accomplices of the genocide will pay,” Maduro said, emphasizing that human rights defenders like Albanese “will be remembered in the future for their bravery.”

    A group of people holding a banner AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A fighter jet flying in the sky AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    Maersk Hamburg Maiden call to the Port of Haifa, Israel.

    An exhibit with computers in it AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A person holding a sign next to a poster AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A hand holding a stack of paper AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A hand holding a sign AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    [Caterpillar bulldozer destroying Palestinian home in West Bank. ]

    Israeli Bulldozers Destroy Palestinian Structures in West Bank village

    306008 1 1468x676 2

    A reception desk in a building AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A close-up of a street sign AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    A sign with white text on it AI-generated content may be incorrect.

    Pro-Palestinian demonstrators face of with a line of police outside the Stata Center at MIT, Thursday, May 9, 2024, in Cambridge, Mass. Police detained at least three members of a group of close to 100 demonstrators who held signs criticizing MIT for research they claim was being conducted for Israeli military drones. (AP Photo/Josh Reynolds)

    [I.G. Farben executives on trial at 1947 Nuremberg trials. I.G. Farben was a chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas used at Auschwitz and other concentration camps.]

    A group of people sitting at a table Description automatically generated

    [IDF helicopter at Tel Nof air base that is being upgraded by the U.S.]

    [Glastonbury is far from perfect. Tickets are increasingly unaffordable making it largely inaccessible for many working class people. Its demographics remain overwhelmingly white. Its insurer—Allianz—invests in Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer. The contradictions are real.]

    Shit dawg, the outsized number of Chosen People at this Utah fun fun fun felony camp:

    Summer camp for billionaires': What to know | NewsNation

    A full guest list of the Allen and Co. gathering is below:

    Big Tech

    Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI
    Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta
    Tim Cook, CEO of Apple
    Eddy Cue, senior vice president of services at Apple
    Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet
    Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft
    Jeff Bezos, executive chairman of Amazon
    Andy Jassy, CEO of Amazon
    Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft
    Dara Khosrowshahi, CEO of Uber
    Brian Chesky, CEO of Airbnb
    Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir
    Daniel Ek, CEO of Spotify
    Evan Spiegel, CEO of Snap
    Bobby Kotick, former CEO of Activision Blizzard

    Media and entertainment

    David Zaslav, CEO of Warner Bros. Discovery
    Bruce Campbell, chief revenue and strategy officer of Warner Bros. Discovery
    Bob Iger, CEO of The Walt Disney Company
    Dana Walden, co-chairman of Disney Entertainment
    Alan Bergman, co-chairman of Disney Entertainment
    Josh D’Amaro, chairman of Disney Experiences
    Jimmy Pitaro, chairman of ESPN
    Michael Eisner, former CEO of The Walt Disney Company
    Rupert Murdoch, former chairman of News Corp
    Lachlan Murdoch, chairman of News Corp
    Robert Thompson, CEO of News Corp
    Barry Diller, chairman of IAC
    Ted Sarandos, co-CEO of Netflix
    Greg Peters, co-CEO of Netflix
    Reed Hastings, chairman of Netflix
    Neal Mohan, CEO of YouTube
    Brian Roberts, CEO of Comcast
    Jason Blum, CEO of Blumhouse Productions
    Brian Grazer, film and television producer
    Bryan Lourd, CEO of Creative Artists Agency
    Michael Ovitz, co-founder of Creative Artists Agency
    Ynon Keri, CEO of Mattel
    Charles Rivkin, CEO of the Motion Picture Association
    Ravi Ahuja, CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment
    John Malone, chairman of Liberty Media
    Derek Chang, CEO of Liberty Media
    Mike Fries, CEO of Liberty Global
    Jeffrey Katzenberg, co-founder of DreamWorks
    Michael Rapino, CEO of Live Nation Entertainment
    Casey Wasserman, CEO of Wasserman Media Group

    Corporate media

    Michael Bloomberg, majority owner of Bloomberg L.P.
    Diane Sawyer, anchor for ABC News
    Anderson Cooper, anchor of CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360
    Erin Burnett, anchor of CNN’s Erin Burnett OutFront
    Andrew Ross Sorkin, financial columnist for The New York Times and co-anchor of CNBC’s Squawk Box
    Becky Quick, co-anchor of CNBC’s Squawk Box
    Bari Weiss, editor of The Free Press
    Bret Baier, chief political anchor for FOX News
    Evan Osnos, staff writer for The New Yorker
    David Ignatius, columnist for The Washington Post
    Gayle King, co-host of CBS Mornings
    David Begnaud, contributor for CBS News
    Bill Cowher, analyst for CBS Sports

    Politics

    Glenn Youngkin, governor of Virginia
    Wes Moore, governor of Maryland
    Chuck Schumer, Senate minority leader
    Gina Raimondo, former commerce secretary

    Others

    Ivanka Trump
    Diane von Furstenberg, fashion designer
    Ruth Rogers, owner of The River Café

    Inside The Sun Valley Event Known As 'Summer Camp For Billionaires' : NPR

    Media mogul style at Sun Valley's 'summer camp for billionaires' - July 11, 2024 | Reuters

    Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos land in Idaho for the annual 'summer camp for billionaires'

