Category Archives: Abolition Of Work

news

The UK Chancellor Philip Hammond has presented the 2017 Spring Budget suggesting he hopes it to provide a strong, stable platform for Brexit,

The UK Chancellor Philip Hammond has presented the 2017 Spring Budget suggesting he hopes it to provide a strong, stable platform for Brexit, something for which many regard Heathrow as integral.

Their views were of slight disappointment regarding Air Passenger Duty:

Were disappointed the Government has not taken the opportunity to reduce air passenger duty. The increase today, and the signal of potential further increases in the coming years, hands a great advantage to our European competitors. If Britain is to be one of the best places in the world to do business then we must work towards abolition of this tax on British competitiveness, tourism, investment and trade.

And on increased investment and focus on technical education, Europe largest airport suggested that:

We welcome the creation of T Levels and extra funding for PHDs in STEM subjects which will help provide the workforce Britain needs for the future. Heathrow expansion, along with other strategic infrastructure projects, will create thousands of highly skilled jobs.

These Government reforms are crucial to ensuring we can deliver a modern, affordable Heathrow.

These Government reforms are crucial to ensuring we can deliver a modern, affordable Heathrow and make sure todays schoolchildren are able to make the most of the opportunities.

Meanwhile, when responding to the Chancellors Budget Statement, Chief Executive of the AOA, Karen Dee said:

Airports provide the necessary infrastructure for the UKs international connectivity, with aviation the transport mode of choice for most people travelling to and from the UK and for 40% of the UKs trade. Boosting that international connectivity through unlocking new destinations will be crucial to achieve the Chancellors aim of building the foundations of a stronger, fairer, more global Britain.

That is why it is a missed opportunity for the Chancellor not to have cut Air Passenger Duty today and instead announcing another rise in line with RPI in 2018/19, on top of the RPI rise from April 2017.

The UKs APD is already one of the highest air taxes in the world. With most of our nearest neighbours either charging nothing or less than half of what the UK levies, APD is a tax on the UKs global competitiveness and connectivity.

The UKs APD is already one of the highest air taxes in the world.

Halving APD, as the AOA had called for alongside A Fair Tax on Flying campaign partners, would have brought the UK into line with the next highest APD equivalent in the EU, in Germany. It would have encouraged airlines to schedule new routes between the UK and new destinations, including in emerging markets, by making those flights more economically viable. It would also have made boosting capacity on existing routes more attractive.

Cutting APD will boost the UKs international connectivity and we urge the Chancellor to take action at the first available opportunity. We also continue to urge the Chancellor to make clear that any cut in any part of the UK would immediately be matched across the rest of the UK.

More here:

Heathrow and AOA voice disappointment with UK Budget 2017 - International Airport Review

Im not with her. Photo: Pete Marovich/Getty Images

International Womens Day has come to Donald Trumps America and all across the country, women are abandoning their posts. Classes have been canceled; children, left to their fathers; boardrooms, left unmanaged; dinners, left uncooked; blog posts, left unwritten.

The strikers are giving their communities a taste of a day without a woman, so as to highlight the indispensable contributions that women make to our society even as our society suppresses their liberation.

There is broad agreement among American feminists that Trumps election is a testament to our nations unpaid debts to the female population. But there is decidedly less agreement about what, precisely, is owed and to whom.

Many of Wednesdays protesters believe that they are owed the pussy-grabber-in-chiefs prompt eviction from the Oval Office; equal pay for equal work; access to legal abortion; and stricter enforcement of laws against sexual assault.

Others believe that the ledger runs far longer. To them, if the government wants to settle its debts with womankind, it must provide them with universal health care; free higher education; free child care; an end to mass incarceration; expanded collective-bargaining rights; a $15 minimum wage; the cancelation of the Dakota Access Pipeline; and the decolonization of Palestine along with a bevy of other social democratic policies necessary for ending decades of neoliberalism.

The organizers of the womens strike fall into this latter category. And this fact has led some in the former group to question the wisdom of such a broad and divisive platform. In their view, the feminist movement should restrict its focus to a narrow set of specifically gender-related issues the ones that all feminists can agree on.

