Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

A Closer Look at and Alternate Interpretation of Who’s Funding Poverty Research || PART 2 of 3

I have been referring to this post (now distributed across three posts) for about month now: first on my April 19 post, then on two others published in the interim May 6 & 12.

I’m glad to have finally published Part 1 yesterday (May 13) and Part 2 today (May 14) and to be anticipating Part 3 tomorrow (May 15, 2019) so I can return to others in the pipeline on subjects raised in the interim posts “More about perspectives and key players” and “Apparently Common Family Court Reform Practice.”(<~~singular).

A Closer Look at and Alternate Interpretation of Who’s Funding Poverty Research || PART 2 of 3

A Closer Look At — and Alternate Interpretation of — Who’s Funding Poverty Research (Hint: The Poor….) In New York (Columbia Univ. SSW), Wisconsin (University of Wisconsin’s IRP), and let’s not forget New Jersey (Princeton University’s Welfare-Reform-Focused “…Center for Research on Child Well-Being”) (Pt. 2 of 3=”9Tx”). (Case-sensitive, WP-generated shortlink ends “-9Tx.” Started about April 17, 2019, Split into 3 parts May 13, 2019.  This part about 6,500 words after split and with some overlapping paragraphs added from Part 1.)

This picks up from A Closer Look At (Pt 1 of 3=”9Lj”) (otherwise identical title), after repeating some lead-in paragraphs and two images from the top of Part 1, and just a bit from the bottom of Part 2.  For QUICK NOTES ON THE (QUICKLY EXECUTED) SPLIT see Part 1, top.

Links to all three are provided here at the top and bottom. As with all links to any posts in draft the link to Part 3 (A Closer Look At…(Part 3=”9TC”) will of course only work accurately once it’s published, currently scheduled for tomorrow, Wednesday, May 15, 2019.  Before then, WordPress will try; it’ll make a “best-guess” leading somewhere else or provide a “not found” error message.

Part 2 provides a bit of a wild ride into details not typical of this blog: international conglomerates and some supporting details on the invention and even physical properties of one of the products involved.  One conglomerate through acquisition of US-based plants became a major player in the producer of this product within the USA (and, separately, in Germany). Our federal government cleared the purchase as to anti-trust factors. Previous rapid growth in the 1990s was enabled by having been given a monopoly for many years by Brazil.  Leveraged buyouts followed by later sell-offs (due to debt) occurred.  (For more specifics, or to double-check my by-recall summary, keep reading and read more from the links provided or on-line searches).  Parts of the conglomerate were later under investigation for a variety of criminal acts. The scope of business was large, and the reach of corruption within it also large, reaching high up into government of more than one country.

This post gives broader scope at the top, and more detail at the bottom of the economic landscape in which this country, federal/state, public/private (and under both) the family courts operate.  I hope it also promotes the habit of doing what I call doing drill-downs beyond only specific buzz-words, sound-bytes, or commonly associated words with any cause relating to the family courts.

There are always operational systems, and it takes money to run them.  So how money moves — and how much of that money influencing public policymaking has been moved legitimately (vs. criminally) is always relevant. Again, what about accountability to the public “served”?

By contrast, A Closer Look At, Part 3 (ends “9TC”) link here is provided at the bottom again and its contents are most closely related to the title because (as my writing style is) it’s where the post began.

I referred to this section [now a post] as “tangential” but in reality it’s just paying close attention, originally, when something “just ain’t right” in a reported set-up. Seemingly “tangential” information may not really be — it may be a symptom of something else.  One way to find out which is by looking closer.  This post and situation raises some big questions about accountability, and reminders what can take place when it’s absent.

Comments Added May 13, 2019 for  Part 2 here:

The theme of “Poverty Research” is a key concept behind marriage/fatherhood promotion and deeply related, at many, many points and across many professional niches, to what is taking place in the family courts nationwide (USA).  Not just because of “welfare reform” but also because of things welfare reform exaggerated (demographic divide/gender wars) and set up (fundamental changes to how the federal government interacts with the states, setting up different circuitry and ways to monitor it — or not monitor it — effectively.  Along with “privatization” is proliferation of nonprofits  = dilution of accountability.  Along with setting up new fields of practice (i.e., “Fatherhood”) and university centers to sustain them, guess what — also comes dilution of accountability.

In this post we see a Brazilian granted monopoly which was later broken up, but before it was, become a multinational corporation in several inter-related fields (petrochemicals) with global commerce, purchasing plants in the USA making a major plastic used in producing all kinds of consumer goods.

And it’s been associated with criminal activity spanning different countries, i.e., “Operation Carwash.”

Ask yourself what kind of mentality would seek out ways to dilute public accountability through privatization, yet in the process control at a more micro-managed level the domestic population of a country?  If you think these things through, Part 2 here isn’t really that disconnected in subject matter from Part 3. I hope the attention span prevails for them both.  (End, May 13 Comments for Part 2)

(Next short Section, WRITTEN mid-April 2019 (except the two images added) and from the TOP of PART 1 post, repeated here)…

Having completed most of a major index project (next two images), my attention has been drawn to recent developments in some familiar circles (university centers) I’ve been aware of over time.