    [Summer camp for billionaires’ begins in Sun Valley with the arrival of 165 private jets]

    Summer camp for billionaires' begins in Sun Valley with the arrival of 165 private jets

    Apple CEO Tim Cook Reportedly Attending Sun Valley Conference Known as 'Summer Camp for Billionaires' : r/apple

    Murphy Brown' star Candice Bergen makes rare public appearance at Sun Valley's 'summer camp for billionaires'

    Sun Valley Reveals a New Billionaire Dress Code - WSJ

    Sun Valley moguls compete for 'best dressed' with odd outfits

    Ivanka Trump Makes Rare Appearance at Billionaire Summer Camp - NewsBreak

    Sun Valley moguls compete for 'best dressed' with odd outfits

    Sun Valley: Paramount, AI, and Disney -- and why Warren Buffett won't be there

    Look at the degradation in AmeriKKKa, the headlines for this Mafia Meet-Up:

    • Sun Valley 2025: Billionaire brawls and AI powerplays set to take centre stage –
    • Sun Valley moguls compete for ‘best dressed’ with odd outfits
    • Photos show Altman, Iger and Cook arrive at ‘summer camp for billionaires’ in Sun Valley

    Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez show up ...

    • Inside The Annual Summer Camp For Billionaires In Sun Valley, Idaho
    • Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez show up hand-in-hand for ‘summer camp for billionaires’
    • Oprah Winfrey stuns in monochromatic ensemble at billionaires summer camp

    Allen & Company Sun Valley Conference - Wikipedia

    • Oprah dazzles in all-white outfit as she joins close friend Gayle King and billionaire masters of the universe at Sun Valley summit

    Oprah dazzles in all-white outfit as she joins close friend Gayle King and billionaire masters of the universe at Sun Valley summit | Daily Mail Online

    I will belabor the point — AmeriKKKa, AKA LaLaLandia, AKA, UnUnited Snake$ of Israel First, that fucking parasitic country, that ONE, is a tale of five bloody cities:

    • Top earners across the United States earn at least six figures, with an average income of over $160,000 for those in the top 10% in 2021.
    • Earners in the top 1% need to make $1 million annually in states like California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington.
    • In West Virginia, the top 1% earners need only $435,302.
    • Historically, the wealthiest Americans have grown richer much faster than the rest of the population.
    • Trends in income and wealth disparities are most pronounced among the top and lowest earners.

    Annual Incomes of Top Earners

    Data from tax year 2021 (as reported on Americans’ 2022 tax returns) shows that taxpayers in the top 1% had adjusted gross income (AGIs) of at least $682,577, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation. Those in the top 5% had AGIs of at least $252,840, while breaking into the top 10% required an income of at least $169,800.1

    Those numbers are averages and can vary widely across the country. According to GoBankingRates, also using 2021 data but adjusting it for inflation, qualifying for the top 1% now requires an AGI of over $1 million in five states (California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington), with Connecticut having the highest threshold, of $1,192,947.

    Meanwhile, residents of Mississippi, New Mexico, and West Virginia could qualify with less than $500,000 in AGI, with West Virginia setting the lowest bar at $435,302.

    On that same plantation, there was the field Negro. The...

    Oh, those house negroes: Malcolm describes the difference between the “house Negro” and the “field Negro.”

    Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

    No photo description available.

    So you have two types of Negro. The old type and the new type. Most of you know the old type. When you read about him in history during slavery he was called “Uncle Tom.” He was the house Negro. And during slavery you had two Negroes. You had the house Negro and the field Negro.

    The house Negro usually lived close to his master. He dressed like his master. He wore his master’s second-hand clothes. He ate food that his master left on the table. And he lived in his master’s house–probably in the basement or the attic–but he still lived in the master’s house.

    So whenever that house Negro identified himself, he always identified himself in the same sense that his master identified himself. When his master said, “We have good food,” the house Negro would say, “Yes, we have plenty of good food.” “We” have plenty of good food. When the master said that “we have a fine home here,” the house Negro said, “Yes, we have a fine home here.” When the master would be sick, the house Negro identified himself so much with his master he’d say, “What’s the matter boss, we sick?” His master’s pain was his pain. And it hurt him more for his master to be sick than for him to be sick himself. When the house started burning down, that type of Negro would fight harder to put the master’s house out than the master himself would.

    But then you had another Negro out in the field. The house Negro was in the minority. The masses–the field Negroes were the masses. They were in the majority. When the master got sick, they prayed that he’d die. [Laughter] If his house caught on fire, they’d pray for a wind to come along and fan the breeze.

    If someone came to the house Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” naturally that Uncle Tom would say, “Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How would I dress? Who would look out for me?” That’s the house Negro. But if you went to the field Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” he wouldn’t even ask you where or how. He’d say, “Yes, let’s go.” And that one ended right there.