On first brush, this seems like a reasonable view. Social movements are as strong as their ranks are wide. And surely, there are more women in the United States who support abortion rights than there are women capable of locating the West Bank on a map let alone, of passionately arguing for its decolonization.

Still, there is a fatal problem with demanding that the feminist movement focus on the issues that are of deep concern to all feminists: No such issues exist.

This point is well-illustrated by one of the most widely read arguments against the International Womens Strikes sweeping platform. In a New York Times op-ed, Does Feminism Have Room For Zionists, Emily Shire laments that the feminist movements desire to be inclusive has actually made it anything but.

Specifically, she argues that by insisting that feminism is connected to a wide variety of political causes, the movement has alienated feminists who dont adhere to far-left orthodoxy:

Implying that mass incarceration is analogous to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is analogous to Donald Trumps desire to build a wall along the Mexican border is simplistic at best.

But my prime concern is not that people hold this view of Israel. Rather, I find it troubling that embracing such a view is considered an essential part of an event that is supposed to unite feminists. I am happy to debate Middle East politics or listen to critiques of Israeli policies. But why should criticism of Israel be key to feminism in 2017?

Instead of picking divisive fights over the minimum wage, oil pipelines, and Zionism, Shire suggests that the movement focus on the key womens issues of reproductive rights, equal pay, increased female representation in all levels of government and policies to combat violence against women.

The trouble with this proposal is that not all feminists share the same key issues.

For example, a woman at the bottom of Americas income ladder may find a $15 minimum wage far more relevant to her struggle than equal pay for equal work earning the same poverty wage as her male co-workers wont make her children less hungry. Nor, for that matter, would it make her less vulnerable to exploitation by male domestic partners.

And this points to another problem with Shires argument even if all feminists accepted her priorities, different feminists could arrive at diametrically opposed means of honoring them: One might believe that combating violence against women requires longer jail sentences for sexual assault; another might point to the epidemic levels of rape in American prisons and argue for the abolition of the carceral state.

Similarly, one could make a strong argument that universal health care and child care, stronger union rights, and a higher minimum wage are actually more relevant to combating violence against women than many policies that explicitly address that problem: Women at the bottom of the income ladder are six times more likely to be sexually abused than those at the top. Policies that reduce the number of low-income women who are economically dependent on their partners will likely do more to reduce the incidence of rape than, for example, reforming how campuses handle allegations of sexual assault.

This isnt to suggest that the latter isnt necessary nor that the specific forms of gender oppression encountered by women on college campuses and in corporate headquarters dont need dismantling. The point is simply that the stances Shire champions arent the core issues for all feminists theyre the core issues for feminists like her.

To a Palestinian woman in the West Bank, no issue may appear more central to her liberation than the end of the Israeli occupation. To a Zionist woman in Tel Aviv whose family tree lost branches to Hitler and then to Hamas no issue may seem less relevant to her interests. The feminist movement has no choice but to represent one woman, and not the other.

It is probably easier to argue for the irrelevance of the decolonization of Palestine to feminist goals than it is to say the same about the social democratic reforms on the strikers agenda. Far fewer women in the world suffer from Israeli occupation than are afflicted by poverty or exploitation in the workplace. Still, it is precisely for this reason that left-wing movements like the International Womens Strike and Black Lives Matter feel a responsibility to champion the Palestinian cause: Without the solidarity of larger left-wing movements, the prospects for Palestinian liberation are quite dim.

In my view, it is reasonable to argue that the preservation of a majority Jewish state and the liberation of women arent incompatible goals or else, that anti-Zionism is too divisive and peripheral a stance for the feminist movement to prioritize. But making this argument effectively requires engaging with the substance of the matter. Which is to say: It requires debating Middle East politics. To suggest that the Israel-Palestine conflict, the minimum wage, and opposition to fossil-fuel extraction are intuitively marginal to the feminist cause is to presume a universality of female experience that does not exist. For women who support the maintenance of a majority-Jewish Israel, it is obvious that anti-Zionism has nothing to do with womens rights. For those who see Israel as an apartheid state, that argument is profane.

