You ever play a “game” with rules, but the rules were rigged? This is the experience of family law. It’s taken me a long time (years) to understand this, but the main thing it does is take participants out of the work force

Then, those who have outside resources can come back in for another beating (or winning). In the long run, “Justice” becomes a moot point. Justice is something that takes place when there is social agreement, generally speaking, to comply with some rules, and/or more ethical enforcers of such rules. Yeah, . . . . …..

I am about to switch from this (overweight) blog to another one I’ve already named. I’m calling it:

“BOYCOTT CHILD SUPPORT”

First, to get our attention, and second, to talk about money in a way most just aren’t taught to.

The longer I stayed in this system (as it happened, my family took — the opposite — side. IT has gotten really ugly at this point) the less stable my job history. I was a good worker, and this was wearing on the independent streak in me. One way an abuser keeps a victim IN the relationship is by curtailing the means to get out. Sometimes, she has to jump. If she jumps into ANOTHER system with the same, controlling, exploiting attitude, more time goes by, further compromising the work history. I did the usual (“more bricks with less straw”) and threw what intelligence, diligence, problem-solving and negotiating I had into this, reducing expenses and increasing hourly wage. THere’s a surge of energy and optimism one sometimes have when a batterer is thrown out; you feel like you can achieve, and many do.

However, if you’re still in similar mentality systems (and a good deal of our culture IS this type of slave/master mentality) there’s a law of reverse efforts at work. In a just system, effort and ethics are rewarded by natural increase of results. However (see my “Milk Sucks” post for an illustration) in an unjust one, the leveling instinct is inspired by jealous or controlling others. My response to that was to attempt to separate (after realizing no cessation of hostilities was imminent, in fact, it began to escalate. And I began to widen the range of to whom I reported. I was NOT going back into begging!)

However, my mistake was to keep on reporting — or seeking intervention. Unfortunately, things are not what they are advertised to be. It’s been a GREAT business lesson, and I eventually began moving out of my (beloved and reasonably paying) profession into sales, figuring that the things could sell while I was in court (etc.). All this time, my kids were growing up — fast, and seeing their Daddy frequently, which meant more opportunity for harassment (once the R.O. was lifted). Hmm. . . . .

So, when the DEFENDERS ONLINE (a civil rights blog of the NAACP), I was glad to see this discussion. Because by this time, I had “figured out” that the large, multi-level agencies and corporations working through the child support, family law, welfare, and domestic violence systems (yeah, I know that’s a mouthful) — and doing so on federal $$ (meaning, the foundations who didn’t pay those $$ were at an advantage, as were the nonprofits who paid LESS $$ at least and were in on the federal spigot — or should I say, “teat”? Sucking off the $$ that were supposed to provide social services, and the less they succeeded, the more $$ they got…

The U.S. economy is rigged AGAINST the taxpayer (employees) and FOR those who have tax loopholes, or assets producing wealth. Your time (labor) for $$ is selling yourself as an asset, even if it’s REALLY high. MOreover, out basic currencty itself produces debt no one can pay off, because it’s bought at interest from the Federal Reserve System, which is not on a gold standard. The entire economy is run by, basically, ultra-elite, ultra-rich families (basically) who set the rules and the standards. It’s most definitely in their best interest NOT to teach so much about wealth, and to focus more on managing the “populace,” if not in a pure version of slavery, or Jim Crow, at least a modified version.

I didn’t begin to understand this, and couldn’t have, had I not experienced what I did since leaving a batterer and thinking I’d be just “let out,” like that. No, one has to fight out. I have a fight going on currently (which I plan to win). o

This is why I believe books like Irwin Schiff’s (about the IRS) or Dr. Popp’s (about “bona fide money”), or Susan George’s (about “The Debt Trap”), let alone even basic, simplified stuff like the Richard Kiyosaki info-books (Rich Dad/Poor Dad) are vital to understand.

The IRS really does insert itself between the producer and the consumer, and rig the game, such that power becomes more and more centralized, and wealth scarcer and scarcer — rather than us solving our problems more centrally.

What happens — when goods — and even services — are produced CHEAPER over seas, for example today’s NYT  — it affects economy in Southern and in Northern Hemispheres.  Add a few banks (IMF, etc.), and systematic encouragement of, say, exports — then those overseas of course need to buy these products — then, of course a culture of consumerism in the Northern hemisphere needs to be maintained — it gets a little thorny for the average worker.  We’re encouraging U.S. students to, we HOPE learn to read, and aim for  a good job (and of course healthy marriages…) but where?  For whom?  THen when they go into prison, the child support debt IS still accruing, but in will come another program (fatherhood, related) to help reduce the arrears (possibly by bargaining it down, or simply increasing more time with the mother, which could have either good or bad impact on the relationship, or children (i.e., sometimes people die over this!): — it’s a large business flow economy managed too centrally and with too little information.

If any readers are old enough (or Western enough?) to remember a teenaged Tom Cruise in “Risky Business,” he falls head over heels in love with a prostitute, who is business minded, and in the end, makes a wad of cash with his young, testosterone-high friends (and quantity helps the endeavor, too) and ends up having the content of his parent’s (wealthy) home stolen by her pimp.  Then, with the proceeds of the former business adventure, he buys his own property back.

That, in essence, is this system I’m blogging about.  What are we buying?  I think, socially and economically, it’s a net loss.

Just an example of outsourcing, then below it, more discussion on wealth from The Defenders OnLine.