    So now you have a twentieth-century-type of house Negro. A twentieth-century Uncle Tom. He’s just as much an Uncle Tom today as Uncle Tom was 100 and 200 years ago. Only he’s a modern Uncle Tom. That Uncle Tom wore a handkerchief around his head. This Uncle Tom wears a top hat. He’s sharp. He dresses just like you do. He speaks the same phraseology, the same language. He tries to speak it better than you do. He speaks with the same accents, same diction. And when you say, “your army,” he says, “our army.” He hasn’t got anybody to defend him, but anytime you say “we” he says “we.” “Our president,” “our government,” “our Senate,” “our congressmen,” “our this and our that.” And he hasn’t even got a seat in that “our” even at the end of the line. So this is the twentieth-century Negro. Whenever you say “you,” the personal pronoun in the singular or in the plural, he uses it right along with you. When you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, we’re in trouble.”

    But there’s another kind of Black man on the scene. If you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, you’re in trouble.” [Laughter] He doesn’t identify himself with your plight whatsoever. — SOURCE: X, Malcolm. “The Race Problem.” African Students Association and NAACP Campus Chapter. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

    Look, I am taking adults with low income lives, adults with Medicaid lives, adults living with intellectual and developmental disabilities lives, adults who need to take in those 10 cents a pop beer and soda cans just to make ends meet lives, adults on food (SNAP) stamps lives, adults with no transportation options lives … taking them on road trips so they can have some sort of activities of daily living that go beyond watching the TV and playing on Smart/Dumb phones.

    Celebrate EDU Spark 101

    Intellectual disability1 starts any time before a child turns 18 and is characterized by differences with both:

    • Intellectual functioning or intelligence, which include the ability to learn, reason, problem solve, and other skills; and
    • Adaptive behavior, which includes everyday social and life skills.

    The term “developmental disabilities” is a broader category of often lifelong challenges that can be intellectual, physical, or both.2

    “IDD” is the term often used to describe situations in which intellectual disability and other disabilities are present.3

    It might be helpful to think about IDDs in terms of the body parts or systems they affect or how they occur. For example4:

    • Nervous system
      These disorders affect how the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system function, which can affect intelligence and learning. These conditions can also cause other issues, such as behavioral disorders, speech or language difficulties, seizures, and trouble with movement. Cerebral palsy,5 Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are examples of IDDs related to problems with the nervous system.
    • Sensory system
      These disorders affect the senses (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell) or how the brain processes or interprets information from the senses. Preterm infants and infants exposed to infections, such as cytomegalovirus, may have reduced function with their eyesight and/or hearing. In addition, being touched or held can be difficult for people with ASDs.
    • Metabolism
      These disorders affect how the body uses food and other materials for energy and growth. For example, how the body breaks down food during digestion is a metabolic process. Problems with these processes can upset the balance of materials available for the body to function properly. Too much of one thing, or too little of another can disrupt overall body and brain functions. Phenylketonuria (PKU) and congenital hypothyroidism are examples of metabolic conditions that can lead to IDDs.
    • Degenerative
      Individuals with degenerative disorders may seem or be typical at birth and may meet usual developmental milestones for a time, but then they experience disruptions in skills, abilities, and functions because of the condition. In some cases, the disorder may not be detected until the child is an adolescent or adult and starts to show symptoms or lose abilities. Some degenerative disorders result from other conditions, such as untreated problems of metabolism.

    The exact definition of IDD, as well as the different types or categories of IDD, may vary depending on the source of the information.

    For example, within the context of education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a law that aims to ensure educational services to children with disabilities throughout the nation, the definition of IDD and the types of conditions that are considered IDD might be different from the definitions and categories used by the Social Security Administration (SSA) to provide services and support for those with disabilities. These definitions and categories might also be different from those used by healthcare providers and researchers.

    *****
    But it gets worse, no? This Jewish Calorie Trap:

    May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'Η HuffPost Dr. Oz Defends Crudité Comments on Newsmax View on Watch'

    Jewish elite values. More room temperature IQ’s:

    Oz began by saying that programs like Medicare and Medicaid “were a promise to the American people to take care of you if you’re having problems financially or you’re having an issue because you’re older and need health care.”

    But he also told Fox host Stuart Varney that Americans should also do the most they can to stay healthy.

    “We’ll be there for you, the American people, when you need help with Medicare and Medicaid, but you’ve got to stay healthy as well,” Oz said. “Be vital. Do the most that you can do to really live up to the potential, the God-given potential, to live a full and healthy life.”

    It was his next piece of advice, however, that inspired waves of social media mockery.

    “You know, don’t eat carrot cake. Eat real food,” he said.

    And, yes, Oz had brought a whole carrot cake for Varney.

    “I couldn’t find a healthy cake, so I brought the closest thing, a carrot cake,” Oz said.

    These people DO NOT care about you, me, my clients, those I write about, none of us.

    Forget about FDR’s legacy: November 12, 2013/ How Franklin D. Roosevelt Botched Social Security/ Alan Nasser

My Uncle Donald Trump Told Me Disabled Americans Like My Son ‘Should Just Die’

Do you know how many MAGA maggots receiving Medicaid, VA benefits, SNAP, DD/ID services, and those getting bedpans changed via the public offers.

The barriers are everywhere, even in communities that are generally supportive, like ours. There are still doorways that can’t accommodate wheelchairs. It is still hard to find meaningful day programs that foster independence with learning, socialization, and assistive technology. The whole narrative still needs to change.