Nearly two months before Shire wrote her plea for a feminist movement more tolerant of heterodox views, Erika Bachiochi made a similar case in an editorial for CNN but the source of Bachiochis alienation was the movements dogmatic insistence on reproductive choice.

Shire would not want the feminist movement to abandon its commitment to legal abortion to make room for women like Bachiochi. Others feel the same about Shires stance on Israel-Palestine.

The feminist movement cannot make room for all feminists or, at least, it cannot represent all feminists core concerns. Those who wish for the movement to disown parts of the strikers platform accomplish little by declaring, as Shire does, that the stances they oppose have nothing to do with feminism.

Such claims only reiterate the point of contention.

We Salute This Mans Tireless Quest to Roast the Hell Out of Idiots on Twitter During International Womens Day

The former Utah governor once called on Trump to drop out of the 2016 race, and the president has attacked him on Twitter.

During the campaign Miller call CNN dishonest while appearing on CNN.

A victory for International Womens Day.

The bill that would unravel Barack Obamas signature law and throw millions off of their insurance needs to berevised?

The revised order fixed a lot of legal problemsbut the White House cant fix the paper trail identifying it as an intended Muslim ban.

It seems crazy, but they may have reasons that arent completely insane.

Newly arrived Marines will assist the hundreds of special-ops forces already in Syria.

The feminist movement cant limit its focus to the issues that deeply concern all feminists, because no such issues exist.

The company is hiring as the system prepares to open new routes from Astoria, the Rockaways, and South Brooklyn.

A group of women, including organizers of the Womens March, were arrested for civil disobedience outside of Trump Tower.

At least 38 are dead with more than 50 injured.

Most people want more. Republicans want less. All Ryans buzzwords are designed to obscure that simple choice.

Coinciding with International Womens Day.

It may only cost them a vote or two in the Senate, but combined with other problems, Planned Parenthood defunding could be fatal to Trumpcare.

Beijing proposes a deal to ease hostilities between the U.S. and North Korea and prevent a head-on collision between the two nations.

Mukemmel Sarimsakci, 50, is hoping to play a big role in the Trump sons plans to launch a new mid-priced hotel chain.

The Chinese export every powerful person can get behind.

This is the sixth wave of threats, and 110 institutions have been targeted.

After promising to rein in GOP defectors, the White House signaled that theyre still open to suggestions on health-care reform.

Everythings different now that Obama isnt required to be civil to Trump.

Here is the original post:

The Women's Strike Can't Make Room for All Women - New York Magazine

Responding to today's Spring Budget, Heathrow CEO John Holland-Kaye said:

On Air Passenger Duty:

Were disappointed the Government has not taken the opportunity to reduce air passenger duty. The increase today, and the signal of potential further increases in the coming years, hands a great advantage to our European competitors. If Britain is to be one of the best places in the world to do business then we must work towards abolition of this tax on British competitiveness, tourism, investment and trade.

On incraesed investment and focus on technical education:

We welcome the creation of T Levels and extra funding for PHDs in STEM subjects which will help provide the workforce Britain needs for the future. Heathrow expansion, along with other strategic infrastructure projects, will create thousands of highly skilled jobs. These Government reforms are crucial to ensuring we can deliver a modern, affordable Heathrow and make sure todays schoolchildren are able to make the most of the opportunities.

See original here:

Heathrow CEO John Holland-Kaye responds to Spring Budget - eTurboNews

AS a semi-product of the grammar school system, I welcome wholeheartedly prime minister Theresa Mays plans for a grammar school revolution.

Mrs May will announce this week that the ban on new grammars is to be reversed and 320m is to be set aside in todays budget for new free schools, many of which are expected to be grammars.

I describe myself as a semi-product of the old grammar school system because I was one of the unfortunate children of the 1970s caught in the fire of the abolition of the grammar school system. In 1979, at the age of 14, my convent grammar in Barrow ceased to exist; the teaching nuns were put out to grass; and the pupils were scattered around various schools in the area - something that would cause outrage today, no doubt.

One of the most strident and oft-parroted criticisms of the grammar school system is that putting children through the trauma of the 11-plus exam is cruel and unfair; that deciding on the path they must take at such a formative age is iniquitous.

