“Shake a Bone” by Son of Dave

“Shake a Bone” by Son of Dave. Someone recommended to me a few weeks ago. I am not sure who, but it wasn’t until yesterday that I got to it on my “things to listen to queue”. I wish that the person who shot this my way would come forward, as I have quickly become a fan. Just imagine some hard-hitting blues… beatboxed. Noise-distorted hummed basslines and harmonicas put the cherry on the top.That’s all you need, man. Peep it. The whole album made my iPod “hot shit” play list.

“The Million Color Revolution” by The Pinker Tones

“The Million Color Revolution” by The Pinker Tones. I picked one of their tracks off of a USB drive that my brother handed me of random from his collection. I’ve jammed their “Sonido Total” for quite a few months now and similar to the previous post (which has an excellent cuatro solo at the end), it wasn’t until now that I’ve gotten around to download it. I must say that I’m impressed with this Barcelona-based electronic group.

The overall sound of the album can be summed up as a sort of electro moog-rock. “Welcome to theTMCR” has some funky organs and “waka waka” guitars as well as a signature synthesizer that characterizes the remainder of the songs. “Piccolissima Descarga” – though it only lasts 30 seconds – has a funky break with some turntablism action over it. “Mojo Moog” is on some gangster tip, sounding like a moog version of some side-scrolling 80′s 8-bit fighting game. The cuica in the later is a plus, as are the other odd instruments and sounds that will make their appearance throughout the album.

“Triple P” by Platinum Pied Pipers

Don’t have much time, but wanted to share a few albums that I have been playing on loop while I study for finals. Enjoy:

“Triple P” by Platinum Pied Pipers. One of my music comrades slapped a Platinum Pied Pipers track on a mix CD for me a few years back. It wasn’t until today that I downloaded the entire album and let it play in its entirety. I must say, I am disappointed at myself for not jamming this earlier. The “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover” cover of Paul Simon’s great classic presents a fascinating jazz twist with a pinch of samba. The rest of the album is on some Dwele/R&B J Dilla stuff, with J Dilla actually blessing a number of the tracks with his vocals. The odd-beat “Lights Out” with its echo-filled conga hits is strictly bananas. The spaced-out bass notes on this baby work well with the unique percussion. “One Minute More”, “Stay with Me”, and “After the Worries” are prime example of pristine neo-soul. “Deep Inside” branches off from the rest of the album, but has a funky Nate Dogg/g-funk feel to it.

This whole album is orgasmic.

Ten Problems with Markets

A good friend and classmate recently began reading the works of Ayn Rand. Just as I was when I first stumbled upon Ludwig Von Mises, she was quite fascinated by the efficiency of the invisible hand of market economics. Though I still cite Von Mises as one of my biggest influences in regards to my economic ideology, I still have some reserves concerning a laissez faire market.

I have enumerated them in the following ten-point list, followed by policies that I feel address said worries.

1. Capitalism has failed to keep monopolies in check or from preventing them outright. Monopolies are centralized, powerful, and limit competition. I see have a dozen (or even a hundred) capitalists participating in an industry than one monopoly. I feel that this justifies at least some intervention by the state in dissuading monopolies from consolidating power.

2. Corporations are just as planned as government. Corporations similarly limit markets through contracting and the expropriation of supply. Kenneth Galbraith explored this in his “The New Industrial States”.

3. Pro-market arguments are ideal, but are under the premises that capitalism is composed of small and medium sized businesses that freely compete in an open market. We live in a corporate world where the power players are hired technicians and administrators as opposed to entrepreneurs. Ironically, capitalists are a rare breed. Those interested in the market are going to school for business administration and not business creation. I feel that ceasing to consider corporations individuals as well as requiring more liability from shareholders would deter corporations as we know it.

4. Much wealth is not the product of hard work and innovation. It is the product of colonialism (which has granted industrial nations a head start that the Third World may never catch up to), theft (from the American indigenous, for example), and inheritance.