I knew that acceptance and tolerance would only come with public education and awareness. Donald might never understand this, but at least he had been open to our advocating through the White House. That was something. If we couldn’t change his feelings about William, that was his loss. He would never feel the love and connection that William offered us daily. By Fred C. Trump III/ July 24, 2024

And it was this that got me going just now: THE PARASITE TAX: The Central Element of Any Tax Code by Emanuel Pastreich

You red Pastreich’s piece and you be the judge. My comments?

Taxing a continuing criminal enterprises? Taxing the Mafia? Taxing a few million hitmen? Contract killers, tax them? Oh, tax the polluters and the toxin producers? Tax the pedophiles? Tax the manslaughter queens and kings? Tax the AI guys and AGI LGBTQA folk? Tax the mining companies? Tax Boeing and Raytheon? Oh, tax tax tax?

Sure, that is the peaceful revolution, no, the monsters still in charge. Oh, that’s right, where to start with the taxation? Hmm, I do a kilo of coke in my house, selling grams to dentists and doctors and professionals, but, alas, a Good Little German with Loose Lips lets the Nazis of the DEA kind know, and, bam, my house, my guns, my bank accounts, my investments, my retirement, my SS, gone gone gone. Forfeited?

But we will tax these mother fuckers? Nah, you need some training with AK-47’s and Molotovs and Claymore mines and, well, Anarchist Cookbook revised.

You digging this headline? Trump’s BBB busts the budget to benefit arms makers, AI warlords

Yeah.

Yep, nervous tics, reading levels plummeting, functional illiteracy rising, outbusts and room clears jumping, food allergies and attention deficits increasing, generalized anxiety the norm, physical activity contraints big time. This is what the Billionaire and Millionaire class are loving — more money for amusing ourselves to death. More money for social impact bonds. More money for social control. More money for tracking our every move, our every fornication-defecation-urination-purchase-dream-trip out- MD appointment-banking transaction-drink gulped-food swallowed-social media post written.
The post Oh, Some are Saying Taxation Taxation for Rich & Jubilee for us Peons! first appeared on Dissident Voice.

This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Trump’s New Tax Law Could Create Insurmountable Hurdles for LGBTQ Health Care

    Millions of Americans are expected to lose health care coverage through President Donald Trump’s “one big, beautiful” tax and spending law — and LGBTQ+ Americans, who rely heavily on social services due to high rates of poverty and disability, are among those who will be most impacted. Experts say that widespread loss of health care, coupled with rising discrimination and fewer workplace…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The horror of DWP benefit deductions exposed in new report from Martin Lewis charity

    For too many people relying on Universal Credit, the harsh reality of benefit overpayments is pushing them further into financial ruin and damaging their mental health. Recent research from the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute reveals that when the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) demands repayment, it often deducts as much as 15% of a claimant’s monthly benefits—up to £60 for a single adult.

    This heavy-handed approach leaves vulnerable individuals struggling just to eat, with one participant admitting that:

    some days I have been not eating because I can’t afford to, which is leaving my mental health in tatters.

    DWP deductions: another scourge affecting claimants

    Official figures confirm the scale of the problem with these deductions.

    In the financial year ending 2024, the DWP overpaid more than £6.4 billion in Universal Credit. Commercial lenders must secure court orders before taking money from someone’s income—a process that can take months. However, the government swiftly claws back these funds directly from claimants’ payments, often without adequate warning or consultation.

    The research found that those affected are rarely informed about their repayment options. Plus, even when they do manage to negotiate a plan, the DWP still takes an immediate first payment that many simply cannot afford.

    This unyielding strategy echoes the infamous carers’ allowance scandal, where unpaid carers were prosecuted for supposedly fraudulent claims after trying to report part-time work earnings.

    The devastating toll on claimants’ finances and wellbeing is clear: many are plunged into deeper hardship, struggling to cover essentials once the deductions begin. One mother was told she owed £17,000 due to overpaid carers’ elements, which she had not been aware of for three years. Another was falsely accused of owing nearly £28,000.

    Yet these are not isolated incidents but part of a wider pattern of aggressive debt recovery that punishes already struggling people.

    A growing problem – with growing alarm over it

    There is growing alarm about the DWP’s approach. More than a million people owe money due to benefit overpayments, and many experience severe mental health challenges as a result of the relentless debt chasing.

    The Money and Mental Health Policy Institute warns that current procedures resemble past policy failures and calls for urgent reform. Instead of punitive deductions, claimants should be given fair opportunities to negotiate manageable repayment plans—and crucially, be protected from deductions while those negotiations are underway.

    Critics argue that the government’s new powers, proposed under the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, will make matters worse.

    This legislation would let the DWP directly withdraw money from former claimants’ bank accounts or wages without a court order—a drastic step that risks exacerbating financial distress among those who may no longer be on benefits but still face residual debt. This level of intrusion and enforcement goes far beyond what commercial lenders must follow and fails to consider the real-life hardship imposed on claimants.

    While the DWP claims it works to block incorrect payments—reportedly saving billions and protecting claimants from falling into debt—these savings and efficiencies come at a human cost.

    The system’s errors are often the DWP’s fault, with recent analysis showing that government mistakes account for £111 million annually in unfair deductions. Citizens Advice has highlighted that over two million households, including millions of children, receive less income than they should because of these deductions.