This was extracted, with a little overlap, from the intro to a new index I’m producing and will (I hope) publish today, April 18, 2019.**  [**It was published April 19, short-link ends “-9Aj” title as shown in the first image below.  I also made the above post “sticky” as key enough to be kept “in your face” with a few others. Here are two screen-shots from that originating post with the index of my 2012-only blog “The Family Court Franchise System” I’d just merged into FamilyCourtMatters.org here. ]:

I believe that the most important part of obtaining “solutions” to major problems is understanding what questions to ask and from there, where to look for potential factors to the situation. It’s also important to realize that what may be for some a “problem” is for others not just an opportunity, but, to put it bluntly, an ongoing profit, benefit, and desirable state of affairs, though admitting this isn’t politically correct.

This post illustrates, again, why you JUST might want to pay enough attention to public/private finances to realize, the task is just about impossible… and what happens when it stays and continues developing out of sight and out of control.

To broadly summarize, domestically, there’s ongoing flow of resources throughout a larger collectively organized landscape.

But in an example I have below labeled “Tangential,” on reading about it, I found a major enterprise which became the largest producer of “polypropylene” in the US through acquisition — polypropylene (since you asked) being a form of plastic developed in the 1950s and used in almost everything we encounter in daily life — whether food packaging, insulation, indoor/outdoor carpenting, seemingly some kinds of plastic furniture, medical uses (internal and external), piping, insulation of electrical cable — you name it.  The material is versatile. I’m not sure yet whether some form of it is represented by the famous food-film (“Saran wrap”) but provide enough links below to find out.

THAT WAS LEAD-IN (FROM THE TOP OF PART 1).  NOW, TO SKIPPING FORWARD TO THE MIDDLE THIRD OF THE POST, WHERE I SPLIT IT MAY 13, 2019:

~|~|~ (Overlapping paragraphs with the bottom of Part 1 of 3 start here) ~|~|~

We might think typically of the criminal activity being in drugs.  It’s also in children, in people and it could be in almost anything with market value.  Unfortunately, for sexual and other exploitation, women and children (both boys and girls) are high-value commodities in the illegal sector.

When all three sectors (public, private (for-profit, not-for-profit) and underground (operating illegally, which would be definition mean major profits to be moved — and potentially and it’s been known to happen — through otherwise legitimate businesses — are operating in synch, then WATCH OUT!

The people as individuals?  We’re (“they’re” as it applies) just the workers, the fuel in the system, and the justification for it.  We occupy a different position on any food chain involving any the above two, or with criminal underground (i.e., untaxed = very low overhead commerce), make that three sectors.  Generally speaking, we (most people) either work for or in them such entities (or rotating inbetween sectors), or are subjected to policies arranged by them if not really working.

However, when it comes to the public/private funded university research centers forever studying the causes for and remedies of poverty, that’s apparently one just about guaranteed place on a well-fed table and job stability — for those in it. Just don’t rock the existing boats too much, and keep up the expert status by conferencing, publishing, peer-reviewing and where possible, get in on the evaluating too, market niche.

Why I keep doing this: tangential (sort of) example,

Doing the drill downs, even just a bit further, illuminates what later becomes news.

Before I get into those poverty centers and which foundations are backing them (but my prior drill down came out of those same contexts), …

Consider this tangential, but recent example of how my previous (annoying) attention to following and considering, writing about not only the money,[1] but also the platforms on which it’s solicited, and who owns & runs them [2]; not only the press releases and publicity on specific programs, centers, entities, but  also the platforms on which it’s delivered (and who owns &/or runs those, too).[3] illuminates even CNN headlines involving drama.

This one involved a former Latin American country’s recent President who just (so it says) committed suicide rather than be taken by police under accusations of multi-million-dollar bribery and kickback scheme while he was President — involving a company who’d come across my path while following up on a donor solicitation platform and named sponsor of a fatherhood nonprofit in Illinois (til suspended, after which it surfaced again in Wisconsin).

If I hadn’t done the previous work, I’d have no idea of what the company reference was, or how it might be actually involved in what it was accused of, major kickback and bribery schemes.  More to the point of this example — what’s to stop that (and has it) from taking place in the US too? However, increasing awareness of these business structures (even though I’m not personally involved as an employee or stockholder of any sort) helps better comprehend where the accounting loopholes might be, and patterns such as nationalization of major enterprises, and how public involvement can make fortunes for those involved. It exposes the principles involved.

No matter which aspect one is looking at, the factor of tax-exempt entities and major sponsorship usually surfaces quickly.

