Occupy Surrey

Former U. S. Presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush spoke this morning at the Surrey Regional Economic Summit held at the Sheraton Guildford Hotel in Surrey, British Columbia. 

Previously, Amnesty International had  announced that Canada should arrest President Bush for war crimes when he came to Surrey.  As a result, some of the Greater Vancouver "Occupiers" arrived to demonstrate against Bush's appearance.  The location is five minutes from my house, so I ventured up to take a few pictures. 

There were plenty of police on site, just to make sure that no one thought about rushing into the hotel and upsetting the conference, chaired by Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts and attended by BC Premier Christy Clark.

Over the years, the police have gotten smarter about controlling crowds wanting to convey a message.  Although lined up in front of the Sheraton, they didn't object to demonstrators taking over the westbound traffic lane and provided flaggers to slow the traffic going eastbound.

Years ago, stepping off the curb might have resulted in action with the baton.  Today, the demonstrators and the police stood pretty much next to each other, each content to let the other fulfill their mission.

Taxes and Social Equity

I don't really mind paying my taxes.  I can afford them; and I feel an obligation to pay my share for public services.  Of course, taxes should be fair and equitable, meaning that those who benefit should pay and those who have more should pay more.  They should also be collectible.

Taxes in the U. S. are a big issue, largely because of a sense that they are not fair and equitable.  Apparently, 47% of American households pay no income tax, creating a resentment among the "53%" who do.  Having spent my life with others who worked and paid taxes, I was somewhat surprised to hear this.  Canada Revenue Agency was immediately questioned and assured the public that only 34% of Canadians didn't pay, being primarily those earning minimum wage, part-timers, students, seniors on pension, and the disabled.  This figure seemed more reasonable and not much more was heard about it.

The other issue in the U. S. is that the wealthy don't pay an equitable share, because of  low tax rates and available deductions.  I noticed that Warren Buffett, one of the wealthiest men in the U. S., reportedly pays a lower marginal tax rate (17.5%) and a lower percentage of income (about 10%) as taxes than I do.  My enthusiasm waned a bit, but then maybe he gives a lot to charity.

Of course, I feel that I justly should pay.  I read a survey, however, than only 18% pay all of their income taxes, because it's the right thing to do.  32% pay out of fear of being caught cheating. (Fair enough; I have to own this, too.)  But then another 38% cheat to some extent; and 12% completely evade taxes.  Statistics like this may not be terrible, but they definitely make me think another system might be fairer.

The real need is to maintain a middle class with productive, well-paying jobs.  When there is a growing economy, there is better feeling towards the Government, less pressure to cheat, less concern about the "lazy" unemployed,  less resentment of the wealthy,  and fewer demands that immigrants be deported.

One effect of the "Occupy Wall Street" movement is to give an alternative to the "Tea Party".  While the "Occupiers" concerns are amorphous, multiple, and social, they contrast to the "Tea Party" approach of reaction, self-absorption, and individualism.  The "Tea Party" resents paying taxes; the "Occupiers" want a more equitable society.  The "Occupiers" are resented by the established players as a threat to their control.

For the time being, the "Occupiers" are being tolerated with the belief that they will die out.  It will be interesting to see if a movement generated by the social media can expand and have a permanent impact, potentially creating a fairer, more accessible, democratic, inclusive, and equal society.

Pandering to the Right

Fortunately, when it comes to Republican Presidential debates, I can switch to another channel or find something useful to do.  I've tried watching a few times, but my tolerance (even pretending that it's only entertainment) runs out after a few minutes.

Whether it's Rick Perry (Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme; If you think I can be bought for $5,000, I'm offended); Newt Gingrich (Building a mosque anywhere near the Twin Towers site is Muslim "Triumphalism"); Rick Santorum (I believe American "Exceptionalism" should guide the world); Herman Cain (Wouldn't appoint a Muslim to his cabinet; Blacks are "brainwashed" into voting Democratic); Ron Paul (If you can't afford health insurance, you may die, but that's the risk you take); or Michele Bachmann (The Founding Fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery; Jesus Christ is the creator of the Universe!; Giving adolescents vaccine for cervical cancer causes mental retardation); they seem to be a group out of touch with any progressive thinking.

Of course, they are pandering to the extreme right of the Republican party, and the extremes frequently win primaries, although their candidates generally fail in general elections.  But what if one of these actually became President?  The United States has had weak Presidents in the Nineteenth Century, but has never had a blatantly unqualified person in the Twentieth.  At some point there is a risk of nullification by the public, refusing to accept the election results (as the Southern States did after the election of Lincoln).