    The DWP is punitive – and it knows it

    It is evident that the current policy amounts to punishing vulnerable people twice: first by overpaying incorrectly, and then by ruthlessly reclaiming those sums without adequate safeguards or empathy. The official Benefit Overpayment Recovery Guide states that repayments can be waived if they would cause excessive harm, supported by medical evidence—but such exceptions are poorly communicated and poorly implemented, leaving many claimants trapped in a cycle of debt and despair.

    Campaigners urge the DWP not only to halt these aggressive measures but to overhaul the system entirely.

    Instead of driving people into destitution, the DWP should prioritise fairness, transparency, and support, giving claimants genuine choice and dignity.

    As one representative from the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute stated, the government must:

    proactively give people a real chance to negotiate a payment plan that they can actually afford, instead of just taking money out of people’s income with barely any warning.

    For countless disabled people, single parents, and non-working people relying on benefits, this is not just about money—it’s about survival, mental health, and being treated with basic humanity in a system that too often fails them.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Connecticut Pilots a Better Way for Unhoused Kids and Caregivers to Access Homes

    Connecticut resident Stacey Duran’s youngest daughter was 3 months old when she fled an abusive partner in 2023. Along with her two other children — a then-7-year-old daughter and a 3-year-old son — the family spent more than a year bouncing between friends, relatives, and their car. “Most of the time we were in the car,” Duran told Truthout. “After my son’s father pulled his arm so hard that…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The Sun peddles the myth that millionaires are fleeing the UK and people are taking the absolute p*ss

    The editor-at-large of the Sun and other right-wing propagandists are spreading the myth that millionaires are fleeing the UK and would do in greater numbers if we tax them more:

    The Sun: glaring double standards

    First off, people on social media noted the reality of the approach:

    The political and media class certainly treat problems for rich people as above life or death matters for the rest of us. Chancellor Rachel Reeves also garnered way more sympathy from commentators for her tearful appearance in the Commons then the prospect of disabled people losing their means to survive.

    And critically, the figure of 16,500 millionaires leaving the UK is literally 0.5% of the total millionaires (3,061,553) in the country. The figure itself also comes from Henley & Partners, a firm specialising in providing the means for the transnational capitalist class to relocate.

    A key argument media commentators make is that millionaires leaving leads to a loss of investment. But there are literally no restrictions on foreign people investing in the UK stock market. So even from a free market perspective, the position makes little sense.

    On social media, people scoffed at the very concept:

    “Quite happy to pay back”

    The thing is, polling shows that most millionaires are happy to pay back into a system that supports them. 68% of millionaires themselves support a wealth tax, according to polling by Survation. On LBC, Stephen Kinsella of Patriotic Millionaires said:

    There’s a lot to be said about for having a fairer system of taxation and having those who have been more fortunate – most of whom made their money based on the fact that we have got infrastructure… free education, free university, a lot of us have benefited hugely from this country and are quite happy to pay back

    This chimes with a report from Tax Justice Network, which found:

    Research suggests that the majority of wealth holders have strong ties to their countries and a genuine desire to contribute as citizens. Factors such as family and social connections, access to education, and overall economic stability carry more weight than tax levels when it comes to their decision on whether to relocate

    An issue with a huge proportion of the super rich in the country is unearned wealth. Over half of billionaire wealth in the UK comes from inheritance, property and finance, according to the Equality Trust. These all contribute to a rigged economy.

    It’s clear we need to rebalance society. It’s worth ignoring the Sun propaganda about a millionaire exodus.

    Featured image via screengrab

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Trump’s war on poverty: poor white Americans and the social safety nets

    In his second term, President Donald Trump aims to dismantle U.S. social welfare programmes developed in the 1960s during the “War on Poverty,” despite ongoing public need. Jalyn Shahid-EL examines how these cuts disproportionately impact low-income Americans, particularly rural white voters who support Trump. She argues racial prejudice and hierarchy may outweigh economic self-interest, raising the question: is this a war on poverty or a war on poor Americans?

    In the 1960s, U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the “War on Poverty” to address social inequalities in struggling communities. Today, President Donald Trump’s administration seeks to weaken and completely abolish these safety nets, which a significant portion of his constituents rely on. Cuts to Medicaid, SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), housing assistance, and other social programmes disproportionately impact low-income Americans, particularly rural white voters who backed Trump in the 2024 election. The Trump administration’s regressive attempts to improve economic efficiency raise the question: Has the war on poverty become a war on poor white Americans?

    Many poor white Americans who supported Trump did so in the belief that his policies would target Black and Brown communities—not themselves. Their support stems from “perceived racial status threat”—deeply ingrained beliefs of white supremacy and entitlement, and a rejection of any policies that would even remotely place them on equal footing with Black Americans. Their commitment to racial prejudice and hierarchy blinds them to economic inequality. Ultimately, Trump’s policies have not only failed to address poverty but have actively contributed to the worsening conditions of the very people who elected him. To understand the pattern of why many poor white Americans vote against their interests, we must discuss the deeper psychological roots of white entitlement.

    The role of white entitlement and racial hierarchies

    Coined in many academic disciplines, “white entitlement” is an idea at the intersection of whiteness and privilege that helps explain why working-class white Americans hurt themselves by voting for Trump. W.E.B. Du Bois’s concept of “psychological wage” further explains why some poor white voters continue to support policies that harm them as long as the racial hierarchy remains. The Trump administration exploited this, using racial tensions as a weapon to justify regressive politics.

