Affordable care act: an allegorical perspective

This article originally appeared in Common Dreams on 3/29/2012.

Let’s imagine ourselves as belonging to a remote valley population that survives on water supplied by groundwater reserves.  As a society we have collectively decided to send the best and brightest to use their ingenuity to find the reserves and dig efficient wells that can sustain the population.  They consider it a proud public service.  As a result of population growth and technological advancement, more wells are dug farther and farther from the valley.  The society subsequently grants a charter to a group of businessmen to incorporate and manufacture electric cars to transport people to and from the wells.  Again, this is considered to be for the good of the population: people need access to water.  These businessmen are allowed to behave according to classical market principles whereby profits incentivize efficiency.  Higher efficiency means better access water which is essential for survival.

As time passes, the population continues to grow and technology continues to advance.  It becomes increasingly clear that the most efficient way to facilitate water access to the population is to a construct a high speed train that the entire population can use.  Since it’s a train, it would eliminate the need for each person to purchase an electric car.  When you need water, all you would need to do is hop on the Aquatrak.  People would rather concern themselves with creative endeavors and personal relationships than how they’re going to afford an electric car.  Water is essential to human life, so implementing the Aquatrak is pretty obvious, right?

Wrong, because we forgot about the owners of Megawatt Motors.  We let them incorporate and accumulate profit which became an addiction.  They became wealthy enough to bribe our leaders and chief decision-makers.  They couldn’t let Aquatrak develop or they would lose all their business.  It doesn’t matter if all of their employees stand to benefit greatly from the better access to water.  The profit distribution at the top would inexorably decline.

Eventually people get unruly and uncooperative as their collective sympathy kicks in upon witnessing the poor go without electric cars and the thirsty go without water.  To check the unrest, Megawatt Motors allows for the construction of Aquatrak.  They refuse to fund it, but they demand that only the poor and the old can use it.  This, too, starts to unsettle the savage population so they stipulate that you can get on the train if you’re about to die from thirst, but those wonderful people we sent to dig the wells are going to have to pay for it which makes them jaded and cynical.  Everyone else needs to buy a car if they want water.

Some discover that you don’t need to buy a car.  If they really need water, they figure they’ll just walk the distance to the closest groundwater well.  If, along the way, they realize that they were too brash and can’t make it the whole way, they have three options: 1) die 2) rent a car or 3) board the emergency train.  Each option is a problem.  Our society doesn’t like dying which leaves the latter two.  Option 2 is bad because Megawatt Motors needs to cover its costs.  So when less people buy their cars, they increase the unit price which is only rational.  Increasing the unit price is bad for everyone else because they have no choice but to pay the extra cost: they need the car because they need water.  Option 3 is bad because, again, those bright groundwater seekers have to pay for it.  But they’re jaded and cynical now so they bill at a higher rate for their labor.

So now both electric cars AND water are ridiculously expensive which burdens the society.  The motor of public unrest begins to turn again.  People are angry that access to water has become so expensive.  It did not used to be this expensive.  They can no longer focus on their passions because they are always worried about water.  Disdain forms between those who can afford electric cars and those who cannot afford electric cars.  The entire population becomes bitter and suspicious.  They don’t understand why they are paying for an Aquatrak that they’re not allowed to use.  They become angry at those using the Aquatrak.  Blinded by consumerism, xenophobia, and nationalism, they cannot understand what is happening.

Megawatt Motors eventually sees a grand opportunity.  They see this opportunity because they are clever which they have to be in order to feed their addiction.  They allow a single idea to penetrate the hazy confusion and reveal its head above the cloud.  Society begins to entertain the idea of forcing its constituents to buy electric cars.  It seems like a great idea because the cost of water and water labor will decrease.  It appears to be an answer to the big problem, a solution in the midst of turbulence.

If everyone buys an electric car, everyone gets water and both become cheaper.   To many, it’s a no-brainer.  But the rest can’t let go of their suspicion and bitterness.  They detest the idea of being forced to buy an electric car. They feel that it is unfair, oppressive, and hostile to their liberty.  Megawatt Motors waits silently as the two sides argue bitterly against each other.  The legal obligation to purchase an electric car would be great for business and profits would soar.  That’s why they let the idea grow, develop, and reach public consciousness.