Both of which are untrue.

The 11-plus exam was, for me, no more stressful (in fact, considerably less so) than doing my cycling proficiency test. My mum took the wise decision not to tell me I was taking this exam and I simply turned up at St Marys Catholic school in Ulverston one day for the headmaster Mr Maguire to tell me I was doing a little test that day with another pupil. We duly did the test and went back to join the rest of our classmates. No big deal because in those days children were brought up via need-to-know parenting methods, rather than todays insistence on over-sharing of information and including kids barely out of nappies in major family decisions.

The other main criticism levelled at grammar schools is that selective education is inherently unfair and divisive, a criticism that is, at best, naive.

When I arrived at Ulverston Victoria High School in September 1979, I discovered there were no fewer than 12 sets for maths and English. Sets one to four were for the academic high flyers heading for university; sets five to eight for the middle-of-the-road kids heading for the world of work sooner rather than later; and sets eight to 12 for those pupils who were either too naughty or too dim to trouble the education system very much at all. Educationally, the differing groups barely mixed and not much more socially, either.

Other than the fact that all these children wore the same uniform, they more often than not experienced very different school lives from each other.

Of course, if pupils did well, there was always the possibility of moving up a set or more just as under the old system pupils who failed their 11-plus could sit it again and move to their local grammar school at a later date.

Selection in educational terms has become a taboo, yet it is difficult to understand why. The sporting world is selective, so why not the academic world too?

Grammar schools gave clever children from poorer backgrounds real opportunities in life; and the abolition of them was a huge educational setback, leaving many potential high flyers to the mercies of the bog standard comps which have done such a great disservice to so many of our children.

Under Mrs Mays new proposals, the inherently unfair system whereby free transport for pupils is provided only for those attending non-selective schools will be overhauled; with free transport being provided for pupils from poorer families to travel up to 15 miles to a selective school. Thats a real step in the right direction.

A reversal of the ban on grammar schools is long overdue. It was an iniquitous measure which has been to the detriment of far too many children left to flounder in inadequate and failing comprehensive schools. The grammar a school and technical school system worked well; and their abolition was a mistake. It is a mistake from which Brexit Britain needs to learn and learn quickly.

Read the original:

OPINION: Grammar knows best - North West Evening Mail - NW Evening Mail

Today Wednesday, 8th of March of 2017 is the 68th day of the year.There are 298 days remaining until the end of the year.608 days until mid-term elections1336 days until the next presidential electionThe sun will rise in San Francisco at 6:29 this morningand the sun will set at 6:11 this evening.Today we will have 11 hours and 42 minutes of daylight.

The solar noon will be at 12:20, mid-day.

The first low tide was at 1:44 early this morning

and the next low tide will be at 2:38 this afternoon

The first high tide will be at 7:51 this morning

and the next high tide at 9:43 tonight

The Moon is currently 82.1% illuminated; a Waxing Gibbous

Moon Direction: 304.99 NW

Moon Altitude: -14.11

Moon Distance: 233669 mi

Next Full Moon: Mar 12, 2017 at 7:53 am

Next New Moon: Mar 27, 2017 at 7:57 pm

Next Moonrise: Today at 2:28 pm

Discover What Your Name Means Day

Girls Write Now Day

International Women's Day

Also known as International Working Women's Day

National Be Nasty Day

National Peanut Cluster Day

National Proofreading Day

Registered Dietitian Nutritionist Day

Also known as Registered Dietitian Day

The earliest organized Women's Day observance was held on February 28, 1909, in New York. It was organized by the Socialist Party of America in remembrance of the 1908 strike of the International Ladies Garment Worker's Union. There was no strike on March 8, despite later claims.

On International Womens Day, women across the world will strike against President Trump and the social injustices that helped him rise to power.

Womens March organizers have declared March 8 A Day Without a Woman, alongside an International Womens Strike taking place in more than 30 countries that day. Theyre urging US women to take the day off work if they can, or to show support in other ways if they cant.