5. The market does not always does a good job at guaranteeing basic freedoms or rights. Similarly, issues such as health, education, and overall well being are secondary to profit-making. In many instances, the market will not remediate these problems itself. Market advocates hundreds of years ago, for example, might have argued, “If people disagreed with slavery, than they wouldn’t purchase products made by slaves”. I think that this justifies the states to defend basic civil rights.

6. Consumers alone do not have the tools, knowledge, nor information available to them to understand the full effect of their purchases. For example, few consumers are aware of Shell’s human rights record in Nigeria or Coca-Cola’s hiring of Colombian paramilitaries to squash unions. Nor has the market done an efficient job at disseminating such information. Measures ranging from food labels to information broadcasting could be employed to better orientate citizens. I have long supported the labeling of genetically modified food and warning labels on unhealthy foods as a means to better advise consumers.

7. Access to health, education, and capital is not dictated strictly by merit. A malnourished child growing up in a slum, for example, will not be able to compete on an equal footing with an Ivy League-raised, privileged child. Similarly, children raised in settings so impoverished, may grow with mental or social disabilities that will forever prevent them effectively compete in a market economy. Guaranteed access to adequate education and health is crucial for us to give everybody a realistic chance. Only then can we say that those who are poor are poor because they wish to be.

8. Not all cultures foster concepts of individualism, competition, or risk taking. Supposing that these values are universal is ethnocentric and disastrous.

9. Savings does not necessarily mean investment. If a capitalist can increase profit cutting his workers’ wages, this additional profit does not necessarily translate into lower product prices or increased jobs. Similarly, I do not buy the “lets give rich people money so that they can hire more poor people” argument. I instead prefer a simplified flat tax with closed loopholes and limited deductions.

10. Full, free competition would only be “fair” if wealth, resource, and land was re-distributed equally among everybody. Prior to the introduction of free market systems, some populations’ positions were already privileged and in advantage to others.

I would prefer for the state to attend to each of these responsibilities in the most efficient manner possible. Activities such as guaranteeing civil rights and properly informing consumers could be done with a limited government. The challenge, I feel, comes when providing access to health and education; a quagmire which I have not quite figured out yet.

Obama the Anti-American?

During my recent stay in Georgia I found it surprising to hear so many conservatives refer to President Obama as “anti-American”. Ted Nugent recently called him an “Anti-American Monster” (The Blaze, February 28, 2012) and one article on the American Thinker tilted him as a socialist, communist, anti-Semetic, and Marxist (August 19, 2011). Tune into syndicated conservative radio and you will be sure to hear something along these lines in-between every other breath. I hear folks talk about how “we can’t let this man win re-election” and that “he is destroying the fabric of American values”. I’ve heard some folks call him the anti-Christ.

But claims that Obama is “anti-American” are based on a narrow view of what it is to be American. Being a Latino born to the son of a U.S. draftee; growing up on military bases throughout the globe; spending my formative years in the still-socially-segregated South; and now residing in a non-incorporated U.S. territory, I have learned a long time ago that there are numerous “Americas”.

If you think that Obama is “anti-American” then you probably live in the America where citizens praise freedom and liberty and boast the country’s history as a global advocate for peace and democracy. You are most likely supportive of U.S. military efforts throughout the globe and consider yourself a patriot. This is one particular “brand” of America; A brand that statistically pertains to White, predominantly protestant conservatives. Likewise, data portrays just how Blacks and Latinos perceive “their” America.

Blacks, for example still largely perceive the U.S. as a nesting ground for racial conflict, still plagued by the problems rooted in slavery and segregation (Washington Examiner, February 2012). A 2006 poll reported that 49% of Blacks believe that racism is a “very serious” problem, with only 18% of Whites sharing said view (CNN, December 12, 2006). More recently, Newsweek reports that 60% of Blacks and 19% of Whites consider racism a “big problem” (Newsweek, April 7, 2012). Only 16% of Whites believe that there is a lot of discrimination in the U.S., compared to 59% Black. 56% of Blacks think that the federal government treats Whites better than Blacks (The Nation, December 13, 2011). Of southern and non-Southern Blacks, 81% and 80% report feeling discrimination in their day-to-day lives. 73% of Blacks (and 66% of Latinos) supported federal intervention to assist in creating equality in jobs, housing, and jobs. Meanwhile, 69% of Whites felt that the federal government should have no such responsibility (Blair-Rockefeller Poll). Blacks seem to be more concerned with equality than they are the “freedom” and “liberty” expounded on white conservative radio.