In the chaos, the general population forgets about the power of Aquatrak, the simplest solution of all.  One train versus an electric car for each person.  The train is NOT fueled by the addiction to profit, but rather by the need for water.  Everyone is allowed on the train, so no one is suspicious of each other.  Everyone takes the train, so our innocent water collectors can go back to digging new wells instead of running tabs.  Collective sympathy is restored.  We remember that water isn’t a commodity, but an element of societal survival.

Aquatrak represents a single-payer universal healthcare system that cuts out the insurance middlemen represented by Megawatt Motors.  During Tuesday’s Supreme Court session, attorney Paul Clement argued with Justice Kagan about the difference between electric cars and health insurance as market entities: “My unwillingness to buy an electric car is forcing up the price of an electric car…If only more people demanded an electric car, there would be economies of scale, and the price would go down” (1).  Clement argued that that sort of inaction does not indicate active engagement in commerce and likewise with failure to buy health insurance.  Kagan disagreed with the analogy and argued that healthcare is by nature different in that even if you do not buy health insurance, you are still entitled to healthcare.  It would be like refusing to buy an electric car, but reaping the benefits of automated travel.

This forced intimacy between two “markets” is the absurdity that we all overlook.  to buy or not to buy health insurance is NOT the question.  It doesn’t have to be.  Congress does not have to impose commerce.  Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.  There’s no reason to force the people to do business with Megawatt Motors when Aquatrak can be financed via taxes.

These Supreme Court proceedings cloud the importance of health not as a commodity but as elemental to human civilization.  Every human depends on it and, as such, it unites us in solidarity.  We care about each other’s access to it.  How can we stay silent as Americans when we’re the only modern industrialized nation where loss of employment means loss of health, loss of life?  Why is corporate profit so intimately connected with popular sustenance?   If healthcare distribution by wealth weren’t so viscerally immoral, why did we find it necessary to forbid emergency rooms to turn people away?  Is that really the limit to our moral imagination?

We can’t see the 47 million uninsured, but we know they are there.  How is this okay?  Mandated coverage under Obamacare will not come near closing that deficit, but we’ve allowed the debate to be framed in such a way that there is no other option.  Not only does it not go far enough, it’s going in the wrong direction.  Channeling billions right back to private MCOs and pharmaceutical giants is not a band-aid on a papercut.  It’s cauterizing a stab wound to the neck.  It might stop the bleeding, but it will become infected.

(1)    http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-398-Tuesday.pdf

Media bias: Trayvon Martin and Ramarley Graham

This article originally appeared in OpEd News on 3/21/2012.

The headline of a recent USA Today article reads, “In wake of Trayvon Martin’s death, America is soul-searching” (1).  And so it should be.  He was a 17-year-old African-American walking back from a convenience store when he was gunned down by an overzealous and self-appointed neighborhood watch activist, George Zimmerman.  The media has so far demanded that the public acknowledges that Martin was walking back to “a gated community” in Florida with Skittles in his pocket (2) (3) (4) (5) (6).  The incident which occurred on February 26, just weeks after his 17th birthday, has sparked international outrage against racism and injustice.  The boy was most likely racially profiled (“Fucking coons ”) and murdered by a much larger, much older, and better equipped member of the community who, outrageously, has yet to be charged with a crime (7).

As a media sensation, the story has forced us to examine racial tensions and prejudices in post-Barack America as well as America’s amorous relationship with firearms.  It’s a tragedy that reflects some of the uglier aspects of our culture.  Benjamin Crump, the family’s attorney, praised the media’s role in revealing the facts surrounding the injustice: “Thank God for the media, because I’m not sure we ever would have gotten the truth out” (8).  Indeed, the media revealed another illustrative aspect of this incident in an LA Times headline that read “George Zimmerman dreamed of being a cop” (4).

The connection between Zimmerman and law enforcement is a remarkable one when we examine another murder of a young African-American male right around the same time as Martin’s death.  On February 2, Ramarley Graham, 18-years-old, was shot to death while unarmed in his grandmother’s Bronx apartment in the vicinity of his younger brother, 6-years-old (9).  If you search his name on Google, you’ll find that his murder was virtually neglected when compared to Martin’s murder.  Trayvon Martin has hour-by-hour coverage and a Wikipedia article.  Ramarley Graham’s has a handful of mentions by Huffington Post and NY times (10).