Womens March organizers released some basic guidelines last week for anyone, anywhere who wants to participate in A Day Without a Woman:

1. Women take the day off, from paid and unpaid labor

2. Avoid shopping for one day (with exceptions for small, women- and minority-owned businesses)

3. Wear RED in solidarity with A Day Without A Woman

Male allies are also encouraged to show support by taking care of children and housework, or by starting conversations with decision makers in their workplace about how to promote family-friendly policies like paid leave or flexible scheduling.

if today is your birthday, Happy Birthday To You! You share this day with

1714 Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, German pianist and composer (d. 1788)

1839 Josephine Cochrane, American inventor (d. 1913)

1841 Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., American colonel, lawyer, and jurist (d. 1935)

1911 Alan Hovhaness, Armenian-American pianist and composer (d. 2000)

1921 Alan Hale, Jr., American actor (d. 1990)

1931 Neil Postman, American author and critic (d. 2003)

1936 Gbor Szab, Hungarian guitarist and composer (d. 1982)

1937 Richard Faria, American singer-songwriter and author (d. 1966)

1943 Lynn Redgrave, English-American actress and singer (d. 2010)

1945 Micky Dolenz, American singer-songwriter, drummer, and actor

1958 Gary Numan, English singer-songwriter, guitarist, and producer

1959 Aidan Quinn, Irish-American actor

On this day in history...

1618 Johannes Kepler discovers the third law of planetary motion.

1702 Queen Anne, the younger sister of Mary II, becomes Queen regnant ofEngland, Scotland, and Ireland.

1775 An anonymous writer, thought by some to be Thomas Paine, publishes"African Slavery in America", the first article in the American colonies calling for theemancipation of slaves and the abolition of slavery.

1817 The New York Stock Exchange is founded.

1910 French aviator Raymonde de Laroche becomes the first woman to receive apilot's license.

1917 International Women's Day protests in St. Petersburg mark the beginning ofthe February Revolution (February 23rd in the Julian calendar).

1936 Daytona Beach and Road Course holds its first oval stock car race.

1937 Spanish Civil War: The Battle of Guadalajara begins.

1949 Mildred Gillars ("Axis Sally") is condemned to prison for treason.

1978 The first radio episode of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by DouglasAdams, is transmitted on BBC Radio 4.

1979 Philips demonstrates the compact disc publicly for the first time.

1983 While addressing a convention of Evangelicals, U.S. President RonaldReagan labels the Soviet Union an "evil empire".

2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, carrying a total of 239 people, disappears enroute from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

View original post here:

KALW Almanac: Wed. March 8, 2017 - KALW

The tragic death of soldier Roy Mathew, a Sahayak, whose video slamming the Sahayak system which exploits the soldiers has started a demand that this centuries-old Sahayak system should be abolished.

Reuters

Sahayaks or buddies, they often garrulously refer these soldiers as are the gun-wielding soldiers given to officers to assist them in performing their duties.

But first the British and later the Indians who served as senior and officers misappropriated the assistance, these soldiers are supposed to provide and many of them allegedly ended up being the domestic help of not only the officersbut also to their families.

It started in British Indian army where the highest post an Indian soldier could move up to was a Subedar. As all the officers were British and therefore they kept Indian soldiers to maintain their uniform, weapons, vehicles and other chores. With independence, British officers were replaced with Indians, but this tradition didnt die.

Reuters

Various revelations by these Sahayaks have unearthed that apart from the main duties that they are mandated to do, they do chores like boot polish, taking officers dog for a walk, taking officers wife and kids to market or wherever they wish to go. Some findings have also revealed that many of them have been tasked to do the laundry of not only the officer but his entire family.

According to written answer of Defence Ministry in response to the report of parliamentary standing committee on defence on the issue of Stress Management in Armed Forces, the ministry said that Sahayaks are authorised to Officers and Junior Commissioned Officers in the Army when serving with units or Headquarters functioning on War Establishment.

AFP

The scale of authorisation of Sahayak is the following:

One for every field officer and above

One for every two officers of the rank of captain and below

One for every Subedar major

One for every two Junior Commissioned Officers of the rank of Subedar and below.

The report was submitted as 31st report during the 14th Lok Sabha in 2008.