Despite the panic in some circles, Blacks seem to be pretty optimistic. Not only did 95% of Blacks vote for Obama in 2008 (Economist, November 6, 2008) but 53% of Blacks say that the “nation’s greatest days are still to come, with only 37% of Whites believing so (Washington Examiner, February 2012). Blacks were also assessing race relations as well as prospects for the future better from 2008 to 2010 than they have during the previous two years than they have in the previous quarter century (Washington Post, January 12, 2010). Only 13% of Blacks feel that the election of Obama has made race relations worse. 74% of Blacks feel that his election has made relations better while only 32% of Whites believe so (Washington Examiner, February 2012).

“America” to Latinos, on the other hand, seems to be much more flexible, with bending and often contradictory perceptions of race. Latinos seem to be less concerned with being “American” as they are with economic progress. Only 21% of Latinos, for example, prefer to be called “American”, compared to their national origin (such as “Mexican” or “Cuban”) or the broader “Hispanic”. 47% of Latinos consider themselves to be “very different from the typical American” (Fox News, April 4, 2012).

Migration has no doubt affected Latinos’ perceptions of Race. For example, 81% of Puerto Ricans living on the island considered themselves “White” in the 2000 Census, while only 46% of those living in the U.S. mainland did so (Los Angeles Times, December 7, 2004). Separate articles from The Los Angeles Times and the New York Times analyze with more depth Latinos’ tendency to increasingly consider themselves “White” as they climb the socio-economic latter. 78% of Latinos, for example, felt that they had the “most in common” with Whites. Professor of Sociology Eduard Bonilla-Silva stated that “we immediately recognize whites on top and blacks on the bottom”(New York Times, April 1, 2012). Overall, Latinos tend to be more pro-diversity than non-Latinos, with 63% of Latinos compared to 45% non-Latinos believe that exposing students to other cultures and teaching them to respect diversity is “extremely important” (California Policy Center).

In regards to economic issues, minorities also share a diversity of views. For example, 43% of Blacks stated that “all” or “most of the time” they had to worry that their family incomes will not be enough to cover expenses and bills. Only 26% of whites expressed the same. In 2005, roughly a third of Blacks and Latinos did not have enough money to buy the food that their family needed (Gallup, 2005). Ultimately, Blacks perceive more class conflict than two years ago (Pew Research Center, January 11, 2012). 65% of Latinos felt that there were plenty of Americans to fill the unskilled jobs, though “employers just need to pay more” (Center for Imigration Studies, February 2010).

Nor do Blacks share the “Obama is anti-American” band’s support of U.S. military interventionism, with Blacks having negative attitudes towards the War on Terror (Wallace, Abduk-Khaliq, Czuchry, & Sia,, 2008). A 2005 poll, for example, found Blacks twice as likely as Whites to have reservations concerning the war in Iraq (USA Today, November 3, 2004). Black were ranked as 30% less likely than Whites to believe that the Iraq was was worth fighting (National Defense Research Institute). One pollster stated that “it would be hard to find a group where the war in Iraq is less popular.” Interestingly enough, it was sported that the Army’s marketing shift from job training to patriotism was “a difficult sell because of misgivings that many African-Americans have about the war.” (USA Today, November 3, 2004) Likewise, Hispanics were 25% less than Whites to recommend military service to a young person, with attitudes regarding the war in Iraq as the source of much of the difference (National Defense Research Institute).

