Colossal Deception

Can it be attributed to inexplicable greed, that one man can enjoy the confidence of a huge number of trusting people and deliberately, utterly without conscience betray that trust? To such an unimaginable extent, that he was able, over a period of decades, to convince people who trusted him that he had safely 'invested' their savings on their behalf, to ensure the principal would be safeguarded, and would render a nice tidy profit through his knowledgeable and professional investment techniques.

Gross malfeasance of unprecedented proportions, that one man, a respected financier with a reputation for trustworthiness, backed by a professional CV that included a stint as non-executive chairman of the NASDAQ stock exchange, admitted to defrauding thousands of investors of billions of dollars. The extent of his breach of trust, of the money lost represents the largest investor fraud in American history. Bernard Madoff pleaded guilty to an eleven-count criminal complaint and was found guilty.

He was found guilty of massive fraud, and sentenced to the maximum allowable penalty, a penalty never before exacted for a white collar crime. The one hundred, fifty years in prison could never conceivably be served, but it will most certainly serve as a caution for any other fraud-oriented entrepreneurs who might want to replicate his success. At age 71, the man's balance of life will be spent as a detested convicted felon, incarcerated in the U.S. prison system, able to spend as much time as he likes thinking about his former celebrated lifestyle.

And the retirees, friends and acquaintances, charities and university endowments, royalty and celebrities whose wealth he spirited away.

Mr. Madoff was the founder of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Until his arrest on December 11, 2008 he was its chairman. His company was considered one of the top market businesses on Wall Street. No one would ever have suspected he was a vulture disguised as a dove. The prevailing legend is that he 'confessed' to his sons that his company's asset management division was a collapsed criminal failure. The money he received from investors simply melted away. Earlier investors who requested their money were given later investors' funding.

There was no substance to his firm's money management, no magic technique and insider knowledge that enabled him to safeguard and grow the investments that friends, colleagues, the wealthy and the famous entrusted him with. It is estimated that he defrauded charitable groups, businesses, individuals, trusts, of the equivalent of $65-billion, an unbelievable sum. Mr. Madoff pleaded guilty to charges including securities fraud, mail fraud and money laundering. In his defence he had no defence. He characterized his defrauding adventure as an error in judgement.

When he stood before the judge to await judgement on June 29, he faced those of his victims who were present to deliver their victim impact statements and said "I know this will not help. I'm sorry." Most certainly it did nothing whatever to help the newly impoverished to face their uncertain future. He cannot take anything more away from them. On the other hand, it is entirely possible that his wife, who declares herself to have been entirely innocent of any criminal involvement, may be sued for the paltry (relatively speaking) $2.5 million she has remaining, having agreed to surrender $85-million in assets.

How believable it is that Mr. Madoff's siblings, his wife, his sons, had no idea of his criminal finagling is another story altogether. Of course federal government financial regulators also have some responsibility to own up to in this dreary tale of human failure.

Non-Stop Greed

In a word, (cupidity) that seems to describe former Hydro One CEO Eleanor Clitheroe. Her sense of personal worth and entitlement appears to know no bounds. Even while, in more recent history she has been ordained by the Anglican Church, and those associated with that church speak of her as a really lovely person. Which she well may be, if you're not paying her salary. When the people of Ontario paid her salary they most certainly did not think fondly of her.

That old saying about a leopard not being able to change its spots applies perfectly well to this woman. She had sued to have her original (beyond gold-plated) pension agreement honoured by the Government of Ontario which thought otherwise. Now Ontario Superior Court Justice Ruth Mesbur has ruled that Ms. Clitheroe's Charter Rights were not violated when then-Premier Ernie Eves introduced Bill 80 legislation clamping down on exorbitant pensions and salaries at Hydro One.

Talk about a sweetheart deal. It wasn't enough for this woman that she brought home a whopping salary of $2.2 million in the year she was fired (2002) by the new interim board of directors over "an issue of corporate governance and inappropriate behaviour at the most senior level of the company". Her salary at that time was $1.6 million, with a $214,000 car allowance, another $330,000 in limousine fees, and including membership in seven "ultra-exclusive" private clubs (entrance fees of up to $60,000). Oh yes, more than $172,000 cashed out representing unused vacation credits.

She thought it would be a nifty idea if Hydro One paid for an expensive new yacht for her husband to captain in competitive yacht-sporting events. She felt that it was reasonable to bill the taxpayer for limousine trips for her two children and their nanny; hence the $330,000 in limousine fees. And, not to be overlooked, a new Mercedes annually. She had been appointed by Conservative Premier Mike Harris, he of the famous "Common Sense Revolution", who gutted social services to save provincial taxpayer revenues.