[1] particularly related to court-connected or court-mandated programs, but because that also comes from higher or more distant sources, those sources too (Examples: federal grants to states to promote increased noncustodial parenting time, and to saturate social services and other agencies with TANF-(Social Security Act Title IV-A, administered through HHS)-driven purposes, such as promotion of marriage and reduction of out-of-wedlock births), or FVPSA (℅ CAPTA, also administered through HHS)-driven prevention of family violence, or VAWA (separate act, administered through USDOJ.  (respectively passed in: 1996ff, 1984ff (CAPTA 1974 or 5), 1994ff… Although the 1996 legislation (Welfare Reform) was a restructuring of an existing (1934) Social Security Act. So looking only at individual court-connected organizations at the local level ignores their larger, funded context.

[2] Platforms mediating how the public gets information are important to notice and document because they DO provide spin at all times and at all levels, as well as gatekeeping, and selective presentation of any underlying truths.  Whether these platforms are literally a government entity website (or one contracted out to provide such information for a government entity), a nonprofit website or (specific type of some universities) a major, long-established university’s website or parts of it, or even the databases which show collections of charitable filings — ALL have their characteristics of omissions and selection on which fields are harder or impossible to search.

[3] Who owns/runs information platforms and is also helping sponsor content for them to run 24/7, developing new outlets, consolidating and merging, etc.  (I extended this footnote at the bottom of the post for recent interesting example of why I continue to look such things up:  See “Footnote [3] “Who owns/runs info platforms and sponsors their content, cont’d.“) 

In those cases funding starting at the federal level as Congressionally-(i.e., legislatively) authorized expenses goes out to in part to the states, but also in part to specific private organizations in various states too.  So the federal influence cannot be determined by looking only at state federal receipts.

TODAY’s (April 17, 2019) ON-LINE NEWS:

~|~|~|~|~|~ (Overlapping paragraphs with the bottom of Part 1 of 3 end here) ~|~|~|~|~

Often, before I get on the computer (laptop) where I do most writing, I may open “Google” on the cellphone to look for something, or respond to a text or email seeking feedback.  On “Google” if I don’t enter the search string yet, a parade of current news or headlines, whether SEO-maximized or promoted, I don’t know, will show up and can be scrolled through.

This morning, about fourth from the top, CNN Posted that Alan Garcia, the former president of  Peru had attempted to kill himself (by shooting in the neck!) but not quite succeeded.  Since this morning’s feed, the update says, he has now died; i.e., the attempt succeeded.  Dramatic enough?

“Alan Garcia, former Peru president, shoots himself” (As police were preparing to arrest him) (by Vlora Charner, Gianluca Mezzofiore and Rafael Romo, CNN, updated 12:31 PM EDT, 4/17/2019. The article said, he was under accusation of having accepted kickbacks in a major construction project from a Brazilian-based construction firm.  On reading it, I was shocked to see I recognized the name and had red-flagged a situation it was involved in, in Texas, some years ago, through following multiple sponsors to a single nonprofit calling itself the policy arm of a single Ford Foundation initiative, “SFFI” (Strengthening Fragile Families”).

I already knew that some revolving doors connected the SFFI at Texas State level to the Attorney General’s Office dealing with child support enforcement, via Michael Hayes of said Attorney General’s “Office of Family Initiatives.” It’s deeply into the father-friendly (“families” defined often in the sector as “Fathers and their children” or ‘Fathers, children and their families” with “mothers” an afterthought, if there at all.  Children: yes.  Youth:  yes.  Families:  Yes.  Fathers or Fatherhood: yes.  Mothers or motherhood?  No. No such topic heading or independent research group.

I wonder   how many mothers have figured that the safest guaranteed place to work is in government- or foundation- sponsored social services promoting fatherhood (just kidding….)

Texas has also worked hard to perpetuate this at certain university centers (I tweeted earlier this year, or late last year, see hashtag “#CFRP”): https://childandfamilyresearch.utexas.edu (LBJ School of Public Affairs, U-Texas Austin).  See FOOTER “CFRP at LBJ UTexas-Austin” for more screenshots.##

##That Footer is now on “A Closer Look… Part 3 (shortlink ending “-9TC).  Two images and link to recent tax return (showing amounts of donations) support my statement here. (The LBJ Library and School of Public Affairs take (are subsidized by) an LBJ Foundation, that is, privately, although obviously University of Texas-Austin would (I think!) be a public university)  LGH My 15, 2019 update). The following pdf link may require two clicks to view (it’s a rather fuzzy tax return, the whole thing).

LBJ Foundation described (and EIN# given) by Guidestar (now owned by “Candid”). Click image to enlarge.

LBJ Foundation (Form 990 FY2015, total assets that year about $174M, total grants donated over $4M as shown here in Schedule I (annotated to enlarge), most go to the School of Public Affairs, not the Library. (excerpt from latest tax return posted (when I took this image in April 2019 (!!)) by FoundationCenter.org. Click image to enlarge. {The graphic is missing an initial “0” for bottom figure highlit yellow, it should show $.076M obviously, representing $76K, not $.76″ which would be instead $76nK“. See 990 for exact $$)

LBJ (written out) Foundation (suppt’ng School of Public Affairs & (less so) LBJ Library| 1969ff FY 2015 (YEAug2016) 990=LATEST @ FndtCenter’org (NONE on website) EIN#741774063 Prntd 2019APr18

 

 

 

(“Alan Garcia, former Peru president, shoots himself” (As police were preparing to arrest him) (by Vlora Charner, Gianluca Mezzofiore and Rafael Romo, CNN, updated 12:31 PM EDT, 4/17/2019,” cont’d.)

