Who makes money off all the people we put in prison? A lot of people, actually -- folks who run corporations that supply food, phone service, and health care to prisoners, but also corporations that use prison labor to process food, package computer accessories, and make clothing. Some corporations even use prisoners as telemarketers in call centers! Cheap services and wage slavery make buku bucks for greedy CEOs, so you can see why it's like pulling teeth to reform our drug and sentencing laws.
Another day, another study blowing a hole in the myth that tax cuts for corporations creates jobs. The Center for Effective Government found that -- get your surprised face ready -- the 14 corporations with the lowest effective tax rate all either created very few jobs from 2008-2012 or hemorrhaged jobs, while the 14 corporations with the highest effective tax rates almost all created jobs during that same period, with nine of the latter group creating more jobs than the corporation that created the most jobs in the former. Seriously, if the tax cut clown car were right, the more highly-taxed corporations should be creating fewer jobs than the more lightly-taxed ones.
"KKK Was Terrorizing America Decades Before Islamic State Appeared," writes Julia Craven at the Huffington Post. A horrifying and detailed history follows. Folks who claim that reminding good citizens about these atrocities is "un-American" need to explain how admitting your wrongdoings and working to fix them is "un-American."
Two animal-rights activists challenge the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act of 2006 on constitutional grounds. The defendants contend that our government has never defined "terrorism" to include non-violent acts (against people, presumably), and though I have my own concerns about releasing animals who've never lived in the wild into the wild, I've always thought people "terrorized" by what animal rights activists do are weaklings who certainly do not deserve to be coddled by the law. How is a burglary conviction (which these two men have already served) not enough in this case?
Finally, the normally respectable Warren Buffett says Sen. Warren should be "less angry" toward the wealthy and even suggests she "get(s) too violent" with her opponents. I don't think the charge of sexism passes muster in this instance, not because Mr. Buffett is better than the average bankster, but because the pro-bankster forces have lately accused everyone who opposes them of excessive anger, as if they should expect something less than anger when they crash our economy in acts of greed.