Black perceptions of the military also differ from those of Whites. Blacks they tend to migrate towards non-combat jobs that “provide marketable skills for post-military careers” (USA Today, January 20, 2003) and in all military branches have shown to “favor support jobs, from mechanic to unit administrator, over traditional combat slots such as infantryman or fighter pilot”. USA Today states that “many African-Americans enter the military on recommendations from relatives, many of whom served in support jobs themselves, using those skills later to find civilian employment.” (USA Today, January 20, 2003) Interestingly, Black recruitment from 2000 to 2005 had dropped 40% according to what some sources speculate as opposition to the war in Iraq (USA Today, November 3, 2004).

In regards to immigration, 68% of Latinos believe that immigration “strengthens the United States” while 43% of Whites think so. Concerning Arizona’s recent anti-illegal immigration law, 58% of Latinos “strongly opposed” it while 70% of Whites support it. Ultimately, 11% of Latinos thought that Republicans would do a better job than Democrats in protecting the interest of minorities (NBC News, May 26, 2010).

Overall, it should not take long to see that there is a diversity of “Americas”. One forged by advocates of freedom and liberty; another found by slave owners and racists; and at least a third “America” as a meeting ground for economic advancement with little need to even call oneself an “American”. This conglomeration and conflict of ideas is what makes the U.S. what it is. To say Obama is anti-American is to be anti-American.

The Demise of the Statehood Movement

As an institution the New Progressive Party (PNP) is stronger than ever. Its fund raising capabilities are impressive; its pro-statehood stand is shared by the plural majority of Puerto Ricans; it controls both legislative chambers and the executive branch; and it holds a super majority in the Supreme Court that is guaranteed to last a few decades. Despite this, in previous years its pro-statehood stance has experienced serious obstacles to its ideological legitimacy.

Poll results from March 2011 showed a 43% preference for statehood, compared to 39% for the current Commonwealth status and 7% for Independence. 11% were undecided (El Nuevo Dia, March 29, 2011). These numbers – more or less consistent through previous decades – prove the statehood movement’s historic inability to obtain an absolute majority of Puerto Ricans’ favor. During a 1998 referendum on Puerto Rico’s status, the PNP administration unsuccessfully attempted to split the pro-Commonwelath vote by adding a “Free Association” option to the ballot. Since then, many PNP leaders have campaigned on promises to eliminate the Commonwealth option in its entirety. Pro-Commonwealth politicians claim that this is a plot by the PNP to create a “false majority”.

In an upcoming referendum designed by the current PNP administration, the Commonwealth option will be removed entirely from the second round, with “Sovereign Commonwealth” (another term for “Free Association”) taking its place. To much surprise, an October 2011 poll showed a 41% preference for statehood and a surprising 35% for “Sovereign Commonwealth” (El Nuevo Dia, November 9, 2011). Only 37% of the population claimed that the status issue should be resolved “urgently” while 49% of PNP voters stated that they were satisfied with the current Commonwealth status. These numbers are terrible for a PNP eager to prove that the majority of Puerto Ricans want statehood.

The statehood movement received another blow when President Barack Obama stated that a supermajority would be required for Congress to act on a pro-Statehood vote. “If it split down the middle or 51-49,” stated Obama, “I think Congress’ inclination is going to be not to change, but rather to maintain status quo until there is greater indication there is support for change.” (Caribbean Business, September 28, 2011) Likewise, one of the leading Presidential candidates for the G.O.P. Rick Santorum similarly stated that “50 percent plus one” would not be enough to demonstrate a desire for statehood (AP, March 14, 2012). Such statements if true, set the PNP’s aspiration for statehood back by decades, if not a century.

A few months later, Angus Reid published an instigative poll that revealed that only 21% of Americans supported converting Puerto Rico into the 51st state. Meanwhile, 32% preferred for Puerto Rico to remain a U.S. territory, 23% wanted for Puerto Rico to become independent. Only 19% of Republicans supported statehood; a statistic that must have sent shocks down the spines of the current PNP leadership composed primarily of Republicans (Primera Hora, February 10, 2012).

