MINIMUM WAGE

The President in his State of the Union address suggested the minimum wage be raised to $9. The minimum wage is presently $7.25. The President asked that the new minimum wage be made in increments so the $9 figure would not be reached until 2015.

 

The next day the Republicans objected. Speaker Boehner said .....No way! It would raise salaries right down the line. Businesses would be forced to close.

 

What bull shit!

 

The facts and studies indicate a contrary result. Most economists agree Boehner is wrong. Dead wrong! Studies show only a minimal impact on a business where the minimum wage was raised. Not enough to put any emplyer out of business.

 

The need for an increase is obvious.The United States is now a country of the very rich and the working poor. The middle class is  basically gone. An adult working 40 hours a week at the present minimum wage of $7.25 earns approximately $15,000 per year. If the rate went ot $9 per hour, the salary would increase to approximately $18,000 per year.

 

Lets take that one worker and put him into a family of four. Father, mother, and two children. Husband and wife both work. Presently their combined gross salaries are $30,000. With the increase, it would go to $36,000. Both figures are below the poverty level. In other words, not enough for a family of four to live on.

 

I see the impact of a low hourly here in Key West. Most working persons in Key West are paid from $8.50 an hour to $12 per hour. Their gross earnings are in the $15,000 to $18,000 range. That is why four persons are required to join together to rent a two bedroom apartment to live in. Or a three bedroom house. They cannot afford to live alone. The rent and utilities need to be divided. Otherwise, they would sleep under the bridge with the other homeless.

 

I find it strange that those who must approve the increase to $9 earn much more. Our Congressmen are paid $174,000 a year. Plus free medical. The best medical policy available. The working poor have no medical insurance. They cannot afford it.

 

Lets examine some numbers.

 

In 1955, the minimum wage was $.75 per hour. In 2013, it is $7.25. An increase of $6.50 over 58 years. The minimum wage has increased $.12 an hour over each of the 58 years.

 

For shame!

 

Back in 1955 when the minimum wage was $.75, most corporate CEOs earned between $40,000 and $70,000 a year. Few, if any, made over $100,000. Today corporate CEOs have earning packages in the $10 million to $40 million dollar range. And they and their Congressmen would deny the working person a minimum wage of $9 per hour!

 

The rightousness and morality in all of this escapes me.

GREECE THE TINDERBOX?

Turmoil abounds in the world. Wars, civil wars,and genocide are examples. The Middle East especially is a hot bed of strife.

 

Many think that if a third world war were to begin, the Middle East would be the place.

 

Perhaps.

 

There is another locale which might cause such a war to erupt. Greece and Germany. The battle of the euros, the repayment of debt.

I mentioned this possibility during my visit to Greece this summer and have commented on it since on my TV/Internet show the Key West Lou Legal Hour. As recently as last Friday.

 

Permit me share my thoughts with you.

 

History repeats itself.

 

Germany has a history of initiating world conflicts. Germany started World War I. Germany started World War II. Why not World War III?

 

Germany may be the richest European nation. It is also the least liked. All over money. The Euro.

 

Germany has experienced great financial success the last 20 years. When the Euro and Euro bank came into being some ten years ago, Germany was in a terrific position. It was king pin. It had the most money.

 

Germany made huge loans to the other 16 nations comprising the Euro nation. Loans were made to other nations similar to the manner in which mortgage loans were made by U.S. banks to homeowners for mortgage purposes in the years leading up to 2008. No concern was taken for the ability of the borrower to pay back.

 

Greece owes Germany a ton of money. It cannot pay it back. The debt is onerous. Greek leaders try to meet the repayment plans. Taxes have had to be raised. Companies cannot pay their employees. Better than half the stores in Greece are closed. Beggars line the commercial streets of Athens. Fathers cannot feed their families.

 

Germany does not care. It has stood hard with regard to the repayment plans. Only minor adjustments have been made. The Greek government presses the people for more money to pay the Germans.

 

Germany is the banker. It is playing hard ass. The reason is simple. If Germany does not collect, it will suffer deep economic problems. In other words, Germany must be paid or the German economy ends up in the gutter.