Why the disparity?  Graham was killed by an NYPD police officer in the narcotics enforcement division.  NYPD police commissioner Ray Kelly expressed his opinion at a subsequent press conference: “At this juncture we see an unarmed person being shot.  That always concerns us” (9).  You might be thinking, or perhaps hoping, that the facts reveal Graham to be somehow “less innocent” than young Martin with the Skittles in his pocket.  Well, of the little bits of information that have been reported, most point to the fact that the police were acting on the suspicion that Graham “might have been armed” (11) (12).  On this suspicion, they followed Graham as he walked into his grandmother’s apartment.  There’s even a video that shows that Graham, indeed, walked into the apartment (13).  The police, specifically Officer Richard Haste, eventually sprinted to the door, kicked it down, and shot the boy in the chest.  Apparently, Haste “believed he was in mortal danger” (14).

What were the officers doing in the first place?  They’re instructed to make arrests upon witnessing a drug deal.  Instead, they witnessed Graham emerge from a bodega with two friends.  Apparently, “something about how he moved his hands near his waist led the officers to suspect he was armed” (11).  He probably had that criminal sort of gait, presumably.  Indeed, the surveillance video confirms hooded sweatshirt and baggy pants.  Well that was it for Ramarley Graham.  The NYPD was vindicated when they found a bag of marijuana in the toilet bowl next to the body.

Both deaths are deeply tragic and grievous.  And neither takes away from the significance of the other.  Each case reflects deep-seated forms of racist oppression against blacks in the U.S.  Yet one has clearly become more sensational than the other.  To find out why, we have to examine deeper differences that have yet to be addressed.

In Trayvon Martin’s case, the mode of racism is horizontal in nature.  Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighborhood watchman, acted on violent inclinations filtered through misguided and dangerous stereotypes.  But both were more or less members of the same socioeconomic locale.  Contrastingly, in Ramarley Graham’s case, the injustice was vertical in nature.  Officer Haste, serving in the War on Drugs—incidentally associated with what’s called the New Jim Crow—was attempting to make a low-level marijuana arrest.  Haste may or may not have been a parallel incarnation of Zimmerman, who “dreamed of being a cop.”  His gun, however, was issued to him by the city of New York.  Furthermore, his neighborhood watch was not self-appointed; rather, it was authoritatively commanded.

The top-down institutional nature of the Graham tragedy makes it indirectly a class issue.  Graham was targeted by the police because he was black and in the Bronx, hallmarks of the insurgent in the War on Drugs.  However, class incongruities do not fit the narrative of the mainstream corporate-owned media.  You’re not supposed to think about institutional oppression.  Bitterness and suspicion needs to be aimed around you, not above you.  It’s your neighbor that’s bankrupting the country, stealing your job, and murdering children.  Because of him/her, your gated community is no longer safe.

The juxtaposition of these two tragedies demonstrates how effectively the media can selectively channel righteous indignation in a way that serves elite interest.  The murders of Graham and Martin are equally monstrous, but there’s no question that a state-sponsored homicide is far uglier and more deeply unsettling than one committed by some local fanatic.

1)      http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-20/trayvon-martin-teen-shot-stereotypes/53677634/1

2)      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/20/trayvon-martin-death-story-so-far?newsfeed=true

3)      http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/03/why_george_zimmerman_trayvon_martin_s_killer_hasn_t_been_prosecuted_.html

4)      http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-20120320,0,1508238.story

5)      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/under-suspicion-the-killing-of-trayvon-martin/2011/03/04/gIQAz4F4KS_blog.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

6)      http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-20/news/os-trayvon-martin-girlfriend-speaks-details-20120320_1_shooting-death-gated-attorneys

7)      http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-killing-911-tape-reveals-racial-slur/story?id=15966309#.T2lWVXxSRnQ

8)      http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2012/03/trayvon-martin-thank-god-for-the-media.html

9)      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/09/ramarley-graham-new-york-police-_n_1266715.html

10)   http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/nyregion/unarmed-teenager-fatally-shot-by-officer-chasing-him.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=%22Ramarley%20Graham%22&st=cse

11)   http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/nyregion/police-unit-faces-scrutiny-after-ramarley-grahams-death-in-the-bronx.html?pagewanted=all

12)   http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/02/the-killing-of-ramarley-graham/253322/

13)   http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local/new_york&id=8537038

14)   http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/fatally-shot-bronx-teen-believed-life-line-colleague-article-1.1032896

Healthcare failure: the occupied Palestinian territories

This article originally appeared in CounterPunch on 3/15/2012.

