From CounterPunch
By Mike Whitney

Last Wednesday, at an improvised press conference, George Bush gave what may have been the most comical performance of his eight year presidency. Looking like the skipper on the flight-deck of the Hindenburg, Bush tried his best to reassure the public that “all’s well” with the economy and that everyone’s deposits were perfectly safe in the rapidly disintegrating US banking system. Leaning lazily on the presidential podium, Bush shrugged his shoulders and said,

“My hope is that people take a deep breath and realize that their deposits are protected by our government. We’re not seeing the growth we’d like to see, but the financial system is basically sound.”

Right. “Breath deep” and chill out; no need to panic. One shouldn’t let the long lines of anxious depositors who are presently trying to extract what’s left of their life savings from the now-defunct Indymac Bank upset one’s basic equanimity. The banking system is perfectly safe, you heard it from President Trickledown himself.

At the same time Bush was offering his soothing words on all the major TV news networks, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke was on the other side of Washington giving a decidedly grimmer assessment of the economy:

“The contraction in housing activity that began in 2006 and the associated deterioration in mortgage markets that became evident last year have led to sizable losses at financial institutions and a sharp tightening in overall credit conditions. The effects of the housing contraction and of the financial headwinds on spending and economic activity have been compounded by rapid increases in the prices of energy and other commodities, which have sapped household purchasing power even as they have boosted inflation. Against this backdrop, economic activity has advanced at a sluggish pace during the first half of this year, while inflation has remained elevated.”

Read more Dow 6,000

From TruthDig
By Marie Cocco

I’m not one to take lightly the loss of 12,000 jobs, especially when they come with good benefits such as health insurance and vacations for part-timers. Still, I’m finding it hard to suppress a bit of smugness over the downsizing of Starbucks, the ubiquitous coffee chain that put the word latte on everyone’s lips.

By next week, the first of 600 stores Starbucks intends to close will be shuttered, a shrinkage necessitated by a drop in profits and an overall drift of purpose that seems to have thrown the company into the type of identity crisis some of its patrons try to work out while lounging at the cafe. My irritation is directed at neither the company’s management nor its employees, but at the Starbucks culture. It’s always annoyed the heck out of me.

Starbucks seems to be a place that carries a whiff of excess. In its own way, it has a lot in common with SUVs, hot tubs and television screens wide enough to fill a wall. That is, it represents the bit-by-bit extravagances that helped get us into the tight economic jam we find ourselves in today.

I never did develop the Starbucks habit, an addiction that can cost otherwise levelheaded people $25 or more per week. Years ago, I remember shocking a colleague when I told him I walked across street each morning to get coffee at a shop where the basic brew was a dime less than a comparable cup at the Starbucks just an elevator ride down from my office. I could have easily afforded the 50 cents extra per workweek, but what was the point? A brewed coffee was a brewed coffee. And since neither Starbucks espresso nor its various versions of “latte” bear much resemblance to the real things I’ve consumed in Italy (or even growing up in an Italian-American neighborhood), I never much cared for them. Eventually, I gave up buying coffee from a shop altogether. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

But the list of stores Starbucks is closing is a revelation. It shows that the company expanded to byways of America where I have no doubt that a decade ago, few would have deliberated the purchase of an expensive coffee, let alone an oddly named beverage. Take, for example, the store that is about to go dark in Triadelphia, W.Va.

Read more Economy

From Tom Dispatch
By Elizabeth de la Vega

“Lisa, the whole reason we have elected officials is so we don’t have to think all the time. Just like that rainforest scare a few years back. Our officials saw there was a problem and they fixed it, didn’t they?” — Homer Simpson

On June 24, 2008, Louie and I curled up on the couch to watch seven of the nation’s foremost water resources experts testify before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

This was a new experience for us. For my part, the issue to be addressed — “Comprehensive Watershed Management Planning” — was certainly a change of pace from the subjects I ordinarily follow in Judiciary and Intelligence Committee hearings. I wasn’t even entirely sure what a “watershed” was. I knew that, in a metaphorical sense, the word referred to a turning point, but I was a bit fuzzy about its meaning in the world of hydrology. (It’s the term used to describe “all land and water areas that drain toward a river or lake.”)

What was strange from Louie’s point of view was not the topic of the day, but that we were stuck in the house. Usually at that hour, we’d be working in the backyard, where he can better leverage his skill set, which includes chasing squirrels, digging up tomato plants, eating wicker patio chairs, etc. On this particular afternoon, however, the typically cornflower-blue San Jose sky was the color of wet cement, and thick soot was charging down from the nearby Santa Cruz Mountains. Sitting outside would have been about as pleasant as relaxing in a large ashtray.

It would have been difficult, on such a day, not to think about water.

Read more Doh

From The Washington Post
By Carol D. Leonnig

Political appointees at the Department of Labor are moving with unusual speed to push through in the final months of the Bush administration a rule making it tougher to regulate workers’ on-the-job exposure to chemicals and toxins.