 

Greece is not the only nation being squeezed. Italy, Spain and Portugal are in similar situations. Though not quite as bad as Greece's.

 

You will recall that I spent five weeks in Greece last summer. I saw first hand the pressure the Greek people were under at the time. I participated in two demonstrations in Athens. Thousands of people in the square in front of the legislative building. I was an observer, not a demonstrator. I walked among the people. They were ordinary every day folk. Most conservative appearing. All ages represented.

 

Merkel was at the time and still is Germany's Prime Minister. She is the boss. Every time her name was mentioned in a speech, Greek citizens, male and female alike, spit on the ground.

 

Merkel has her own problems. She runs for reelection next year. The opposition insists she is not doing enough to collect the debt, especially the Greek portion. So she presses even harder.

 

Which brings me to today. This moment in history and what is happening. None of it good.

 

Greece consists of many islands. My recollection tells me 800. It could be more. Travel amongst the islands is by ferry boat. The ferrys carry people and necessary supplies to the various islands. Very few islands have airports.

 

Last week, the seamen who operate the ferry boats went on strike. They struck for pay arrears, payments to their pension funds, against tax hikes, and various aspects of the government's austerity program. Notice they struck not for more. Rather to get even. To merely be paid what they were owed.

 

The seaman have more than six months back pay coming. They had worked without pay in anticipation of getting caught up at some point. Catching up never came. The pension plans had not been funded for more than one year. A simple truth is involved. If you do not get paid, you cannot eat. Nor can your family.

 

The Greek seamen were on strike 6 days. The strike basically shut down Greece. The government finally got a court order to the effect that the seamen return to work immediately or get fired. Hope continues to spring eternal. The seamen returned to work.

 

Workers from other occupations then struck. In support of their brother seamen who had been forced to return to work. The hotel workers, bus drivers, trolley workers, and railway workers announced an immediate four day strike. Out they went. It is called solidarity.

 

Farmers are getting killed economically. The cost of producing the farm goods exceeds greatly what fruits and vegetables can be sold for. Six months of working and tilling the soil returns pennies. The farmers are threatening to close down Greece's highways in protest.

 

The farmers decided better to give the food away to those who were in need. Free. Last week in Athens the farmers gave out free fruits and vegetables. It was  a mob scene. Chaotic. Everyone climbing on each other to get some food.

 

A news media outlet described it best. These people were not beggars.....they were victims of an economic crisis.....which came like a hurricane and leveled families.....the people have swallowed their pride and dignity.....they will do whatever they can for free food for their families.

 

It is a bad situation getting worse with each passing day.

 

Recall Germany in the 1920's and early 1930's. The German people were economically down trodden because of the onerous financial burdens imposed on them by the Allies after World War I. Such gave Hitler the ability to  gain popularity and favor and eventually take over the German government. Whenever people hurt, especially when a man and woman cannot feed their children, people will accept any one who promises a better way.

 

The seeds of a similar experience are breaking ground today in Greece. There has been the birth of a Greek Nazi Party. It is called the Golden Dawn Party. In the national elections last November, the Nazis garnered seven per cent of the vote. Now roughly three months later, it is believed that if an election were held today, the Golden Dawn Party would come in a strong third. Making the Nazi party a decided influence in Greek affairs.

 

The members of the Greek Nazi party are similar to those who supported Hitler. They are anti-Semitic. They believe Auschwitz was good. They sing praises to Auschwitz. The Nazis are also very anti-immigration. There is not enough for the Greeks. Why share with an outsider. The Nazis chant the slogan.....Speak Greek or die. Jewish and immigrant places of business are vandalized.

 

Sound familiar?

 

Things are obviously bad in Greece. It is difficult to see any good coming out of the present situation. A head on confrontation between Germany and Greece is possible. Perhaps probable. Whatever. My point is the Middle East is not the only tinderbox that could explode into a world war. Germany and Greece are in the running. Germany would then have the dubious honor of having started World War III.