Outsourcing to India Draws Western Lawyers

By HEATHER TIMMONS

Published: August 4, 2010

• ose
  • Linkedin
  • Digg
  • Mixx
  • MySpace
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Permal

Christopher Wheeler met last month with some of the lawyers he supervises at a legal outsourcing firm in Noida, India.

Enlarge This Image

Brian Sokol for The New York Times

Christopher Wheeler, a former assistant attorney general for New York State, met with his staff at Pangea3, a legal outsourcing firm, in Noida, India.

Today, he works in a sprawling, unfinished planned suburb of New Delhi, where office buildings are sprouting from empty lots and dirt roads are fringed with fresh juice stalls and construction rubble…

SO, NOW LET”S TALK ABOUT WEALTH v. ASSETS, and the relative assets of most of our (asses).  I had planned my adult life on, say, WORKING.  I worked in fields I loved, and then married a man I, at the time (pre-assaults) loved.    Enter 2 decades of hell and reduced income, exploitation, etc.  I didn’t raise children to have them watch me being degraded or humiliated, and I didn’t work that hard to get OUT of abuse, to thereafter beg — from anyone.  Especially not as an older worker with zero assets.  HOW did this happen, and what can be done about it?  Because I think I’ve run around the ring enough times after grants, time’s probablyh up.  A GOOD business deal has profit when the deal is closed, to start with — not a promise of it from an unreliable vendor, which many of the social services ones are.  Which the child support agency SURE is, and which welfare ALSO is.  If you leave an abusive relationship, attempt to get REAL far away and REAL solvent REAL quick, OK?  ANd stay smart, and accumulate wealth, if possible.  With a tax shelter and away from the pre-emptive divorcing or separating partner.  Figure it out — there has to be a way!

No Money in the Bank: Black Women, Wealth and Assets

Posted By The Editors | March 16th, 2010 |

By C. Nicole Mason

If the average single black woman went to the bank and withdrew her wealth, she would only withdraw $100.00. And nearly half of single black women have zero or negative wealth—meaning if they inserted their cards into an ATM machine, it would more than likely be rejected. A new study by the Insight Center for Economic Development finds that single black women have one penny of wealth for every dollar of wealth owned by black men and only a tiny fraction of a penny for every dollar of wealth owned by white women. Nationally, five out of ten African-American women have had trouble paying bills on time and one-third of black women are worried about their debt-to-income ratio. In tough economic times, this news is particularly devastating as it means without wealth and assets, black women who lose their jobs or have a financial emergency will have very few reserves to draw upon to get them through. Over the last few decades, black women have made tremendous strides in terms of educational attainment, entering careers with high income potential and homeownership. However, these gains have met with rollbacks and have not necessarily translated to wealth or assets. In fact, in the case of homeownership, black women were 256 percent more likely than white men to receive subprime loans. And upper-income black women were nearly five times more likely than white men to be saddled with high-cost mortgages. Low-income black women and single mothers also have a difficult time accumulating wealth and savings. Black single mothers with children under 18 have a median net wealth of zero compared to $7,970 of wealth held by white women with children under the age of 18. Among black families, 68 percent of black women have no net financial savings and live from paycheck to paycheck. The question is what keeps black women from accumulating wealth and assets? The answer is manifold. First, there is a prevailing myth that income equals wealth. Many people measure their economic well-being by how much money they bring in the door each month. This is a mistake.

Another site illustrates this:

• The L-Curve graph represents income, not wealth. The distribution of wealth is even more skewed. Quoting from a recently-published book by political philosopher David Schweickart,

If we divided the income of the US into thirds, we find that the top ten percent of the population gets a third, the next thirty percent gets another third, and the bottom sixty percent get the last third. If we divide the wealth of the US into thirds, we find that the top one percent own a third, the next nine percent own another third, and the bottom ninety percent claim the rest. (Actually, these percentages, true a decade ago, are now out of date. The top one percent are now estimated to own between forty and fifty percent of the nation’s wealth, more than the combined wealth of the bottom 95%.)

Our economy produces tremendous wealth but it also produces tremendous poverty. Sure, some people can be lazy, but when large numbers of hard working people live in poverty and the middle class is shrinking, it is a systemic, not an individual problem. There is plenty to go around, but it doesn’t adequately go around. It goes to the top, and leaves the masses to fight over the crumbs. (If you are mathematically inclined, check out a recent study of the income distribution that identifies two distinct income classes in the US with different mathematical b(e)havior.) True, it has been this way through the ages, but that doesn’t mean we should be satisfied with such a system. I believe we can do better.

Here’s another site,I googled “{income is not wealth)”:

INCOME AND WEALTH INEQUALITY

According to the Federal Reserve, in 1990 the richest 1 percent of America owned 40 percent of its wealth -- the greatest level of inequality among all rich nations, and the worst in U.S. history since the Roaring Twenties. Furthermore, the richest 20 percent owned 80 percent of America -- meaning, of course, that the bottom four-fifths of all Americans owned only one fifth of its wealth.

Another revealing way of expressing this statistic is that the top 1 percent owned more than the bottom 90 percent combined.

What caused this growing inequality? The most underlying reason may be that it takes money to make money. This is why many call for a progressive tax system: to redistribute at least a percentage of the wealth back to the middle class, thereby avoiding modern serfdom. We will explore the tax cuts for the rich in detail in the next section. But tax cuts are not the only way to polarize wealth. There are several others, and they can all be lobbied through Congress. A complete list follows in More.

T