In recent weeks, a number of influential stateside conservative groups began to clamor the Republican Presidential Candidates to adopt an English-only stance on Puerto Rican statehood. U.S. English stated, “should the Puerto Rican people choose to become a state, they must consent to becoming a primarily English speaking state”. Various Tea Party groups have pushed for the adoption of a number of requirements for statehood, including English fluency by at least 75% of the population as well as economic parity with the poorest state in the union. “When it comes to language, if Puerto Rico petitions to become the 51st U.S. state, Congress and the president must require it to adopt English as the only official and primary language of day-to-day government operations including all laws, official records, and government proceedings,” the National Capital Tea Party said (Caribbean Business, March 13, 2012El Nuevo Dia, November 8, 2011). Though leading Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney claims to be open towards a Spanish-speaking state, he has come under fire his flip-flopping on the issue (CNN, March 16, 2012).

The possibilities of statehood for Puerto Rico any time soon look bleak. A prolonged economic recession and increased pressures from the electorate and Congress to cut spending further add to the improbabilities. Not to mention, an increasing number of states are enacting strict immigration laws perceived by many to be anti-Latino. The PNP-authored Puerto Rico Democracy Act, which seeks to create a federal referendum on the issue, failed to obtain the approval of the Senate and died both during the 2007 (HR 900) and 2009 (HR 2499) adjournments of Congress.

The PNP continues to command a large electorate. It has become an institutionalized component of our every day lives and has become part of our political culture, and will not be disappearing any time in the near future. Despite this, the PNP is riddled with members and leaders that view the party as a vehicle for patronage; a special club that guarantees job for your children or contracts for your contracting company. Statehood has become a rallying point used by the PNP to give itself some sort of ideological justification. Jobs are dealt, campaign dollars flow, and occasionally the PNP will submit a token bill to Congress or suggest a local referendum in order to appease their followers.

How to Get a Job. And Keep It

I think I have my “shit straight”. I have never been involuntarily unemployed; have always ascended quickly through my employment ranks; and have been told more than once by friends and family that I have my “head on right”. I attribute this to a particular work ethic that I feel that my sister Irma and I share.

One day while sitting around waiting for the world around me to crank up, I had nothing better to do than list the components of my work ethic. For the sake of my personal amusement I have decided to publish them below. Hopefully someone out there will read it and will extract something from it.  This list is particularly helpful for young people seeking unskilled or low-skilled jobs. (Once you specialize in a field, I’m sure you know, the rules and steps change.)

Fortunately, I have followed these “rules” my whole life and have not had any problems. I have had the opportunity to work as a supervisor and hirer as well, so I speak from first hand experience as the one carrying out the employee review process.

I will start with the first step, of actually obtaining a job.

1. You are unemployed. (Either that or the job that you have sucks.) Your first step is to make your unemployed status your actual full time job. Wake up early, get dressed, and jump on your grind as if you actually had a job. Make looking for a job your job. Eight hours a day.

2. Put together a nice resume. On good paper. Get a friend who has a laser printer at work to take care of this. Either that, or head on down to your local copy shop. Make sure you get a couple people to look over it to make sure it looks as professional as possible. It doesn’t have to be one page, just make sure you cut out the B.S. Highlight your punctuality and your ability to work under pressure.

3. Get dressed. Church shoes, platted khakis ($9 in Wal-Mart), and a shirt with buttons tucked in. Made sure they aren’t faded or stained. Make sure your hair is cut and/or groomed. No dirt under your fingernails. You have to be “interview ready”. Nobody wants to hire anybody who looks sloppy. First impressions are gold.

4. Write a list of all the jobs that you would love to have (“A” jobs), that you wouldn’t mind working at (“B” jobs), and jobs that you would work at if need be (“C” jobs). For example, my “A” job selections out of high school were Internet cafes, “B” jobs included the movie theatre, and “C” jobs included department stores. Prioritize your search based on this list. If you score a “C” job, don’t stop your searching until you get a “B” or “A” job.