 

NOTHING IS FOREVER

Laws become outdated and need to be changed. The  circumstances which gave rise to the law initially are no longer valid.

 

An example is China's one child rule.

 

In 1980, the Chinese government became concerned with over population. The country was growing. There was not enough of anything to keep up with the increased population. Simple things like food and shelter. Something had to be done. The Chinese government passed the one child rule.

 

The rule was simple. Only one child per family. The rule was strongly enforced in urban areas where space was at a premium. If a woman became pregnant with a second child, the law required she be aborted. No choice on the couple or woman's part. It was described as forced abortion.

 

The law permitted two children per couple in rural areas. Space amongst other things was more prevalent and farm areas raised their own crops for consumption.

 

The one child per family rule has been quite successful. It is estimated that four hundred million births have been averted since 1980.

In recent years, the every action has an equal and opposite reaction axiom has come into play. The Chinese government now needs an increased population. The only way such can be accomplished is by more births. The proposed new rule would permit two children per couple.

 

Why is the change being considered?

 

One reason is that the working population is decreasing rapidly. There is a definite shortage of workers. Ten million workers per year are dropping out of the work force due to age or other reasons. The ten million worker drop has been steady since 2007.

 

China needs an increased working population in order to survive. Economically and otherwise.

 

There is the problem of care for the aged. Chinese custom requires that children care for their parents in their old age. The children become the caretakers of the old. Unless something is done, there will not be a sufficient number of children to care for their parents. Stated another way, too many parents for one couple. Remember, if left at one child, the husband and wife will be caring for each other's parents at the same time. Four dependents relying on 2 people. It may not be workable.

 

Male babies have always been favored over female ones in China. If a woman determined she was carrying a female child, she could have an abortion. Get pregnant another time and it may be a male. The male over female favoritism has resulted in 118 boys being born to every 100 girls.

 

This translates into not enough females for marriage. Nor for sex. Both are becoming decided problems.

 

Chinese men who have been unsuccessful in securing a wife will often times go to a brothel for resolution of the problem. There are many brothels on the China side along the Vietnamese border. A Chinese man can get his sex at a brothel. He can also get a so called wife.

 

Pimps offer the prostitutes for sale. The brothels are considered sex markets. The man purchases a Vietnamese prostitute for a sizable sum of money. The transaction is split between the prostitute and her pimp on a 60-40 basis. The prostitute gets the 60 per cent.

 

The prostitutes do not marry the men. Though they live with them as wives. Many of the so called wives leave this arrangement after a while and return to the pimp. Then she is offered for sale again and gets her 60 per cent again. This can happen several times.

 

Some of the prostitutes have 2-3 such husbands at one time. They are referred to as rotary wives.

 

It all boils down to the following. The Chinese government needs workers for it burgeoning economy, the elderly need caretakers, and Chinese men need wives and sex. There is a moral component. The Chinese government frowns on prostitution.

 

The Chinese government is in the process of deciding whether the two child rule is feasible.

 

Decision time is probably this year. It is a toss up as to whether the new rule will be adopted. 

BRAZILIAN PROSTITUTES

Prostitution in Brazil is an odd bag. It is neither legal nor illegal. Therefore, prostitution is considered legal for all intents and purposes.

There are 1 million prostitutes in Brazil. Two hundred fifty thousand are children. This article is limited to adult prostitutes.

The 2014 World Football Cup is being held in Brazil. The world series of soccer.

One of the sites where World Football Cup activities will be conducted is Belo Horizonte.

Classes are being conducted in Belo Horizonte to prepare Brazilian workers for the influx of foreigners. Taxi drivers, bell hops, quick food workers, hotel workers and the like are attending these classes. The course runs six to eight months. English, Spanish, and correct Portuguese is being taught. Portuguese is Brazil's official language. Correct Portuguese is being taught because a large number of attendees are immigrants.

Prostitutes are also permitted to attend. In fact, they are encouraged.

The ladies are organized. They have a union/association. It is quite effective. The President recently said regarding the classes that they contribute to the dignity of the work performed. She was also of the opinion that the members would be better able to negotiate a fair price with foreigners after completing the course.