According to defence ministrys answer, following are the duties, a Sahayak is supposed to carry out while assisting the officer:

To provide personal protection and security.

To attend telephones, receive and deliver messages during operations, training and exercise and in peace.

To maintain weapons, uniforms and equipment of Officers/Junior Commissioned Officers in accordance with custom and usage in the Army.

To assist in digging trenches, erect bivouacs and shelters during war, training or exercise while the leaders are more busy in planning, coordination and execution of operations.

To be of assistance during patrols and independent missions.

To carry and operate radio sets, maps and other military equipment during operations, training cadres and outdoor exercises.

The Defence ministrys answer to the parliamentary standing committee says that apart from the Indian army, none of the other armed forces, neither the Navy nor the Indian Air Force have Sahayak system in place. But dont Navy and Air Force officers have peace postings. Of course, they do.

Based on the ordeals of many jawans working as Sahayaks, the committee took ministry to cleaners and questioned the usage of Sahayaks as domestic help by the officer and his family.

The Committee noted that the jawans are recruited for serving the nation and not to serve the family members of officers in household work which is demeaning and humiliating.

AFP

The chorus like polishing the boots, and doing laundry of officers entire family is humiliating for a soldier who came to army to serve the nation and not to serve the whims and fancies of officers and their families.

The committee also cited the several instances soldiers have been seen deployed at the residences of the officers. To this, the representative of the army had answered, Would have been attending the work at home due to reverence. He is not supposed to do it technically. He is not supposed to work in the house.

Based on these findings, the committee recommended the abolition of the sahayak system in the Army and also recommended that the Ministry of Home Affairs take similar steps in para military and other organisations. The committee in its fourth report of the 15th Lok Sabha submitted the action taken report on its previous recommendations.

In reply to committees recommendation of abolition of the Sahayak system, the ministry of Defence gave it a cold shoulder and merely stated that the system should not be misused to employ sahayaks in menial house-hold work. But it refused to accept the recommendation of the committee.

Post the slew of controversies, Army Chief, General Bipin Rawat has recommended the government to abolish this age old system of Sahayaks aka buddies at least in the peace areas.

In field areas, sahayaks are still required because of the buddy-pair concept in the infantry. We proposed to the government to have buddies only in forward areas, Gen Rawat was quoted in Deccan Herald on January 15, the Army Day.

Tophatter

Auto Overload

WebMD

The Stir

Microsoft

GlassesUSA.com

Excerpt from:

This Is Why Modern India Needs To Discontinue The Abused #Sahayak System In The Indian Army - Indiatimes.com

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The petition calls for the mandatory fee of 145.50 per household per year to be ditched, arguing that it is too expensive. By law, every household capable of viewing live content must pay the TV licence, used to subsidise the state broadcaster, whether they access BBC content or not. Failure to pay is a criminal offence.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

But even if the idea gains support among MPs during the debate, scheduled to take place on 8 May, fee payers are unlikely to be let off the hook for at least another decade as the state broadcasters charter, which sets the terms for the fee for a ten-yearly basis, has only just been renewed.

In an official response to the petition, a government spokesman said: Throughout the Charter Review, the Government considered the question of funding the BBCs services, and decided that the licence fee system will be maintained for the coming Charter period.

In maintaining the licence fee model, the government is clear that the licence fee remains a licence to watch or receive television programmes, and is not a fee for BBC services although licence fee revenue is used to fund the BBC and other public service objectives.

In further bad news for British households, the fee, which has been frozen since 2010, is set to rise with inflation for the next five years the spokesman said. They added: The government also intends to help those on lower incomes by making the licence fee easier to pay through proposals to provide more flexible payment plans.

Pensioners will continue to see the cost of their fee subsidised by the taxpayer.

Nonetheless, campaigners for the abolition of the fee have welcomed the debate as a way of gauging support within the Commons for an end to the fee.

Andrew Allison, head of campaigns for The Freedom Association which runs the Axe the TV Tax campaign, told Breitbart London: Although a debate in Parliament on the future of the licence fee is welcome as it keeps the issue alive, it wont make any practical difference. The Government has already agreed a new Royal Charter with the BBC.