Garcia, who served as president from 1985-1990 and from 2006-2011, was under investigation for money laundering and taking bribes in connection with a massive corruption scandal that has engulfed a number of former Latin American leaders…”

Guess who it was, and guess in which context (how) I’d run across it, and even posted on it?

“…accused of receiving kickbacks from one of Latin America’s largest construction firms — the Brazil-based company Odebrecht — during the building of an electric train for the Lima metro while he was president during his second term.  He has denied the claims….”  [requested asylum at the Uruguayan embassy after being banned from leaving the country for 18 months, and was denied] …

…Odebrecht is accused of doling out nearly $800 million in bribes between 2001 and 2016 to get contracts from governments to build roads, bridges, dams and highways …. [para] Authorities say Odebrecht official shipped cash across the globe — from one shell bank account to the next — en route to politicians’ pockets in a dozen countries, including Peru, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, Argentina, and Mozambique.  Some of the bribes filtered through the United States.

I recognized the name, and remembered that my blogging context had involved the corporate filing similarities (in California) with a listed donor (one among MANY, most of whom I also looked up) to the small nonprofit “CFFPP.”  This connection was through follow up on “JustGive.”  The details only surfaced through noticing both registered agent and street addresses.  The connection was with an on-line marketplace for reselling equipment which had been used in major construction project.

WHEN?  Well, per a media library search on this blog, Nov. 2017, Sept. 2017, July 2016, and when it comes to CFFPP (not Odebrecht) as far back as March 2010 — only a year into this blog (which I began March, 2009).

In this post, “CFFPP” comes up again, so please bear with these next few reminders on seemingly tangential topic, Latin America’s major construction firm Odebrecht (accused of bribery and kickbacks).. “some filtered through the USA…” The location was a joint venture (major building project in Texas // Freeway bypass)…

• Nov. 29, 2017, The Dark Sides (Bottom Lines) of Web-based Donor-Advised Funding: Donor Disclaimers, Buyouts, Emigration (JustGive [US]~>JustGiving [UK]). And Interesting Related Ops (IronPlanet: ZOPB Highway ByPass J.V.) and Bank Bailouts. [A July 26, 2016 section repost]. (shortlink ends “-83s” and length is just under 7,000 words).

(Opening two paragraphs from this post:)

This material isn’t new, just the title, the introduction and for the reposted segment, aspects of its format (appearance).  Some of the summaries are, however.  The relationship[s] between JustGive.org, JustGiving(™) the service, and JG USA are explored.  At first glance, they are less than obvious, particularly when one is a service facilitating the other, which is listed as a sponsor of CFFPP in Wisconsin

There’s (1) an immediate parent post, (2) THIS post, the full-grown offspring, and (3) the upcoming one I’m paving the way for, now in the pipeline [just published, Tues. Nov. 28, 2017]. Complete with names, links, and a little background, that’s:

• (1) The Parent Post (July 26, 2016) is: SFFI – CFFPP – JustGive, Inc. – IronPlanet, Inc. – ZOPB – Texas DoT’s $1B GrandParkway Project – US Gov’ts Big Banks Bailout|SunTrust (while Fixing Fragile Families?) [First Publ. July 26, 2016. See also my ~>March 3, 2010<~ post]. (blog-generated, case-sensitive short-link ends “-43Z”)

Here’s an image or two from those posts, showing what the “Z” in “ZOPB” stands for  and that the “O” stands for “Odebrecht.”

The above posts are also some good review for the topic below (“SFFI — Strengthening Fragile Families Initiative” of the Ford Foundation which has more of a HHS, social services focus.  However, major movement of finances on-line and philanthropic or tax-exempt entities sponsoring such platforms isn’t always field-specific).

The next image, below right, shows how I got from “JustGive.org” (corporate filing, registered agent “Doug Feick”) to “Iron Platform” (on-line auction of construction equipment after the project is completed), that is, through the same street address, that is, and Mr. Feick.

For more, or easier to view, information and context, see those links I gave in the bulleted section above. However I’ve inserted some more context (in light of today’s successful CNN-reported suicide by an ex-Peruvian president caught up — or at least accused — in some of these corruption scandals involving MAJOR international petrochemical, construction, engineering and other business-involved conglomerates (the words “bribes” “kickback” “over-charging” prominently featured)

JustGive.org (CFFPP sponsor) and Iron Planet, previously posted on FCM (11/29/2017, 7/26/2016, etc.)