5. Pick a general area you would like to work in. Something close to home or something on an accessible route. Go from business to business asking to speak to a manager, expressing your interest in working for the business, filling out any necessary applications, and leaving a resume. If the manager is not available, speak to their representative or to the actual employee. My experience is that employees have not been too helpful with this, so if you need to come back at a later time, this is fine. Always leave your resume if they are not hiring at the moment. Jot down the manager’s name and the date you came. Do not depend on online databases and newspaper classifieds. Though these are useful tools, a third of all jobs are never published. In fact, five of the seven jobs I have had in my lifetime were obtained by walk-in visits or phone calls.

6. Call back in two weeks to each and every place you have visited. Ask to speak to the person who you had turned your resume in to previously, refresh their memory as to who you are, and inquire about whether or not they are hiring yet. If you have no luck, try and try again every two weeks until they shut the door in your face.

Sooner or later you will begin getting phone calls for interviews. If you’re lucky, you will get an on-the-spot interview when turning the resume in. After a few weeks you should be getting numerous calls and might even be in a position to select the job you want. If after a month or two you are still not receiving any callbacks even after your daily 8-hour grind than something is wrong. You either have a shitty resume or are not presentable. I would suggest going back to the drawing board and reviewing the previous rules.

Now once you have your job,

1. Show up to work on time. In fact, show up 15 minutes early. Punctuality goes a long way. Then, whenever you’re late for whatever reason people will truly believe you.

2. Don’t bitch about not getting paid for the 15 minutes you show up early or stay after work wrapping up your loose ends. Just pretend in your mind that you’re on a salary and not an hourly wage for a minute. A few minutes here and there are not going to hurt.

3. Sooner or later you are bound to make a mistake. And sooner or later your boss is going to scold you for something. That is fine. Just shut up and take it. If you “missed a spot” but really didn’t, don’t bother contesting. Bosses like scolding you as much as you like getting scolded, so they have to get into a certain mentality before unloading on you. This mentality is “output only”, so there is little room for you to talk back or appeal during that moment. There is nothing more annoying than scolding someone only to have them defensively argues back. This only confirms that you are not paying attention or that you don’t care. Once your boss retreats and a few minutes pass, feel free to bring to his attention that the issue has been corrected. Obviously, there can be an instance where a boss crosses the line and you have to go haywire on them. But please don’t bitch and wine if your boss is scolding you for coming to work late or doing something wrong. Especially if you came to work late or did something wrong.

4. Don’t limit yourself to your job description. Volunteer for any task. Be aggressive. Be a “go to” person who is willing to do anything needed. The employee that refuses to wipe down the front window because it is not part of their job description will be the last one to get a raise. People like that are not promotion materials.

5. Be aggressive. Even if it means you have to push aside co-workers who obviously don’t give a shit about their job. Once an employer of mine was complaining about a co-worker who was showing up late and performing terribly. “Well give me her hours,” I said. That single move allowed me to jump from a part-time to a full-time position within the first few weeks of my new job. Some might say that this was a bitch move on my behalf, but this other employee most likely moved on to another job where she continued such practices. Either that, or it was a wake up call for her.

6. Aim high. Your supervisor might be a cool guy, but make it your secret mission to one day have his job. Don’t worry about supervisors who could potentially “have it out” for you. As long as you follow these rules and do your job well they should have little ammunition to sabotage your aspirations. I never understood how someone could work at as a cashier at a McDonalds for 10 years. If I were to work at McDonalds for 10 years, I would already own one.

7. Being a hard worker with the ability to follow instructions doesn’t mean you have to be a yes man. If you think that your manager is going about something the wrong way, pull them aside and let them know your opinion. I was surprised at how many supervisors and employers would take into account my opposition to something that I thought was unreasonable.

Of course, some bosses are straight out assholes and many jobs are dead end. Frankly, there are some employers out there that will take advantage of you. If you see that you are working for someone who is hateful and mean or that your job title is stagnant despite your aspirations, than you need to find another job.