Healthcare is a unique issue in international politics and discussions of modern civilization.  As an institutional entity, it has both a substantial and direct implication regarding the very existence of human populations.  That’s in contrast to markers such as employment, GDP, or literacy that have effects that are slightly harder to trace out.  Indeed, the authors 2010 World Health Report recognized that “promoting and protecting health is essential to human welfare and sustained economic and social development” and that people “rate health one of their highest priorities” (1).  As a majorly accepted sentiment, it becomes morally difficult to justify institutional healthcare inequalities if we choose to believe in principles of democracy and Rawlsian equality of opportunity.

If, as a nation, we impose economic sanctions on another country as a method of foreign policy, it’s okay for that nation’s economy to suffer because it puts pressure on the government and state leaders to capitulate.  What you’re not allowed to talk about are the direct outcomes on the population because the point is to get the boogey man—Saddam or Osama—but not to cause a humanitarian crisis characterized by the starvation of children in, say, Afghanistan (2).  Unfortunately, severe economic decline and mass suffering are inexorably linked as is clearly demonstrated by the Palestinian condition.

Starting in 2009, one of the world’s leading medical journals, The Lancet, began publishing a series of studies and commentaries concerned with the socioeconomic condition in the occupied territories.  The chief editor of the journal, Richard Horton, recognized that “since 2000, the occupied Palestinian territory has experienced increased human insecurity, with the erosion and reversal of many health gains made in earlier years” and that “these setbacks, together with the latest Israeli air and ground attacks on Gaza, have plunged the region into a humanitarian crisis” (3).  Indeed, a February 2012 poll by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion reported that 54.7% of Palestinians are concerned about their subsistence of themselves and their family.  Furthermore, when asked about their main present concern, 39.6% said it was employment and 22.4% said it was security (4).

The reason for their bleak outlook is pretty straightforward, let’s just look at the facts.  The aftermath of the Second Intifada and the blockade of the Gaza Strip left the population of 1.7 million in a devastated state.  In 2008, 37% of the active workforce in Gaza was unemployed and 74% of the population lived below the poverty line of $3.15 per person per day.  Unemployment in the West Bank was 19% and 40% lived under the poverty line.  Though physical, institutional, and trade restrictions imposed on the Occupied Territories since the Oslo accords had been deteriorating the internal Palestinian economy, foreign aid allowed for continued development (32% of GDP according to the World Bank) (5).  However, the situation collapsed upon the popular election of Hamas: “Diplomatic ties and international donor funding were cut, and Israel withheld Palestinian tax revenues, which together form about 75% of the budget of the Palestinian National Authority.”  (6).

Image

Health outcomes also deteriorated sharply as a result of economic penalties and restrictions.  Electricity and cooking gas to Gaza was heavily diminished which subsequently “disrupted the operation of water and sewage pumps throughout the Gaza Strip.”  In addition to continual shortages of medicines and medical supplies, a WHO report found that “medical devices are often broken, missing spare parts, or out of date” (7).  Amnesty International’s 2011 Report revealed that the infant mortality rate in the occupied territories is 23/18 (m/f) per 1000 in contrast to 6/5 in Israel.  Furthermore the life expectancy in the territories is 72.9 years as opposed to 80.3 years in Israel (8).  Proper access to healthcare has also been severely impaired by the stringent restriction on travel outside of the occupied territories.  Reports by Physicians for Human Rights revealed an increase in the medical referrals outside of Gaza coupled with a decreased in travel permissions allowed for these cases by Israeli officials (9).  The population inexorably suffers.