This Oct., 2015, BusinessWire  (“A Berkshire Hathaway Company,”) (i.e., Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger investors) “Iron Planet awarded contract by Zachry-Odebrecht Parkway Builders” (i.e., “ZOPB”) (announcing that Iron Planet got the contract from Zachry-Odebrecht Builders (the joint venture) to dispose of used equipment describes Odebrecht as a Miami, Florida entity, not Brazilian-based.  See blurb about each company at the bottom, typical of Businesswire (or, PRNewswire) formats.

NB:  I don’t see that Iron Planet was somehow involved.  I’m just pointing out that a situation I’d previously paid attention to simply for being so large (and for having, as I recall, been financed in part, post-2008, by Sun Trust, who was bailed out by the U.S. Government (i.e., taxpayers) in the mortgage default, “too-big-to-fail” banking crisis of that time.

But governments and public/private ventures often get involved in huge infrastructure projects, and in general, the larger and more complicated any conglomerate gets, the easier it is for such things to take place.

Wikipedia on “Odebrecht, S.A.” Braskem, Petrobas (etc.) shows some of the size of operations and scope and fall-outs of the scandal (“Operation Car Wash”).  There’s also a paragraph of how, in Nov. 2017 (about the time I was posting on the ZOPB and Iron Planet/JustGive material, although the origins were earlier posts), regarding <>money-laundering <>bribes <>kickbacks, of investigations of off-shore (to the USA) investments as “the Paradise Papers”:

Paradise Papers[edit]

On 5 November 2017, the Paradise Papers, a set of confidential electronic documents relating to offshore investment, revealed that Appleby {{a law firm}} managed 17 offshore companies for Odebrecht and at least one of them was used as a vehicle for the payment of bribes in Operation Car Wash. Some of these offshore companies are publicly known to operate for Odebrecht in Africa and be involved in bribes. Among those involved in the operation who are named in the papers are Marcelo Odebrecht, his father Emílio Odebrecht, and his brother Maurício Odebrecht.^[30]

Wow.  Odebrecht S.A. (1981, but the underlying firm started back in 1941 and only started going international in the late 1970s), controls Braskem (only formed in 2002, but from consolidation of six companies, and acquisition of others).  It seems that Odebrecht formed Braskem.

What’s more, Petrobras is semi-public, nationalized, and (per its Wiki; see that article for how current), Brazil’s government owns more than half the stock.  BRASKEM controlled Petrobras (which had a legal monopoly in Brazil 1953 – 1999) and is, in a word, LARGE….). Petrobas officials were involved in the kickbacks for contracts, however Petrobras pre-dates BRASKEM by several decades.  Odebrecht (and that family) predates Petrobras…

History [edit]

Braskem was formed in 2002, already Latin America’s leading petrochemical company, with industrial units and offices in Brazil, as well as commercial bases in the United States and Argentina. The company was formed by the consolidation of six companies: Copene, OPP, Trikem, Nitrocarbono, Proppet and Polialden. In 2006, Braskem acquired Politeno, the third largest polyethylene producer in Brazil. The company joined Petrobras and Ultrapar the following year in the biggest merger in Brazilian history, when those three companies acquired Grupo Ipiranga for US$ 4 billion.[3] While Petrobras and Ultrapar shared the fuel distribution operations, Braskem took over Ipiranga Petroquímica, Ipiranga’s former petrochemical operation.

In 2016, Braskem was fined $957 million over a bribery scandal.^[2]

---

and, (under Petrobras wiki, under “History”).  This shows you what can happen under nationalization.

Corporate milestones [edit]

Petrobras was created in 1953 under the government of Brazilian president Getúlio Vargas with the slogan “The Oil is Ours” (Portuguese: “O petróleo é nosso”). It was given a legal monopoly in Brazil.^[9] In 1953, Brazil produced only 2,700 barrels of oil per day.^[10] In 1961, the company’s REDUC refinery began operations near Rio de Janeiro,^[11] and in 1963, its Cenpes research center opened in Rio de Janeiro; it remains one of the world’s largest centers dedicated to energy research.^[12] In 1967, the company established Petrobras Quimica S.A (“Petroquisa”), a subsidiary focused on petrochemicals and the conversion of naphtha into ethene.^[13]

Petrobras had begun processing oil shale in 1953, developing the Petrosix technology for extracting oil from oil shale. It began using an industrial-size retort to process shale in the 1990s.^[14] In 2006, Petrobras said that their industrial retort had the capacity to process 260 tonnes/hour of oil shale.^[15]

In 1994, Petrobras put the Petrobras 36, the world’s largest oil platform, into service. It sank after an explosion in 2001 and was a complete loss.^[16] In 1997, the government approved Law N.9.478, which broke Petrobras’s monopoly and allowed competition in Brazil’s oilfields, and also created the national petroleum agency Agência Nacional do Petróleo, (ANP) responsible for the regulation and supervision of the petroleum industry, and the National Council of Energy Policies, a public agency responsible for developing public energy policy.^[17] In 1999, the National Petroleum Agency signed agreements with other companies, ending the company’s monopoly.^[18]