The Republicans have two mainstream (and qualified) choices in Mitt Romney and John Huntsman. Romney is not the choice of the "Tea Party", having shifted on a number of issues after being Governor of Massachusetts; and Huntsman is unable to attract much support, having been President Obama's  Ambassador to China.    

It's been a sour summer listening to these people, including the "debt ceiling" spectacle.  I realize that I can ignore them, but it almost means blocking out the U. S. news.

La Paz - Historic Place

The United Farm Workers Union headquarters at Keene, California, Nuestra Senora Reina de La Paz (Our Lady Queen of Peace), has been added to the National Register of Historic Places.  Union founder Cesar Chavez worked and lived there from 1971 until his death in 1993.

Originally a tuberculosis treatment centre, the property was purchased and donated to the Union in 1970.  I was a volunteer at the Union headquarters in Delano in April 1971 when Cesar decided to move the central Union offices to La Paz.

The site wasn't much.  It had an administration building, a small hospital, a dining room, a couple of houses, and a few small cottages.  A few trailers were brought in for married couples. Staff  moved into the hospital; spent a week painting; and set up the Union administration, legal, boycott, accounting, and data processing offices, as well as the Robert F. Kennedy Farm Worker Medical Plan.

There wasn't any money for improvements. Cesar was very sensitive about appearing to be benefit personally from the Union, and La Paz was left in a fairly primitive condition. There were vague plans about transforming the property into a retreat for farm workers, but that was for some time in the future.

Today, La Paz is somewhat changed.  The National Chavez Centre includes a visitors centre, conference facilities, a museum, monuments, and gardens.  The walks are paved and there are stone benches.  Nice facilities, perhaps what Cesar would have wanted, but I wonder what the cost has been.  

One thing Cesar was very opposed to was creating a cult of personality around him.  Once, Ben Maddock at the print shop in Delano produced a badge with Cesar's picture on it, framed with "Boycott the Hell Out of Them".  Cesar became angry when he saw it and made Ben destroy the badges.  He said that the Union was about farm workers, and the last thing he wanted was to give the impression of self-promotion.

Cesar Chavez Gravesite

Opponents of the Farm Worker Union liked to claim that Cesar was secretly hiding a fortune away somewhere.  When I knew him, he had a family with six still dependent children.  For someone who had many opportunities to take a well-paying position, he received $231/month.  Today the staff are paid reasonably well; we received either $5 or $15/week, plus meals and accommodation.

I'm not suggesting that there is anything excessive about what's been done at La Paz.  However, when you have nice facilities and start paying staff good salaries, it may be harder to recruit volunteers and maintain grassroots support. The social and economic justice aspect diminishes, and the organization starts looking like a business. There is also some irony in making a modern facility a historic site.

Rhodes Family - Maryland and Pennsylvania

My 3x great grandfather George Rhodes (1783-1847) was a stonemason and house builder, who contracted for the U. S. Naval Shipyard at Gosport, Virginia.  He married Anna Maria McCabe in 1805.  Their third  son George (1813-1885) married Elizabeth Cunningham  at Georgetown, Washington, DC, in 1838, and took up farming around Hyattstown, Frederick Co., Maryland. George and Elizabeth had nine children, the eldest being my great grandfather William Lee Rhodes, born at Hyattstown in 1840.

William Lee Rhodes (1840-1902)

Maryland, being a slave state, but not in rebellion, had divided loyalties during the American Civil War.  Their father being a slaveholder, William Lee and his brother George joined the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia, William attaining rank of captain, his brother that of sergeant.  A letter received by William's daughter Nelle in the 1920's indicates that her father served in General Jubal Early's Corps, General Robert Rodes Division.  He may have been at Petersburg at the end of the War.  His father George was held at Fort McHenry, Maryland, for two weeks in October-November, 1862, as a political prisoner, probably because of his sympathies or aid he may have offered the Confederates. (The Battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam was fought nearby in Maryland in September, 1862).


After the Civil War, William returned to Hyattstown for a short time, then moved to Chambersburg, Pennysylvania, where he married Barbara Allen Heayd in 1869.   William's uncle, William Powell Rhodes (1809-1887), had purchased property at Chambersburg in 1849, and it may have been this tie which attracted him there.  (William Powell Rhodes later relocated to Virginia and Missouri).