The fundamental barrier Palestinians face in attaining healthcare is ubiquitous: inability to afford high costs.  There is no realistic way of implementing a system of pooled risk to decrease up-front costs and the distribution of healthcare resources (including personnel) among the sick is extremely inefficient.  Because of the stipulations of the Israeli occupation, the “Palestinian National Authority is expected to perform as the government of a state while lacking control over its borders, basic resources, and many of the social determinants of health” and “vague institutional arrangements have hindered the establishment of a proper governance system” (10).

Modern medicine is built upon basic principles of inter- and intra- state trade.  This is in sharp contrast to an advanced profession such as law where an expertly trained professional can provide legal counsel just about anywhere and to anyone.  In addition to the physician’s knowledgebase and skill set, he/she requires material goods and resources such as medicines and biomedical equipment.  The internal economy of Palestine is deeply impoverished and exchange with external parties is severely hindered by check points, roadblocks, and blockades.  There are no economic and logistical frameworks to get patients what they need.

The bottom line is that the population suffers due to external forces beyond their control (and desire as revealed by the polls).  A crippled economy left the people without jobs or an infrastructure for societal development: they’re stuck.  In the ghetto that is Gaza Strip: “social solidarity and resilience have nurtured the Palestinian health response to occupation.”  However, in light of continued political and economic degeneration, “the social fabric of Palestinian society is eroding (11).”  Ordinary Palestinians are completely disenfranchised.  Even if they were to engage in popular demonstration which has been used globally to achieve egalitarian health objectives (12), the Palestinian Authority does not have the capacity to react significantly in any way.  If the only parties that enter the discourse are Fatah, Hamas, Israel, and the United States, then health outcomes will decline.  Poor healthcare has become an effective means of nonviolently undermining a population.  Sadly enough, the same strategy was employed in Apartheid South Africa.

(1)    http://www.who.int/whr/2010/en/index.html

(2)    http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq/sanctions.html

(3)    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60100-8/fulltext

(4)    http://www.pcpo.ps/polls.htm

(5)    http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWESTBANKGAZA/Resources/AHLCReportSept.08final.pdf

(6)    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60107-0/abstract

(7)    http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/m/abstract/Js16445e/

(8)    http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/israel-occupied-palestinian-territories/report-2011

(9)    http://www.phr.org.il/default.asp?PageID=111&ItemID=558

(10)http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60111-2/abstract

(11)http://www.thelancet.com/series/health-in-the-occupied-palestinian-territory

(12)http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02817.x/abstract

Crisis of democracy: the Virginia hunger strike

Dissident Voice

On March 1, 2012, a hunger strike consisting of 26 students at the University of Virginia came to a close.  The Living Wage Campaign made an unprecedented decision to initiate a hunger strike to achieve its goals of raising worker wages from the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr to to $13/hr (1).  Though the University has a minimum rate of $10.65, this official rate does not apply to contracted workers that fall outside of this stipulated minimum (2).  Contracted workers imply temp laborers supplied by staffing agencies such as those run by Schneider Logistics who coordinates manual moving labor for Wal-Mart’s supply chain (3).  It’s a clever way of getting around regulatory mechanisms established for humanitarian purposes.

Let’s examine what is going on at the University.  The Living Wage Campaign “declared a hunger strike to publicize the unjust wages paid to UVA employees, and to urge the administration to take action on this issue.”  26 students denied themselves nourishment for 13 days to make a statement about injustice.  Blacks and latinos living below poverty is alright because it’s “part of the plan,” but well-off students at an elite university playing Bobby Sands is a deviation that arouses decision makers.  Our nation’s future leaders need to focus on getting in line and learning how to play the game.  Too much concern for the underprivileged is pathological and risks spreading.

Symbolic demonstration in the U.S. has a long history, but it is undeniable that this hunger strike was inspired by the Occupy movement.  When the disenfranchised lose the ability to participate in the electoral system, they find other means to enforce their demands.  When the subjects–who make up the majority–of an institutional system peacefully and quietly request a change in the operational framework, it’s very easy for administrators in power to refuse: the incentive is negligible.  But sometimes these requests are made a second time  through demonstrations that are loud and visible.  They capture the public eye and the administrative officials begin to fear collective mobilization.  This is nonviolent resistance.  This is the crisis of democracy.