What will be interesting, though, is to find out how many of the current crop of MPs are opposed to it. We hope to work with them to make sure at the end of this Charter period, the telly tax becomes a relic of the past.

Support for dropping the fee is growing among the public as people are increasingly opting for subscription viewing packages or are turning off their sets entirely.

A 2016 Ofcom study of British viewing habits found that the average amount of time spent watching tv daily dropped by 11 per cent between 2010 and 2015, driven mostly by young people turning off. While the viewing habits of those aged 65+ remained largely unchanged, children and those in the 16-24 age range showed a reduction of over a quarter in their average viewing time.

In 2015/16 the BBC gained3.74 billion from licence fee payments.

Follow this link:

MPs to Debate Scrapping the TV Licence Fee - Breitbart News

Danielle Cameron dissects the work and cultural importance of the director of Selma and 13th

Manohla Dargis of The New York Times describes Ava DuVernays 13th as powerful, infuriating, and at times overwhelming. I cannot disagree with Dargis words. Correlating Americas current mass incarceration of African Americans to the abolition of slavery in 1865, 13th is, quite simply, one of the most brutally energising films that I have seen. Rather, I want to emphasise how Dargis description is relevant to DuVernays entire body of work. 13th is a timely high-profile embodiment of the palpable activist energy that flows throughout DuVernays films, both factual and fictional.

Her first feature-length film, I Will Follow(2010) is a study of a woman grieving for her late aunt during the time of Obamas first inauguration. Next, DuVernay wrote and directed 2012s Middle of Nowhere,in which a medical student is suffering a different kind of grief: her husband has received an eight-year prison sentence. In 2015, Selma depicting the Selma to Montgomery march, with a brilliant performance by David Oyelowo as Martin Luther King was released. Her pieces all have predominantly, if not exclusively, African American casts. Through her focus on African American experiences and their individual yet intersectional textures, DuVernay reminds her viewer that the political is personal and the personal is political.

13th is a timely high-profile embodiment of the palpable activist energy that flows throughout DuVernays films, both factual and fictional

DuVernay tells her viewer that filmmaking is a valid way of putting pressure on the structures we wish to change. In conversation with Oprah Winfrey about 13th, DuVernay said she wanted a film and an ending that would motivate people to do something about the systems of oppression continuing to surround ethnic minorities. She chose this conclusion to be a photo collection of, as she says, black people in everyday moments, their lives mattering. Soundtracked by Commons Letter to the Free, the closing moments of 13th may feel like a reprieve from the blistering pace of the 100-minute long documentary. But it is in this reprieve that you find yourself reflecting on all you have heard and witnessed reflecting and then feeling motivated to enact a change.

A crucial reason why I draw inspiration from DuVernay as both a filmmaker and activist is her refusal to speak down to people. Over the past few years I, as a mixed race woman, have become increasingly tired of Im-more-woke-than-you conversations. These conversations see people competing to seem the most aware, the most concerned about to be the dominant voice of change, when activism needs to arise out of collaboration. Going on more marches than a fellow supporter of the same causes does not make you a better activist. Identifying as an activist for any movement does not give you license to condescend to others. These conversations belittle, alienate and harmfully hierarchize activism. DuVernay and her work refuse to do this. She says that, on the one hand, she made 13th to be a primer for people who know nothing about Americas prison industrial complex and its relation to race. On the other hand, DuVernay made 13th so people who already knew about African American liberation history could fit all the pieces of the puzzle together. Such a policy of inclusion, dialogue and education through activism is apparent in DuVernays whole filmography.

VisCourse: The Bond Complex

DuVernay remains one of cinema's most groundbreaking directors. She is the first African American woman to win the Sundance Award for Best Director and have her work nominated for both Best Picture and Best Documentary Feature by the Academy. With intelligence, grace and calculated anger, DuVernay and her work embody and speak to the many forms of action for social change. Long may her example continue to inspire

Continue reading here:

Close-Up: Ava DuVernay - Varsity Online

Deliveroo riders protesting over pay outside the company headquarters. Much of the growth in self-employment has been in high-paid sectors rather than low-paid taxi drivers and couriers. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/PA

Philip Hammond is likely to close loopholes in Wednesdays budget that mean many self-employed workers pay less tax than their salaried counterparts but he will come under pressure to ensure they receive better rights in return.

