I recommended this on Facebook. I quoted a paragraph with pleasure in another entry on this blog.
It’s not enough. I’ve waited a long time to see this kind of writing and here it is – Christianity with teeth, not some Bible thumping loon talking about the innocuous undefinable “family values” while safely giving a pass to the rapacious businessmen in his congregation. I say to you that he has his reward.
I am honored to, once again, pass on these words.
James Pilant
Homophilosophicus writing in his blog quoting the Prophet Amos. (Jeremiah is my favorite.) The first decades of the 21st century are truly the years of the Old Testament Prophets. All around us, uncertainty, stupidity and greed flourish.
“They do not know how to do right, says the Lord, those who store up violence and robbery in their strongholds (Amos 3:10).”
Those of whom the writer of Amos speaks are not merely petty criminals, for they live in strongholds. Amos is referring to those who rule from their unassailable citadels, who fill up their treasuries with the wealth they have taken from the powerless by violence and theft. It is evident that this relationship between the powerful and the powerless has not changed; in fact it has become enshrined within modern economic systems. There are those who, by virtue of their monopoly on power alone, assert the right to grow fat from the labour of the powerless. In Ireland we have seen that the government have stolen from the people. They have taken tax from the people and they have failed to provide for the welfare of the people from that revenue; this is nothing other than theft. Without proper consultation with the people the government has gambled and lost billions of euros from the community purse, and have successfully lined their own pockets. This also is theft. By maintaining systems of injustice they have demonstrated their violence against the vulnerable and the weak. Ignorance is not an excuse for what they have done, but it would seem to be the case that “they do not know how to do right.” Each and every member of the present government of Ireland comes from a privileged background, a background that has taken wealth for granted and considered the accumulation of money the highest virtue. It stands to reason then that these people have suffered from a severe form of political myopia in their regard of the poor. They have consistently failed to take the needs of the poor into account when they have made decisions ‘for the good of the nation.’ What ‘good’ in this context actually means is that which is ‘economically good for the wealthy.’
Doesn’t this sound like a Minister of God with brains? All we got around here is an editorial writer explaining that the Medal of Honor has become feminized!
James Pilant
The companies with multimillion-dollar contracts to supply American airports with body-scanning machines more than doubled their spending on lobbying in the past five years and hired several high-profile former government officials to advance their causes in Washington, government records show.
L-3 Communications, which has sold $39.7 million worth of the machines to the federal government, spent $4.3 million trying to influence Congress and federal agencies during the first nine months of this year, up from $2.1 million in 2005, lobbying data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show. Its lobbyists include Linda Daschle, a former Federal Aviation Administration official.
Rapiscan Systems, meanwhile, has spent $271,500 on lobbying so far this year, compared with $80,000 five years earlier. It has faced criticism for hiring Michael Chertoff, the former Homeland Security secretary, last year. Chertoff has been a prominent proponent of using scanners to foil terrorism. The government has spent $41.2 million with Rapiscan.
Obviously, the TSA bought those scanners to protect Americans from threat, enriching well heeled manufacturers was just an after thought. I, mean, considering their ham handed arrogance so far, there can be little doubt that they do what they want. The President won’t even get in the way.
James Pilant
William Saleton wrote this on Slate –
Ignore these imbeciles. Their plan would clog security lines and ruin your holiday for no good reason. They don’t understand the importance of the electronic scans. They’re wrong about the scanners’ safety. And from the standpoint of dignity, their advice is insane. If you opt out of the scan, you’ll get a pat-down instead. You’ll trade a fast, invisible, intangible, privacy-protected machine inspection for an unpleasant, extended grope. In effect, you’ll be telling TSA to touch your junk.
This is what he says he is reacting to –
In case you haven’t heard, there’s a big holiday coming up. No, I don’t mean Thanksgiving. I mean the day before it. Wednesday is the busiest air travel day of the year, and a horde of paranoid zealots—techno-libertarians, Tea Partiers, rabble-rousers, Internet activists, and congressional demagogues—has decided to make it even worse. They’re calling it “National Opt-Out Day.” Rather than endure an electronic scan of your body at the security gate, they want you to “opt out” and force the Transportation Security Administration to physically inspect you. Their hero is John Tyner, the man who recorded himself a week ago as he warned a TSA officer not to “touch my junk.”
Guess what?? Now, I’m either no longer just an imbecile but paranoid zealot as well!