    A National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) study found that respondents were asked about their beliefs on the racial distribution of welfare recipients. Results concluded that respondents overestimated that 37 per cent of Black people and 39 per cent of white people received welfare benefits. In reality, Black beneficiaries only make up 21 per cent, far from the 37 per cent of the respondents’ belief.

    The NBER study further included party affiliation as a determining factor for biased ideology. The results found that “conservatives and moderates are significantly more likely to overestimate the share of welfare recipients who are Black than liberals.” These findings indicate that Trump’s strategic approach relies on undermining evidence-based and inclusive social policy, and in doing so, he continues to weaponise racial tensions for political gain.

    Despite aid being essential to millions of white Americans, the continued reinforcement of long-standing racial stereotypes surrounding welfare recipients by the Trump administration perpetuates fear and resentment. For example, the term “welfare queen” came into conversations about poverty in the 1970s during the Reagan administration. This stereotypical language shames Black women who receive welfare based on assumptions rather than their actual realities, which stems from the belief of who is the “most” deserving of government aid. In other words, once accessible welfare programmes developed a negative connotation because they made non-recipient families and working-class people internalise their struggles as not deserving enough. The Clinton administration solidified the link between the poor and poverty by codifying it through policy and reshaping welfare dependency, further enhancing the “welfare queen” narrative, as mentioned by New America.

    The Trump administration reinforces this rhetoric in how Trump himself speaks about immigration, shifting the conversation to frame non-white communities against immigrants as a national threat. Notably, during Trump’s first term, his detest for immigrants, especially Black and Brown immigrants, was met with strong family separation policies. As this Just Security article highlights, the Reagan-era stereotypes painted Black women as “irresponsible” women who make many babies to benefit from government welfare checks. Over time, racial and welfare discussions changed, creating another stereotype where “Black children born on US soil [were] for…citizenship.” This narrative fuelled discussions of “whataboutism” and strong views of separating “anchor babies” from “welfare queen” mothers.

    The dual nature of the “war” on poverty and poor white Americans

    The Price of Poverty

    The Trump administration plans to abolish essential programmes, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and federal rental aid. If implemented, his proposed cuts would seriously harm at-risk communities that depend on the services during emergencies. Disasters like Hurricane Helene in 2024 made this evident, as struggling communities were left heavily reliant on federal aid and demonstrated the essential part of these programmes.

    By reconsidering and potentially modifying this funding, the administration is introducing uncertainty within the nation and deepening the very crisis it claims to address, all while promoting Trump’s vague slogan of “putting America first”. Eight days into Trump’s new administration, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a temporary pause on certain federal financial assistance programmes to review spending priorities, reported by The 19th. Although this pause was lifted after legal changes were made the following day, the confusion already had a lasting impact on its beneficiaries, shifting to intensified negative stereotypes and racist beliefs about social welfare recipients.

    Government Neglect and Disaster Failures

    While Trump’s funding review did not completely halt all social programmes, the damage was already done, especially during Trump’s confusing “federal freeze“. As a result, many Americans who rely on consistent access to critical services like SNAP benefits, particularly in rural areas, faced confusion and panic. In September 2024, the devastation from Hurricane Helene foreshadowed the chaos that the federal freeze would create during the 2025 federal review. Hurricane Helene targeted the Western region of North Carolina, leaving the state’s relief plan and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) under scrutiny as communities struggled to get aid. During his “Tour of Hurricane Helene Disaster Site”, Trump made it clear that he intended to significantly alter FEMA by “fundamentally reforming [it] and overhauling”, as reported by The American Presidency Project. With the changes to FEMA, the affected community felt abandoned and uncertain about their future, particularly among working-class white Americans who make up a crucial demographic in Trump’s political base.

    Final Realities

    Currently, Trump’s politics reinforce these illusions of an “America First” agenda while undermining his voter base—majority poor white Americans. Recently, Time reported the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) plan to eliminate jobs and funding, forcing jobs at the Social Security Administration and their offices to close. Some policymakers even fear new “identification policies”, introduced by the Senate or House, which increase the difficulties of accessing these offices, including requiring beneficiaries and applicants to come into their offices or call as opposed to online access. As a result, rural communities (full of his supporters) will face challenges due to the inaccessible nature of these codified policies.

    So, is this a war on poverty or a war on poor white Americans? …It’s both! Poor white Americans hope and aspire to “get ahead” of people they view as beneath them, particularly Black people. To be seen in the same class as other minorities goes against their fundamental principles of entitlement and some of their beliefs about white entitlement. Therefore, their vote in hopes of getting ahead ends up impacting them more, as this demographic does not tend to vote where they socially, politically, or economically stand.

    In the end, despite the policies favouring the capitalist wealthy, these fundamentals contradict the U.S.’s self-proclaimed role as a representative and advocate of human rights. Its own citizens, especially rural poor white Americans, are left to face the systematic economic obstacles they had hoped to combat by voting for Trump. The same government that touts American exceptionalism is completely disregarding the well-being of one of its most vulnerable populations, with 73.9 per cent of majority-white rural counties supporting Trump in 2024 & 52 per cent of Trump supporters came from families earning $50,000-$99,999 in 2023. By provoking a race war with extreme political rhetoric, Trump fails to address these concerns, taking advantage of their economic instability.