Images for those three main companies Odebrecht S.A. (and Group), Petrobras, and Braskem (from the top of their respective Wiki’s):

More from Braskem Wiki shows how it got into the United States (Braskem America HQ’d in Philadelphia) through purchases (incl. assets (plants?) in USA and Germany from Dow Chemical) making it the largest PP (“polypropylene”) producer in the USA — and another subsidiary in Germany.  At the time, US authorities (FTC and the USDOJ Anti-trust section) cleared the purchase:

[Braskem] Purchases [edit]

On January 22, 2010, Braskem announced the acquisition of Quattor, in line with its strategy to strengthen the Brazilian petrochemical chain and become one of the five largest and most competitive petrochemical companies in the world. The acquisition of Quattor Participações S.A., Unipar Comercial e Distribuidora S.A., and Polibutenos S.A. Indústrias Químicas was unanimously and fully approved by the board of directors of the Administrative Council of Economic Defense (CADE) on February 23, 2011.

On February 1st, 2010, Braskem announced the acquisition of the PP assets of Sunoco Chemicals, 4th largest polypropylene producer in the U.S. The transaction represented an important step in Braskem’s international expansion process, offering the combination of growth in the U.S. market, with alternative sources of raw materials at competitive costs and access to major consumer markets. With this acquisition, Braskem has become the 3rd largest polypropylene player in the world.

On July 27th, 2011, Braskem announced the acquisition of the polypropylene business (PP) of Dow Chemical. The transaction involved 4 industrial units, 2 plants in the United States and 2 plants in Germany. The U.S. assets, located in Freeport, Texas and Seadrift, Texas, have combined production capacity of 505 kton, which represents 50% of the country’s annual PP production of 1,425 kton. The German assets, located in the cities of Wesseling and Schkopau, have combined annual production capacity of 545 kton. On September 30, 2011, the acquisition was approved by the antitrust agencies of the United States, the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as the European Union. The transaction represented an important step forward in consolidating the company’s international expansion and positioned it as the largest PP producer in the United States.

Polypropylene is used as both a plastic and a fiber (amazing amount of uses, both household and industrial, and some medical; it’s less likely to melt than polyethylene and it’s only been around since the mid-1950s…).  References:

• https://pslc.ws/macrog/pp.htm Site about Polymers in general).
• https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-polypropylene-820365 (Jan. 2019, Todd Johnson, “Polypropylene is a type of thermoplastic polymer resin. It is a part of both the average household and is in commercial and industrial applications. The chemical designation is C3H6. One of the benefits of using this type of plastic is that it can be useful in numerous applications including as a structural plastic or as a fiber-type plastic. … began in 1954 when a German chemist named Karl Rehn and an Italian chemist named Giulio Natta first polymerized it. This led to a large commercial production of the product that began just three years later. Natta synthesized the first syndiotactic polypropylene”

  … how versatile this product is. According to some reports, the global market for this plastic is 45.1 million tons, which equates to a consumer market use of about $65 billion. It is used in products such as the following:

  • Plastic parts – from toys to automobile products
  • Carpeting – in all forms of carpeting, area rugs and in upholstery
  • Reusable products – especially in containers and similar products
  • Paper – used in various applications for stationery and other writing bindings
  • Technology – commonly found in loudspeakers and similar types of equipment
  • Laboratory equipment – in virtually every aspect where plastics are found
  • Thermoplastic fiber reinforced composites

  It’s among the safest (least toxic) of plastics because it’s heat-resistant, according to “LittleAcornstoMightyOaks.co.uk” Dec. 1, 2008, “Non-toxic products for the whole family  ”

  Polypropylene (PP) is considered to be the safest of all plastics, this is a robust plastic that is heat resistant. Because of its high heat tolerance, Polypropylene is unlikely to leach even when exposed to warm or hot water. This plastic is approved for use with food and beverage storage. Polypropylene plastics can be re-used safely and with hot beverages.

“Syndiotactic Polypropylene, say WHAT???” Under “Cosmetics and toiletries” (2009) possibly one brother asked another (doctoral student in chemistry) to explain.  It has to do with how they (polymers?) attach to that backbone — on the same side (ISOtactic) on the Opposite Side (SYNDIOtactics), both of which are more crystalline or randomly (Atactic), which makes the substance more “amorphous.”  It has everything to do with what quality the substance (plastic) is going to be, and “tacticity” only becomes an issue when those asymmetric carbon (pieces)  (do I look like a chemist??) attach to that polymer “spine.”  Do I know what a polymer is? Or what is a “-mer” (because I’m seeing polymer and monomer in the description here). Not yet, will soon, one thing at a time here!  They mention “Pendant groups” and based on my recollection of Latin (and related English, and jewelry) “pendant” means “hanging.”  Pendulum, etc.