The Treasury is concerned that the growing prevalence of self-employment is not just driven by entrepreneurialism in the gig economy, but by tax avoidance, which will progressively undermine Britains tax base.

The self-employed pay 9% national insurance contributions (NICs) on their earnings above 8,060, compared with 12% for employees.

Torsten Bell, director of the Resolution thinktank, said: There is a straightforward fairness question about whether that difference is justified.

The abolition of class 2 NICs, which are paid only by self-employed people, from April next year a simplification measure announced by the former chancellor, George Osborne will also lift the burden on the self-employed.

Almost half 45% of the growth in jobs as Britains economy has bounced back since 2008 has been in self-employment. Much of that has been in traditionally high-paid sectors such as advertising and banking, rather than the low-paid taxi drivers and couriers whose cases have caught public attention.

Hammond could choose to align NICs for self-employed workers and employees, perhaps above a certain earnings threshold, to protect the lowest-paid.

There is growing political pressure to underpin the rights of self-employed workers. Matthew Taylor, who was an adviser to Tony Blair when he was prime minister, is carrying out a review of employment practices in the modern economy, which is expected to look at how to improve the safety net for self-employed workers.

But the chancellor believes that as a quid pro quo, the self-employed should be prepared to pay more tax. Hammond is keen to examine how the public finances will be affected by long-term trends in the economy and the labour market.

Simon McVicker, director of policy at IPSE, the trade body for self-employed workers, said: If the increase goes ahead, the government should commit to righting some of the unfairness in the tax system for the self-employed. Currently, many mothers who work for themselves can only claim a small maternity allowance, while employees are granted enhanced maternity pay for the first six weeks of leave.

He added: Any big changes to tax policy should be preceded by a proper consultation.

With two budgets due this year, as the Treasury switches the biggest day in the chancellors calendar from the spring to the autumn, Hammond could announce a review of the issue, to report at his second big outing at the dispatch box.

He is expected to defer firm decisions on a range of subjects, to allow the Treasury to take stock of the state of the economy after the government triggers article 50, the formal process for quitting the EU, later this month.

Read the original:

Taxes for self-employed likely to rise in Hammond's budget - The Guardian

Pauline Hanson. Picture: Steve Ferrier/The West Australian.Picture: The West Australian

Pauline Hansons plan for a flat 2 per cent tax would cost the Federal Budget more than $230 billion and aid imports at the expense of the local manufacturing sector.

Analysis by the left-leaning Australia Institute shows it would be the most radical tax overhaul in Australias history.

Senator Hanson has backed a two per cent tax on all income, including welfare payments, as well as abolition of the GST.

One Nations policy statement commits the party to explore removing Federal taxation and direct and indirect taxes on employment.

But the institutes analysis suggests such a major departure would punch a $232 billion hole in Federal finances in one year.

A 2 per cent tax on business turnover, property and income would raise almost $147 billion.

This years Federal Budget shows the Government will collect $379 billion in taxes.

Institute executive director Ben Oquist said a simple flat tax would leave the Federal Budget in tatters.

This amounts to a cut equivalent to all Commonwealth payments to the States, including $8 billion to WA, plus the aged pension, plus Medicare and all income support to the disabled just to name a few, Mr Oquist said.

This would be the most radical taxation policy in Australian, probably OECD history.

One Nation has argued its tax policies would drive a lift in economic growth that would make the country richer and generate extra tax revenues. But the institute analysis suggests the biggest winners would be high-income earners and overseas firms.

A person earning more than $1 million would make a tax saving of almost $420,000. An international firm such as Shell would save $660 million. According to the institute, a turnover tax as suggested by One Nation would encourage large firms to produce goods and services in-house rather than outsource that work to small and medium-sized companies.

Read more here:

Analysis of Pauline Hanson's flat 2 per cent tax shows it would help overseas imports - The West Australian