    All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of the Department of Sociology, LSE Human Rights, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

    Image credit: René DeAnda

    The post Trump’s war on poverty: poor white Americans and the social safety nets first appeared on LSE Human Rights.

    This post was originally published on LSE Human Rights.

  • Resurrection City 1968: Demanding an end to poverty

    The year is 1968. Summertime. Washington, DC. And covering the National Mall are endless rows of shacks built by hundreds of poor families from across the United States. It’s called Resurrection City, and they have come to Washington to demand an end to poverty and a new economic bill of rights… for the poor. 

    This was Martin Luther King Jr’s dream. The Poor People’s Campaign is what he’d been working for in the months before he was killed in April 1968.

    The city would last for six weeks. It would inspire thousands. Its legacy would last for decades.

    This is episode 51 of Stories of Resistance—a podcast co-produced by The Real News and Global Exchange. Independent investigative journalism, supported by Global Exchange’s Human Rights in Action program. Each week, we’ll bring you stories of resistance like this. Inspiration for dark times.

    If you like what you hear, please subscribe, like, share, comment, or leave a review. 

    And please consider signing up for the Stories of Resistance podcast feed, either in Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Spreaker, or wherever you listen.

    You can listen to Michael Fox’s full interview with Marc Steiner on his Patreon account: patreon.com/mfox. There you can also see exclusive pictures of many of his stories, follow his reporting and support his work and this podcast.

    Written and produced by Michael Fox.

    RESOURCES

    Poor Peoples Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival: https://www.poorpeoplescampaign.org/

    Camp life in Resurrection City 1968: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjsQ7IWszRE

    Senate listens to people of Resurrection City 1968: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4hrSkTnXes

    Resurrection City closed down, Abernathy jailed 1968: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQpBlIKJDyA

    #MLK on the Poor People’s Campaign, Nonviolence and Social Change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWcD4xt7Mnk

    Poor Peoples Campaign June 2018: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCcKpVFz32c

    Transcript

    The year is 1968. 

    Summertime. 

    Washington DC.

    And covering the National Mall are endless rows of shacks built by hundreds of poor families from across the United States. It’s called Resurrection City. And they have come to Washington to demand an end to poverty and a new economic bill of rights.

    This was Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream. The Poor People’s Campaign is what he’d been working for in the months before he was killed in April 1968. 

    “The emergency we now face is economic. And it is a desperate and worsening situation for the 35 million poor people in America. Not even to mention just yet the poor in the other nations, there is a kind of strangulation in the air.”

    For King, poverty was a great evil. Something to be overcome. And which could be tackled by uniting across communities. Uniting across color lines. Despite his death, people carried on. They would organize in poor communities across the US. 

    Longtime radio host Marc Steiner was deeply involved. 

    “And when the Poor People’s Campaign started, we knew we had to build a coalition to join Resurrection City and started in Chicago… we traveled around the industrial north and down through Appalachia to organize communities to come to Resurrection City.”

    And come they did. Thousands of people came from across the country in mid-May. 

    “I mean, there were thousands of people there… And people moved in, well, first of all, they came into DC from all over the country. And there were people from reservations in New York in North and South Dakota and Southwest United States all coming in, you know, to, to there. There were Mexicans coming from all across Southwestern United States and California. That and the Puerto Ricans coming in from Chicago and New York and in the Appalachian group. It was, it was really unbelievable. I mean, it was hard to fathom the power and beauty of this multiracial poor people’s coalition that actually came and they built these shacks, you know, and communal eating centers for cooking tents. And the mud, because it rained and rained and rained. And people stayed. It was, it was horrendous, but powerful.”

    At its height, roughly 3,000 people lived in the makeshift wooden shacks of Resurrection City, right in the middle of the National Mall, in Washington, DC. It was a full-blown town. There was a day care center. A city hall. A barber shop. It had its own ZIP code. The goal was to pressure lawmakers to pass legislation to tackle the inequality in the country.

    “I got nine children going to school now. And I had been to the welfare agency to see if I can get help and they wouldn’t help. And I really need help.”

    This is from old footage and interviews from Resurrection City.

    “A lot of people knew the condition of some of these places and when they see and know the condition will be interested enough to try to make things better.”

    They demanded that the country spend $35 billion a year to end poverty in the United States. They called for half a million homes to be built per year until every poor neighborhood was transformed. They demanded full employment in the country, with a living wage for everyone.

    “What we’re saying is that our economic order is evil… It’s been our experience that Congress and this nation doesn’t really move until their own self-interest is threatened. And until they, in fact, they begin to share some of the problems of the poor. Or some of the effects of poverty.”

    They held marches and rallies, the biggest on Juneteenth, with 100,000 people in the streets. 

    Martin Luther King Jr.’s widow, Coretta Scott King, spoke to the crowd.