In 1973, the Trilateral Commission was formed by state-capitalist elite members of North America, Japan, and Europe as a discussion-based think tank “to foster closer cooperation among these core industrialized areas of the world with shared leadership responsibilities in the wider international system” (4).  In 1975, the Commission published a book entitled “The Crisis of Democracy: on the Governability of Democracies” which examined and attempted to rationalize the unpredictable power shifts in the socioeconomic fabrics of the three societies.  The authors conceded that “the viability of democracy in a country clearly is related to the social structure and social trends in that country” and that “a social structure in which wealth and learning were concentrated in the hands of a very few would not be conducive to democracy.”  Their analysis of social movements in the 1960s draws uncanny parallels to the present American consciousness.  They called it “a decade of democratic surge and of the reassertion of democratic egalitarianism.”

The intellectual elite at the time recognized that decreasing popularity for foreign interventionism coincided with increasing support for government intervention in domestic programs.  There was a clear disparity between the interests of the government and ruling elite and the interests of middle and working class people.  Disillusioned with jingoistic and anti-communist propaganda, the general population tried to curtail American imperialism and demanded that it prioritize social imperatives: “a shift in values is taking place away from the materialistic work-oriented, public-spirited values toward those which stress private satisfaction, leisure, and the need for belonging and intellectual and esthetic self-fulfillment.”  We could call this a desire for a meaningful life with creative pursuits.  As per the Commission, “The vitality of democracy in the United States in the 1960s produced a substantial increase in government activity and a substantial decrease in government authority” which it viewed as paradoxical.  The authors could not understand the attempt to reorganize the government’s focus away from imperialist and ideological pursuits and more towards social and humanitarian goals.  All of this should sound familiar.  Wall Street and the military-industrial-complex come to mind.

They viewed it as a crisis when “authority [had] been challenged not only in government, but in trade unions, business enterprises, schools and universities, professional associations, churches, and civic groups” which were significant as “institutions which have played the major role in the indoctrination of the young in their rights and obligations as members of society.”  There was too much concern for everyday people rather than national interest and they attributed this problem to a failure on the part of universities, instruments of elite indoctrination: “The more educated a person is, the more likely he is to participate in politics, to have a more consistent and more ideological outlook on political issues, and to hold more ‘enlightened’ or ‘liberal’ or ‘change oriented’ views on social, cultural, and foreign policy issues.”  Group actions such as the civil rights movement, the sexual enlightenment, and the feminist movement were symptoms of “excess democracy.”

In any institution, there are always two major parties with opposing interests.  The students participating in the hunger strike at UVa with their liberal and humanitarian indoctrination have goals that are opposed to top-down administration who have been forced to meet and discuss demands.  The students are demanding money.  It is a dangerous demand that confuses capitalist elites because they are demanding money for poor workers that are not involved in the strike.  People  fear what they do not understand.  And centers of power, as demonstrated by the Trilateral Commission’s report, are very much aware of the contagiousness of popular demonstration.

The hunger strike in Charlottesville, VA is an inspiring domino in wave of popular movements all around the globe.  Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street, and the Wisconsin protests are interconnected surges of uprising in response to systematized and falsified greed.  It’s one thing to pay workers an indecent wage, but it’s more sinister to resort to alternative and perfidious means of getting around wage regulations.  The University’s minimum entry-level wage is $10.65/hr which was the case when I myself worked there.  But they can get around this rule by hiring contract workers that are not direct employees of the University and can be paid as low as the federal minimum wage, $7.25/hr which is so ridiculous I won’t even bother discussing it.  Walmart is another example for blue collar workers.  For white-collars, the late pandemic of unpaid internships should be quite familiar (5) (6).  It takes loud voices and forceful movements to get the machine in line and under control.  Machines, like universities and like corporations, are not people and don’t need the money as much.

(1) http://www.livingwageatuva.org/official-demands/

(2) http://www.hr.virginia.edu/news-events/news/u.va.-raises-minimum-hire-rate-to-10.65/

(3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/new-blue-collar-temp-warehouses_n_1158490.html

(4) http://www.trilateral.org/go.cfm?do=Page.View&pid=5

(5) http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/caroline-mortimer/are-unpaid-internships-an_b_1001250.html

(6) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robin-richards/unpaid-internships-the-el_b_826194.html