Following hard on the heels of a NDP government headed by Bob Rae who had hired Maurice Strong to head the predecessor of Hydro One, Ontario Hydro. Mr. Strong, as CEO of Ontario Hydro tried to cut costs, lamented the dreadful money hole Ontario Hydro had collapsed into, and offered to cut his own, by comparison, modest salary. What a contrast in character and style. Mr. Strong thought it would be a good idea for Ontario Hydro to spread its wealth around - in other, undeveloped economies. Ms. Clitheroe felt Hydro One needed to develop her economic bottom line.

When Hydro One paid for renovations to Ms. Clitheroe's Toronto home to the tune of $40,000 she was complacent with that until it became public knowledge, along with the extent of her other entitlements. She speedily repaid that sum. And was then fired. Ms. Clitheroe challenged the provincial government for the amount of her pension. Feeling she was entitled to receive $33,644 a month (gasp!), and not the $25,637 a month (gasp!) she will be entitled to when she turns 65.

Guess the very nice woman who is now an Anglican clergywoman will have to learn to live on $25,637 a month in her disappointed elderly years. Pity that things don't always work out as people feel so passionately they should.

CSU and the budget

California State University (CSU) is facing a $583.8 million dollar budget cut for the 2009-10 fiscal year. CSU faculty are being asked to take 10% less pay by accepting two days of furloughs per month for 2009-10. Justification for this request is to protect 3,700 full time equivalent lecturer positions (9000 Instructors) from lay-off. CSU Faculty, like state workers, are being asked to bail out the state by accepting less pay because of massive budget deficits. State worker unions and the California Faculty Association must stand firm against the CSU administration and State government officials. Giving concessions undermines the wages for working people across the board. It also means protecting the incomes of the rich, and most powerful corporations in California.

The budget crisis in California has been artificially created by cutting taxes on the wealthiest people and corporations. The current “crisis” is a shock and awe process designed to undermine wages and unions in the state and force labor concessions to protect corporate profits.

According to the California Budget Project, tax cuts enacted in California since 1993 cost the state $11.3 billion dollars annually. Had the state continued taxing corporations and the wealthy at rates equal to those fifteen years ago we would not have a budget crisis today. Even though a budget crisis was evident last year, California income tax laws were changed in February of this year to provide corporations with even greater tax savings—equal to over $2 billion per year.

Half of all state revenue comes from personal income taxes paid by working people, and another third comes from sales and use taxes. The result is that as a percent of income, taxes hit the lower paid workers the hardest. Corporations only pay for about 1/10th of the state budget. The rest of us are bailing out the rich by accepting massive budget cuts at a time when less spending will only exacerbate the economic situation.

Unions and working people need to say no to massive state budget cuts, and fight for every service and job possible. We must say no to voluntary furloughs and push for new taxes on the wealthy and largest corporations. CSU Professors should be the leaders for working people in the State. We must stand firm on no concessions, no furloughs, and no cuts in classes for our students.



Peter Phillips is a Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University.

California State Budget Crisis Not Caused by the Recession


The budget crisis in California has been artificially created by cutting taxes on the wealthiest people and corporations. The current “crisis” is a shock and awe process designed to undermine wages and unions in the state and force labor concessions to protect corporate profits.

According to the California Budget Project, tax cuts enacted in California since 1993 cost the state $11.3 billion dollars annually. Had the state continued taxing corporations and the wealthy at rates equal to those fifteen years ago we would not have a budget crisis today.

Half of all state revenue comes from personal income taxes paid by working people, and another third comes from sales and use taxes. The result is that as a percent of income, taxes hit the lower paid workers the hardest. Corporations only pay for about 1/10th of the state budget. The rest of us are bailing out the rich by accepting massive budget cuts at a time when less spending will only exacerbate the economic situation.

Unions and working people need to say no to massive state budget cuts, and fight for every service and job possible.

45 Brilliant Old Record albums that will change your face

45 Brilliant Old Record albums that will change your face - Part 2
















































Part 1

Lisbon Treaty requires new German National Law

Federal Constitutional Court - Press office -

Press release no. 72/2009 of 30 June 2009

Judgment of 30 June 2009
– 2 BvE 2/08, 2 BvE 5/08, 2 BvR 1010/08, 2 BvR 1022/08, 2 BvR 1259/08 und 2 BvR 182/09 –

Act Approving the Treaty of Lisbon compatible with the Basic Law;
accompanying law unconstitutional to the extent that legislative bodies
have not been accorded sufficient rights of participation

Read the entire press release from here.

This could be the Lisbon Treaty's death knell, fingers crossed!!

53 Brilliant knitted food patterns

Amazingly creative knitted food patterns