    “We are here because we feel a frightful sense of urgency to rectify the long standing evils and injustices in our society, racism, poverty and war. The Poor People’s Campaign was conceived by my late husband, Doctor Martin Luther King Junior, as America’s last chance to solve these problems nonviolently. The sickness of racism. The despair of poverty and the hopelessness of war have served to deepen the hatred, heightened the bitterness, increase the frustration, and further alienate the poor in our society.”

    Residents of Resurrection City spoke to lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

    “We’re building our old house over there and I’m gonna tell you something. It’s better than anything that we have in Brownsville. We got our house better than anything in Flatbush, which is middle class. 

    “It is working down in Resurrection City. And please listen to that. That beautiful thing down there is just the top of a movement that stretches from coast to coast. 

    “This is the last chance I think for this country to sort of respond to the quiet and peaceful petitions of people who are asking for very very just solutions to very very real problems.”

    Resurrection City lasted for more than 40 days. 

    “Yeah, it was a, it was an amazing experience. America could use that again now.”

    It was inspiring. It was powerful. Maybe too powerful. 

    After six weeks, on June 24, a thousand police officers rolled in to crush Resurrection City. 

    “It was like chaos. I mean, they came in just destroying places where people lived, throwing people out. Some people got arrested and, you know, it was a, it was a really miserable, anticlimactic end to a very powerful movement.”

    But its legacy would last until today. Marc Steiner…

    “It was critical. I mean, it was a game changer in many ways for a number of levels. It radicalized people inside of poor communities that were involved in the Poor People’s Campaign to help them build movements locally. One of the hidden gems of the Poor People’s Campaign for me is that what happened after it was destroyed and people went back to their communities and continued to build and organize because of that experience. And that’s that story that’s really hidden and not talked about very much.

    “All over the country that happened, and some of us stayed in touch. Like when I went back to Baltimore in 1970, Baltimore had a series of collectives in working-class communities. Organizing. And so we did a lot of great work in those first few years of the 1970s, and that was born out of that.

    “And it happened all over the country like that. I mean, we started a People’s Free garage, we started a People’s Free grocery store, we started at People’s Free Medical Clinic. We organized, we started a Tenants Union group that fought against slumlords and brought Black and white communities together to fight, you know, these slumlords. And so, I mean, out of Resurrection City, a movement was created.”

    And it didn’t stop there. On the 50th anniversary, a new Poor People’s Campaign was organized in communities across the US to once again pick up Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream. Led by Rev. William Barber and Rev. Liz Theoharis, they, too, marched on Washington. 

    Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream continues to inspire.


    This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by Michael Fox.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Southern Workers Strategize For Future Struggles

    From June 13-15 more than 400 workers answered the call by the Southern Workers Assembly (SWA) to affirm an action plan to challenge the systemic racism, poverty and anti-unionism of the South.

    The dynamic agenda of the summit was held in Spartanburg, South Carolina, with workers mostly from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Kentucky, Arkansas, Tennessee, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. All the main sessions were able to be heard in English and Spanish. Workers of all ages participated in very interactive breakout sessions that combined proven tactics for organizing with new ideas and technology.

    The post Southern Workers Strategize For Future Struggles appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • New research shows HALF of the UK experiences financial insecurity

    47% of UK adults (28.3 million people) experienced financial insecurity – or ‘economic precarity’ – in 2022/23, according to new research led by the London School of Economics (LSE). Given the UK is one of the richest countries in the world, it’s clear that rampant inequality – where 1% of the population have more wealth than 70% – is a factor.

    The number of adults facing economic precarity has risen significantly since 2014/15, where it stood at 29% (16.7 million people).

    Large numbers of adults experienced other forms of insecurity in 2022/23. A further 46% of adults experienced health insecurity. 27% faced housing insecurity, while 36% experienced work insecurity.

    Austerity-driven economic precarity

    The study found that the rise of economic precarity is driven by austerity cuts such as the benefit freeze and NHS underfunding, along with inflation in utilities, consumer and housing costs.

    The research underscores the need to bring public services back into public ownership and deliver a Green New Deal. A publicly owned Green New Deal would remove profiteering from the energy system including the national grid, uphold the UK’s role in stopping the climate crisis, bring about cheaper renewable energy and shield the UK from volatile global gas markets, all in one fell swoop.

    Instead, Labour appears to have abandoned its previous commitment to what chancellor Rachel Reeves called ‘securonomics’. Indeed, they are not nationalising utilities like Keir Starmer pledged to. And they are continuing with Tory austerity, whether it’s the illogical and cruel two child benefit cap or the cuts to disabled people’s support. All this is deepening people’s economic precarity.

    Multiple insecurities

    The report also found that 9% of people (5.2 million) experienced a combination of financial, health and housing insecurity in 2022/23. That’s up from 6% in 2014/15.

    For some groups of people, that figure of economic precarity and its intersections is much higher. It includes:

    • 32% of people who are economically inactive due to being long term sick or disabled
    • 28% of unemployed people
    • 27% of lone parents
    • 21% adults living alone

    The study notes that the surge in economic precarity negatively impacts society in multiple ways. It leads to mental health issues, difficulty raising children and makes it hard for people to take up further education. 57% of those with multiple insecurities felt constant strain.

    It’s clear that austerity and inequality is having a destructive impact on the UK. We must reverse these trends.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By James Wright

    This post was originally published on Canary.