Now, I am also referred to as an Internet activist, but that sound kind of cool, I mean, not in the women liking you way but more out there on the edge. It’s like not having the Harley Davidson but having the jacket.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Mr. Saletan is not trying to persuade me. His idea here is that if he can make me appear to be foolish (or ugly for that matter), it will destroy the force of my argument. This is a logical fallacy, nevertheless I am heartbroken to be called an imbecile and a paranoid zealot. I’m going to shut down my internet site and turn myself in for confinement in an asylum for paranoid delusionals. Yeah right, and I going file for Cambodian citizenship too.
This is not a legitimate strategy for persuasion. I admit he does throw in what he would term facts.
But really all temptation for me to criticize him was erased when I read the comments on his post. As of 8:16 PM, Central Standard Time, the comments number 593. I looked at them. Around 400 would be willing to participate in a lynch mob.
Now, I don’t want you regular people commenting, just my fellow a) imbeciles, b) paranoid zealots or C) internet activists. But if you guys want to, you can go here and let him know your opinion. My semi-insane comrades and I will comment too!
James Pilant
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said she thought “everyone, including our security experts, are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public.” She told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “striking the right balance is what this is about.”
However, when asked on CBS’ “Face the Nation” if she would submit to a pat-down, Clinton responded: “Not if I could avoid it. No. I mean, who would?”
Do you think that the White House may have miscalculated in bringing her into the discussion?
She doesn’t sound like the President’s emasculated staff. It adds credence to recent comments as to who has balls.
She said what she thought.
Let this be our meek but vital battle cry against the TSA – “NOT IF I COULD AVOID IT. NO. I MEAN, WHO WOULD?”
James Pilant
By the Ethics Sage –
Dan’s flow chart is both masterful and scary at the same time. It makes you wonder whether anyone really knows who owns a mortgage. When one party sells it to another as a securitized asset, it transfers the risk to that party. Given that the original holder of the mortgage no longer bears the risk of default, it can make unsupportable mortgages to undeserving parties and not worry about the probability of repayment. Multiply that by the number of times a mortgage is sold and you have a chaotic system that encourages bad behavior.
(The “Ethics Sage,” aka Steven Mintz, has been writing, speaking out, and blogging about a lack of ethics in business and society by attacking the decline of moral values in society, a vanishing work ethic, pursuit of self-interests mentality, and a tone at the top of organizations that tolerates and even encourages wrongdoing.
Dr. Mintz enjoys an international reputation for research, teaching, and speaking on ethics in business and accounting. He has published two textbooks and dozens of research papers on business and accounting ethics, and corporate governance. He teaches a course on accounting ethics at California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo.
Dr. Mintz is a widely sought out speaker at ethics, professional and academic meetings. He has presented at: The Board of Director and Corporate Governance Research Conference in Henley, England; Global Finance & Research Conference in London; The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Trinidad & Tobago; Association of Asian-Pacific Accountants in Bangkok, Thailand; and the Asian International Business Association in Shanghai, China.
Dr. Mintz has his own blog on ethics issues under the name of Ethics Sage. The website address is: http://www.ethicssage.com.)
Written by Erik Sherman at CBS Moneywatch –
The lawsuit is three years old and the story continues. When a company makes a colossal error, it can simply make a clear breast of it, take its lumps, and recover. Or, it can try to bury the story, protect itself by claiming innocence, and prolong the pain. That’s the route that Dell has taken.
In July, Dell tried to deny fault and simply ignore how it allegedly ignored customers who were having problems with computers plagued by bad parts. And some of the explanations in the past were real hoots. For example, Dell told the University of Texas math department that the machines went bad because intense calculations overtaxed them. Right, the machines were actually supposed to be coasters and were only missing the sign that said, “Warning, Don’t Use For Math.”
Apparently taking responsibility was too risky.
This seems to me to be an obvious case of thinking only as far as the next quarter.
Any kind of long term thinking or ethical thinking would have called for a different action.
James Pilant
This is fascinating. I was deeply impressed. You should give this a listen if you have any concern for the free market’s effect on morality.
James Pilant
I’ll just let this speak for itself, although the temptation to speculate of what happens to a child that hears sitar music in the womb is difficult to overcome.
James Pilant
Can’t the banks call off the dogs, if you do the right thing?
James Pilant
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.