The agency did not disclose the proposal, as required, in public notices of regulatory plans that it filed in December and May. Instead, Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao’s intention to push for the rule first surfaced on July 7, when the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) posted on its Web site that it was reviewing the proposal, identified only by its nine-word title.

The text of the proposed rule has not been made public, but according to sources briefed on the change and to an early draft obtained by The Washington Post, it would call for reexamining the methods used to measure risks posed by workplace exposure to toxins. The change would address long-standing complaints from businesses that the government overestimates the risk posed by job exposure to chemicals.

The rule would also require the agency to take an extra step before setting new limits on chemicals in the workplace by allowing an additional round of challenges to agency risk assessments.

The department’s speed in trying to make the regulatory change contrasts with its reluctance to alter workplace safety rules over the past 7 1/2 years. In that time, the department adopted only one major health rule for a chemical in the workplace, and it did so under a court order.

Read more Workplace Toxins

From The Pgh Post Gazette
By Joe Fahy

The director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and UPMC Cancer Centers plans to issue an advisory to about 3,000 faculty and staff today about the possible health risks associated with cellular phone use.

“Recently I have become aware of the growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer,” Dr. Ronald Herberman said in the memorandum. “Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use.”

The advisory suggests certain measures to limit exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by the devices, such as shortening the length of conversations or keeping the phones away from the head by text messaging or using headsets or speaker phone options. It also recommends that children not use cell phones except in emergencies.

A child’s developing organs “are the most likely to be sensitive to any possible effects of exposure,” according to the document.

In an interview, Dr. Herberman said he hoped the suggestions would spread to others within Pitt and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, as well as to the general public.

Read more Health Risks

From AlterNet
By Jordan Smith

According to a new study released June 30 by the World Health Organization, the U.S. leads the world and — just in time for the Olympics — takes the gold for the use of tobacco, pot, and cocaine, far outpacing other countries, even the Netherlands, where drug laws are far less draconian. In the U.S., more than 42% in the study admit having used marijuana, and 16% admit having used cocaine — a cocaine-use rate four times that of New Zealand, which ranked No. 2 out of 17 countries surveyed.

For this first cross-national drug-use study, WHO researchers surveyed more than 54,000 people in the Americas (the U.S., Mexico, and Colombia), Europe (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and Ukraine), the Middle East and Africa (Israel, Lebanon, Nigeria, and South Africa), Asia (Japan and China), and Oceania (New Zealand), using a standardized methodology. While WHO researchers determined that drug use is more prevalent in wealthier countries, researchers determined that income does not have a “static” effect on drug use. Overall, researchers found the greatest involvement with all drugs by younger people and “remarkable similarity” across the countries surveyed in the “age of onset” of use. Typically, alcohol and tobacco use begins earliest (between 16 and 19 years of age), followed by pot use (around 18), and coke (typically between 21 and 24).

While income and age may be factors determining drug use, it appears that a country’s drug policies have little impact on use. “Globally, drug use is not distributed evenly and is not simply related to drug policy, since countries with stringent user-level illegal drug policies did not have lower levels of use than countries with liberal ones.” Indeed. The U.S., with its harsh user penalties, outpaced all other countries on use of pot and coke — way beyond even the Netherlands, where legal action is not taken for pot possession for personal use. There, just 19.8% of the population has even tried marijuana, and just 1.9% of the population has tried cocaine. Only New Zealand comes close to the U.S. in the number of folks who have ever tried pot, with just under 42%. The U.S. far outpaced other countries in coke use too, with 16.2% of respondents having tried the drug; New Zealand posted a 4.3% lifetime coke-use rate. Colombia, the only coke-producing nation on the list, came in fourth (tied with Mexico) with a 4% lifetime use rate. Only in alcohol use was the U.S. tossed out of the top spot: We took sixth place, while Ukraine took gold with 97% alcohol use. Germany garnered the silver, with 95.3%, while New Zealand, otherwise — apparently, our drug-use sister country, imagine the cultural exchange possibilities! — took the bronze, with 94.8%.

Read more We’re #1

From Thomas Paine’s Corner
By Rebecca Gibson

“…..What more does man want to know, than that the hand or power that made these things is divine, is omnipotent? Let him believe this, with the force it is impossible to repel if he permits his reason to act, and his rule of moral life will follow of course.”

—Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

I don’t know if it’s God we have murdered; I don’t think that is possible. But capitalism has killed compassion. In a society which only worships the dollar, those who aren’t potential income generating units have no value. None. Children, the elderly, the disabled, the disenfranchised, the damaged….there is no one to care for them as everyone who could be compassionate and offer care -(we the prey)- are busting our asses just to eat and keep a roof over our heads as the wealth of society gets sucked up by greed and extravagance for the feckless few.