Comparatively Speaking: Isotactic vs. Syndiotactic vs. Atactic in Polymers October 6, 2009 Contact Author Anthony J. O’Lenick, Jr., Siltech LLC 

Anthony J. O’Lenick, Jr., asks Thomas O’Lenick, a doctoral candidate in polymer chemistry at the University of Tennessee, to explain the difference between isotactic, syndiotactic and atactic in reference to polymers. Thomas O’Lenick explains:

Tacticity is a term used to describe the way pendent groups on a polymer chain are arranged on a polymer backbone. The tacticity of a polymer is determined by what side of the polymer chain the pendant groups are on. This relative position can have dramatic effects on the physical properties of the polymer.

Tacticity only arises when there is an asymmetric carbon in the polymer chain backbone… If the monomer adds to the polymer backbone with the pendant group (X) on the same as the previous pendant group, this is called isotactic. If the monomer adds where the pendant group adds to the opposite side of the polymer backbone, it is called syndiotactic. Isotactic and syndiotactic are illustrated in Figure 1.  If there is no order to the way the pendant group adds, (completely random) the polymer is said to be atactic.

…Isotactic and syndiotactic polymers provide long-range order, which leads to higher crystallinity in the polymer chain. Polypropylene is a great example of how tacticity has a dramatic effect on the physical properties of the polymer.

So, there are going to be three kinds of polypropylene (Isotactic, syndiotactic and atactic) all of which have different, specific uses, which make it valuable to be one of the world’s largest producers of polypropylene (and petrochemicals) used worldwide for packaging, piping, water bottles, food containers, medical (vaginal, hernia mesh came up in one discussion, although with drawbacks), indoor-outdoor carpeting, ALL kinds of places…. where anything is sold or used in households, or in household constructions, circulation, insulation, and so forth….

Most commonly, amorphous polypropylene is called linear low-density polypropylene (LLDPE). This polymer is clear and used in soda bottles. Isotactic polypropylene (HDPE) has long-range order, which adds mechanical strength and crystall­inity. This version of polypropylene is used in laundry detergent bottles and is not transparent like LLDPE.

This property of polypropylene was so important that Ziegler and Natta co-invented a catalyst that can be used in the synthesis of isotactic polyprop­ylene. This catalyst changed the way we live our everyday lives and produced a billion dollar industry.

Thank you Anthony J. O’Lenick of Siltech, LLC for asking Thomas O’Lenick about this over 8 years ago so I had a better concept of what was the very big deal about polypropylene in its many tacticities (physical formats).  here’s another more technical source on Poly Propylene but the snippets from it I hope explain how valuable the substance has been worldwide since its invention in the 1950s.  From “delta engineering” under “PP” https://delta-engineering.be/pp?lang=nl:  (White-on-black color scheme is mine, not the website’s.  Just wanted something that looks a little different.  Active links are yellow…)

Polypropylene (PP), also known as polypropene, is a thermoplasticpolymer used in a wide variety of applications including packaging and labeling, textiles (e.g., ropes, thermal underwear and carpets), stationery, plastic parts and reusable containers of various types, laboratory equipment, loudspeakers, automotive components, and polymer banknotes. An addition polymer made from the monomer propylene, it is rugged and unusually resistant to many chemical solvents, bases and acids.

In 2013, the global market for polypropylene was about 55 million metric tons ….

PP is the commodity plastic with the lowest density. With lower density, moldings parts with lower weight and more parts of a certain mass of plastic can be produced. Unlike polyethylene, crystalline and amorphous regions differ only slightly in their density. However, the density of polyethylene can significantly change with fillers.

Polypropylene is normally tough and flexible, especially when copolymerized with ethylene. This allows polypropylene to be used as an engineering plastic, competing with materials such as acrylonitrile butadiene styrene(ABS). Polypropylene is reasonably economical.

Polypropylene has good resistance to fatigue.

…
Chemical properties
Polypropylene is at room temperature resistant to fats and almost all organic solvents, apart from strong oxidants. Non-oxidizing acids and bases can be stored in containers made of PP. ….

Degradation:

The polymer can also be oxidized at high temperatures, a common problem during molding operations. Anti-oxidants are normally added to prevent polymer degradation. Microbial communities isolated from soil samples mixed with starch have been shown to be capable of degrading polypropylene. Polypropylene has been reported to degrade while in human body as implantable mesh devices. The degraded material forms a tree bark-like layer at the surface of mesh fibers.

And finally, “History” after which (not quoted here) this website goes on to list an amazing variety of categories of use, including for clothing, furniture, food packaging, medical sutures (!), rope, packaging of food and stationery products, even added (fibers) to soil in earth-quake prone California.  It’s reported as low-toxic but not 100% free (see bottom of the article).

HISTORY

Phillips Petroleum chemists J. Paul Hogan and Robert L. Banks first polymerized propylene in 1951. Propylene was first polymerized to a crystalline isotactic polymer by Giulio Natta as well as by the German chemist Karl Rehn in March 1954. This pioneering discovery led to large-scale commercial production of isotactic polypropylene by the Italian firm Montecatini from 1957 onwards. Syndiotactic polypropylene was also first synthesized by Natta and his coworkers.