Prostitution is oddly viewed in Brazil. The government is generally helpful and at the same time disinterested.

Prostitution has official status. The Brazilian Ministry of Labor Official List of Occupations contains "sex worker."

Prostitutes can earn a federal pension. They are permitted to contribute to the official government pension fund. This makes the ladies eligible for federal pensions when they retire.

Brazil maintains a Labor and Ministry Primer for the Sexual Professional. A short how to do book. Tips and advice as to how to be a prostitute. Instructions such to be appealing, affectionate, use perfume, and offer the customer specialties.

The negative aspect of the government's support has to do with medical regulations. The health of the ladies is given no consideration. Such things as regular medical checkups are not required.

Although this article does not touch on the 250,000 child prostitutes, it should be recognized that Brazil has the largest number after Thailand. Not something to be proud of.

Why did I write regarding this subject? No particular reason. I did think the way Brazil handles its ladies of the night was interesting and informative. Especially when contrasted to the United States where prostitution is illegal and no benefits are available to the ladies.

THE CONSCIENCE OF A NATION

I just finished listening to the NRA's first comments regarding the Newtown tragedy. NRA CEO Wayne La Pierre spoke on behalf of his organization at a televised press conference.

 

A more arrogant and off base presentation I have never heard. And I have listened to many as a trial lawyer of almost fifty years.

 

La Pierre suggests that easy accessibility to firearms is not the problem. Nor are our laws. Rather he blamed everyone els and everything else for the shootings. The NRA was not responsible in any fashion. His solution to preclude any further Newtowns was to have guns in schools. Armed guards and/or armed teachers. His position that what stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

 

I believe La Pierre's comments did much to injure the cause of the NRA. He set them back a number of years. It will be difficult for those elected officials who dance to the NRA's tune to continue to do so. Let me phrase it differently. It should be. We never know with today's politicians.

 

This is a wake up time for America. The time for words is past. Action is required .Dictated. Demanded. Significant laws to restrict gun activity. Anything less is to invite another Newtown.

 

The United States Supreme Court bears responsibility for Newtown, also. The Court came down with two decisions in 2008 and 2010 which aggravated/expanded the problem. The end result of the decisions was that a person is allowed to carry a gun inside and outside the home for purposes of protection. In my opinion, the Second Amendment does not say this.

 

The Second Amendment word for word reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

 

Why did James Madison write the Second Amendment as he did back in the 1780s? The answer is simple. The United States at the time had no standing army. If an army was required to defend the new Nation, citizens would be called. From the farms and the cities. And they were to bring their guns with them because the government had no guns to give them.

 

What does the reading of the Second Amendment have to do with the right to keep a gun in the home or carry one on the street for purposes of defense? Nothing.

 

I have to smile. We have heard for years that the Suprme Court should be made up of strict constructionists. Persons who would  interpret the Constitution as written. Not those liberal type judges who stretch the law and in effect make law. The Supreme Court in 2008 and 2010 was controlled by a strict constructionist majority. However, they did philosophically what they were opposed to. The Court liberally construed the Second Amendment. Stretched it in my opinion.

 

I ask this question of all die hard NRA/Second Amendment supporters. What is more important, the purported right to bear arms or a child's right to grow up? That is the issue as framed by Newtown.

 

America is at a cross roads regarding guns. I am hopefull immediate appropriate steps will be taken to alleviate the problem. Otherwise, Newtown will not be the last time our children will be a shooting gallery.

 

 

 

BIG BROTHER

We all recognize government can be Big Brother. One we do not need nor want. It is accepted that Big Brother has no place in people's lives. Not only should the government stay out, also other people. My business is my business. Not someone elses.

Recall George Orwell's classic 1984. People were constantly watched by cameras integrated into their television screens.

It took a while, but what was described in Orwell's book is here. There is now the capacity for a person's TV set to watch that person. Phrased another way, some one can watch a person while that person is watching TV.

And hear conversations, also.