So how do the incapacitated live? What is their value, and why is that even a question? What has happened to mercy and humility, compassion and charity? So many of the incapacitated are casualties of the status quo in the first place - a botched surgery or birth, a drug reaction, heart disease and diabetes and obscene obesity from eating grease and garbage, cancer from chemicals, Alzheimer’s from aluminum, insanity from insanity, the list goes on and on. It has all been co-opted by capitalism: nursing home corporations are publicly traded commodities - rife with enough requisite bureaucratic red tape to keep individual do-gooders (those pesky charity types!) out of the business, community mental health centers and hospitals are just trying to turn a profit, and the care and education of children has been relegated to the same wage-bracket as a garbage collector. In none of these endeavors is there anything more than lip-service to the idea of actual ‘quality of service’, despite the exceptional individuals who do care and try.

I find myself wondering, when I venture out into neon ugly-world, when did it all turn so hideous? I heard this old sixties song recently, Cat Stevens’ ‘Peace Train’, and I thought wistfully, tears in my eyes, ‘Wow, music from the time of hope…’ and I realized in that moment that the time of hope was gone. In 2008 most people hope that the stock market will recover, that they won’t lose their job or home, or that they will be the first one to get a new iPhone. Hope for such “utopian trivialities” as beauty or peace or justice is all but dead.

Read more Peace Train

From The Seattle Times
By Froma Harrop

The word “prevention” has a nice ring in any health-care discussion. Thus, many politicians argue that programs to stop smoking, improve diets and otherwise promote wholesome living save money in the long run. A healthier population at less cost — sounds like a win-win situation.

Unfortunately, that formulation is a pleasant fantasy.

Medical economists agree that cancer screenings and gym classes can lead to physical well-being and longer lives. But in the interests of honest accounting, they add that prevention does not reduce overall health-care spending. On the contrary.

Let’s put it bluntly: Longer lives cost more money. Those who make it to 90 thanks to exercise and six daily servings of vegetables are more likely to suffer the expensive ravages of old age. Everyone dies of something. So he who avoids a fatal heart attack at 70 is more at risk of cancer at 80. Those extra 10 years can mean extra CT scans, hip replacements and physical therapy, even for those in relative good health.

Despite this reality, the cost-saving virtues of wellness programs echo along the presidential campaign trail. Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards talked them up — as did Republican Mike Huckabee. The presumptive major-party nominees, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, both include “prevention” in their health-care proposals.

“Prevention is absolutely the right thing to do,” Arthur Garson Jr., the provost at the University of Virginia Medical School, told me. “The issue is, do not expect to get to the end of the day and have enough money from prevention savings to pay for the uninsured.”

Read more Healthy People

From The Seattle PI

On July 4, normally the busiest public holiday of the year, tourists were put off by high gas prices and more than 300 wildfires raging across California. On Memorial Day, traditionally the beginning of the summer season, it was cold. In 1999 there was a grisly murder. In 1997 the Merced River flooded, inundating a hotel and wiping out hundreds of campsites. There are always excuses for the absence of people in Yosemite National Park.

The number of visitors to California’s most spectacular valley has dropped for nine out of the past 13 years, and seems to be heading down again this year.

Even in 2007 — a relatively busy year — attendance was 11 percent below the mid-1990s peak. In America as a whole the number of visitors to national parks and historic sites peaked in 1987.

Visitors are staying for less time and camping less often, especially in the wilderness. And rangers are hearing less American- accented English. Were it not for British and German tourists enjoying the weak dollar, the parks would be desolate.

Falling enthusiasm for what the writer Wallace Stegner called America’s “best idea” is especially striking in such a fast-growing part of the country. Since 1994 California has swollen from 31.5 million to over 38 million people. The speediest growth is inland, close to parks like Joshua Tree, Sequoia and Yosemite.

The same pattern holds further east. Larry Swanson of the Center for the Rocky Mountain West notes a strong correlation between population increase and proximity to national parks and forests. Americans plainly think it is a good idea to live near national parks, but they are not so keen on visiting them.

Read more Great Outdoors

From The AlterNet
By Scott Thill

”This is a specter against which grand inquisitors and wars against terrorism are powerless to protect us,” Mike Davis wrote in a 2003 essay titled “The Perfect Fire,” which was composed against the backdrop of a massive firestorm that callously rampaged across Southern California, burning thousands of homes and billions of dollars in its wake. “It is, of course,” he added, “the right time of the year for the end of the world.”

It still is. In late June, an ahead-of-schedule dry lightning event sparked more than 8,000 strikes across California, setting off over 800 fires, many of which are still burning as I write. And if you’re the praying type, you might want to start praying they can be put out before the conventional time window for such events arrives in late July and August.

“This doesn’t bode well for the fire season,” AccuWeather.com meteorologist Ken Clark told the Associated Press in June, shortly after the lightning hit. “We’re not even into the meat of the fire season at this point, and the brush is extremely dry. It’s not going to get any better,” he added. “It’s going to get worse.”

How much worse? How much time have you got? You might want to spend it packing.

According to a study published in Science last year, the Southwest region of the United States will enter permanent drought by 2050, and that’s being optimistic. The seven states dependent upon the Colorado River Basin — Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona and California — will most likely war over what remains of its diminishing water resources. The region’s thirsty population will also be beset by rampant firestorms, as portions of the snowpack that remains bypass the liquid stage and evaporate into thin, dry air.

Read more Lightning Strikes