Polypropylene is the second most important plastic with revenues expected to exceed US$145 billion by 2019. The sales of this material are forecast to grow at a rate of 5.8% per year until 2021. …

Read More at<—(click to read)

Finally (?) here’s the Abstract to a 2003 article presented? at a conference in Japan, found (through basic Google search on this material) at ieeexplore.IEEE.org, with six authors, talking about its use in insulating electric cables, and how it’s also good for recycling because it’s not cross-linked:  “Property of syndiotactic polypropylene and its application to insulating electrical cable – property, manufacturing, and characteristics” (“Published in: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Properties and Applications of Dielectric Materials (Cat. No.03CH37417)“)

“IEEE” (“Eye-Triple-E”) stands for ” Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.” and has an interesting and clearly summarized history you can read about here (and please do!)

 ~||~||~||~||~||~||~ OVERLAPPING PARAGRAPHS WITH Part 3 of 3 START HERE: ~||~||~||~||~

WHERE I STARTED THIS POST (on moving material from another one):

In finalizing the integration of an index of a blog I wrote almost exclusively in the year 2012 to this blog, I was tempted to just load on more updates from two of FIVE university-based poverty research centers where two middle-aged men [1] who’ve made a career, pushing public policy antagonistic and insultingly patronizing to single mothers [2] backed by some of the largest progressive foundations around (foundations, at least one of them, with backers of murky respectability, at the best) [3], and both the middle-aged men (and middle-aged or older professional women who publish and proselytize alongside them] having become smart and rich through following life course the masses of poor of the nation are NOT advised to follow, or generally in any position to do so, i.e., assuring that

[4]  “Assume the position!” The STUDIERS vs the STUDIED (The researchers vs. the lab rats) Basically, the Dominant few vs. the Subjected Many.

What we fail to see — but any serious, that is long-term diligent and consistently noticed attempt to follow the finances quickly reveals — the PhD’d publishing, poverty- and family-center (co-)directing white-collared academics are the hired hands.  They are NOT the engineers, and did not design the infrastructure supporting the entire system.  That was set up decades ago, economically, through control of banking, currency, and — through taxation with less and less representation the more and more regionalized and federalized (then internationalized) it becomes over time, incrementally — the population….

By demography, race, gender, marital status, residence (metro/rural/suburban), religion, life curve, income level (notice the obsession with studying ‘low-income” families?  INCOME is one category of survival — it’s generally taxed UNLESS the “person” is a tax-exempt entity (corporation or government itself).  Also by citizenship and immigration status, family size, and did I yet mention political persuasion? ALL of these must be monitored, gauged, evaluated, analyzed, and databases developed to obtain individualized profiles (see also “epigenetics” promotion at Harvard and elsewhere) psychologically, physically and motivationally.  WHAT induces or heals trauma?  WHAT perpetuates or alleviates poverty.  WHAT SHALL WE SET OUR SIGHTS ON NEXT?

WHAT CAN BEST DISTRACT THE PEOPLE FROM EVER, EVER — ever — DEMANDING ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE PROVIDERS OF SERVICES, BASED ON THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ECONOMY (AND TO GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AT ALL LEVELS)?  or even comprehending what it might look like, or using basic sensible terms to demand it?

. . . . BREAD AND CIRCUSES, ENTERTAINMENT AND GADGETS, PRESSURE AND INTERMITTENT RELIEF FROM THE PRESSURE.  DEBT BONDAGE.  “COMPROMISE OF (CHILD SUPPORT) ARREARS” ON CONDITION OF SITTING THROUGH MORE TRAININGS ( = more things to report and analyze).

Anyone, actually subjected to and being aware of this, might be disgusted and fed up with it.  I know I am…. I doubt any service provider, nonprofit advocacy group, or government agency (whether or not I may need to approach any of the above) will ever regain my full trust again. It’s not in basic survival instincts.  

//LGH April 2019, mid-post.

~||~||~||~ OVERLAPPING PARAGRAPHS WITH Part 3 of 3 END HERE~||~||~||~

YOU HAVE (I HOPE) JUST READ and ARE AT THE BOTTOM OF:

A Closer Look At — and Alternate Interpretation of — Who’s Funding Poverty Research (Hint: The Poor….) In New York (Columbia Univ. SSW), Wisconsin (University of Wisconsin’s IRP), and let’s not forget New Jersey (Princeton University’s Welfare-Reform-Focused “…Center for Research on Child Well-Being”) (Pt. 2 of 3=”9Tx”). (<~<~<~CLICK if you want to go back to the top of this post).

CLICK HERE FOR THOSE FOOTNOTES & THE REST~>~>~>A Closer Look At … (Pt. 3 of 3=”9TC”)

Or Go Back to Part 1: A Closer Look At … (Pt. 1 of 3=”9Lj”)