William Powell Rhodes' daughter Annie (William Lee's first cousin), who grew up near Chambersburg, married a Methodist Minster, Reverend Leonard Marsden Gardner (1831-1925).  They resided at York Springs, Adams County, Pennsylvania, north of Gettysburg.  On the morning of July 4, 1863, as Lee was withdrawing form Gettysburg, a messenger with dispatches for Union commander General George Meade asked Reverend Gardner how to get around the rebel forces and reach Meade's headquarters.  Gardner, being a strong Union supporter, personally escorted the messenger there; and then spent the following week assisting the sick and wounded from both armies who remained at Gettysburg.  He described the scene in an article, "The Carnage at Gettysburg - As Seen by A Minister".  During the Wilderness Campaign of 1864, he again ministered to and aided wounded soldiers, serving with the Union Army of the Potomac.

Of William Lee Rhodes' siblings, his brothers Charles Cunningham Rhodes (1850-1921) and Frank Valerius Rhodes became lawyers and formed the law firm Rhodes and Rhodes in Baltimore, Maryland.  Charles Rhodes met a sad end, when returning home from a store on the evening of November 29, 1921, and crossing the tracks at the Howardville, Maryland, station, he was struck and killed by the mail train of the Western Maryland Railroad.

William Lee Rhodes and Barbara Heayd had nine children, the second youngest being my father's mother Nelle, who married James Cowsill, Sr., in 1913.  The Chambersburg farm was sold in 1917 and is now the Rhodes Grove Camp and Conference Centre, a Christian retreat. 

Market Volatility

I keep hearing to expect "Volatility" in the stock markets.  Nothing new, really.  Some event spooks investors and they sell in a panic.  Sometimes it lasts a few hours; sometimes a few days; but sometimes a prolonged slump sets in.  Eventually, however, good companies return to their original prices.

During the fall of 2008, stock prices fell 40% in reaction to the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the panic that ensued.  By the following summer, most had recovered substantially.  However, the American and Canadian economies have limped along and anticipated growth hasn't occurred.

Last week, the markets continued a two-week downtrend, particularly alarming on Thursday, when the Dow Industrial Average had its sharpest sell-off since 2008.  The current slump is attributed to sovereign debt problems in the U. S. and Europe, a fear that austerity measures to reduce debt will further injure weak economies.

After the markets closed on Friday, Standard and Poor's reduced their rating on U. S. Government bonds from AAA (top) to AA+, the first time U. S. bonds have not had the highest rating.   Standard and Poor's doesn't believe that the U. S. is in danger of defaulting on its bonds, but instead cited a lack of political will by the Federal Government to deal with its growing debt.

How will this affect the stock market?  We'll have to wait and see.  A lack of confidence in the future of the U. S. economy may lead to a sell-off.  On the other hand, nothing immediately changes, and two other bond rating agencies (Moody's and Fitch) continue to rate U. S. bonds AAA.

What do I do as an individual?  The stocks I hold are high quality, pay dividends, aren't overpriced, and have had good growth long-term (more modest recently).  As a long-term investor, I should hold on and not be checking the market every day.  At least this is the advice I hear.  I don't consider myself good at predicting the future, so I shouldn't try to be too smart.  Emotions are likely to take control if I do.

Before the crash of 2008, there were a lot of signs of problems. Asset-backed commercial paper had frozen in Canada in August 2007.  Bear Stearnes investment bank had collapsed, and fears about Lehman Brothers were prominent.  At that time, I sold most of my market holdings ahead of the crash. Now I'm much more heavily-invested.  How worried should I be?

Getting On

I visited with my sister-in-law (or maybe my ex-sister-in-law) yesterday.  She was married to my brother for forty-two years, but they separated in 2007 and later divorced.  They had four children, all grown, and now scattered in different locations, none nearby.  She lives alone in a small two-bedroom apartment in an adjoining municipality.

I don't know if anyone's life unfolds as they expected it too.  We end up living in different locations, having careers that we sometimes fall into more than plan, with partners who came along at the right time.  Relationships are built on fulfilling one another's needs, sometimes held together by a sense of commitment, obligation, or simply convenience. Even when you've been together a long time, the relationship is vulnerable.

My sister-in-law and I talked about what older people often do, our histories, family members no longer with us, things we remember more than plans for the future.  We discussed her Mother and Father, her younger brother who died suddenly last year, some of my family members. (I don't discuss her relationship with my brother or his new life.)  We also discussed whatever small plans she has (her patio garden, decorating), her health, her old friends (and any new ones she might be making), how she gets around, whether she's able to get the things she needs. Her knees are bad and she has some trouble walking distances. She's lost weight, which she attributes to giving up junk food.  She says that she suffered a nervous breakdown after the separation, and I wonder whether she's fully recovered.  She says that she has unlimited, free long distance calling and talks to her children; but she's not active on the internet and I wonder why.

Getting older can be a little sad, not always the "golden years" that we hope for.  Some people cope with it fairly well, as long as their health holds up.  With others, you worry.