All via camera and microphone.

.

It is others watching while I watch TV in my bedroom and living room. Watching while I have sex with a wife or girl friend. It is watching as I argue with some one in the living room. There is no discrimination. Everything is filmed and recorded.

A joke this is not.

Verizon filed a patent in 2011 for a set top box. The box would operate when the TV did. Total visual and audio would be captured and available instantly to outsiders. Comcast and Google already have similar patents, either for the box approach or directly embedded in the television set itself. Samsung's 2012 plasmas and LED HDTVs already have camera and microphone built into the unit itself.

Intrusive! No question about it.

The purpose is marketing. The various organizations mentioned wish to tailor advertisers to what TV viewers are doing. Doing is the operative word.

If a couple is arguing, an advertisement for a marriage counselor might be in order. If cuddling or love making, advertisements for romantic getaway vacations or flowers.

Beware!

IS A FERTILIZED EGG A PERSON?????

When does life begin? At the moment of conception when the female egg is fertilized by the male sperm?

 

There is a clamor for answers to the questions. Not so much  from society as a whole. Rather from a small minority who seek to impose their religious beliefs  on the majority. The battle waged by this small group is ongoing. Their beliefs are rooted so deeply that resolution appears impossible. Anti-abortionists are now into their second and third generation of supporters.

 

The issue of when life begins was raised recently from a legal perspective in the case of Person hood Oklahoma v. Barber. Last week on October 28, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear an appeal on the issue from a decision of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The Oklahoma Supreme Court had ruled against an anti-abortion group. The anti-abortion group had had placed on next week's election ballot in Oklahoma an amendment to the State Constitution. The amendment would define an embryo as a human being from the moment of conception. Which as a practical matter is the moment the female egg is fertilized.

 

I am interested in the issue strictly from a legal perspective.

 

A walk back in legal history is required to understand what is going on.

 

When I graduated from law school in 1960, a fetus was not considered life. There was no life unless the fetus was born live. Which meant that the baby had to be delivered and breath. Breathing was the most important part of the concept. It meant the baby was alive. Then and only then did rights accrue to the baby as a person, as a human being.

 

Abortion in 1960 was a criminal offense. It had nothing to do with the abortion issue as we understand it today. The law was only concerned with back room deliveries with a bent metal hanger.

 

Years later abortion became the fanatical issue it is today. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled on the issue some fifty odd years ago in Roe v. Wade. A woman was free to decide if she wanted to abort a pregnancy. If so, it was legal and proper for the woman to have the abortion and the medical profession to provide the assistance.

 

Via Roe v. Wade, abortion was considered a woman's right. The right to choose, to control her own body.

 

A small but vocal group could not accept Roe v. Wade. The battle to overturn the decision or minimize its application has been ongoing for more than five decades.

 

In the 2012 Presidential election, abortion is in the forefront of issues being discussed. A supreme effort primarily by the Republican right has been initiated. The approach is to deny to women many of the personal freedoms they won 50-60 years ago. Things like the right to contraception, as well as the right to abortion. The battle has a male/female component. It is primarily  men attempting to dictate to women what they can and cannot do, especially as regards their bodies. It makes me wonder what century we are living in.

 

The newest gimmick by the anti-abortionists is to seek to redefine when life begins. It is called parenthood. Attempts are ongoing to change federal and state laws so as to define a person/human life as beginning at the time of conception. If successful, it would mean that the fertilized egg has all  rights of due process and equal treatment under the law.

 

If the redefinition took hold, it would be a crime for a woman or anyone to assist her not only with abortion, but also contraceptive use and in-vitro fertilization. There are probably further ramifications I cannot think of at the moment.

 

Anti-abortionists in Oklahoma thought they saw the road home regarding the issue. They had the question put on this November's ballot as a proposed amendment to the Oklahoma State Constitution. Groups disagreeing with the anti abortionists went to court to have the proposed amendment declared unconstitutional and thrown off the ballot.

The group was successful. The Oklahoma Supreme Court said the amendment was unconstitutional and struck it from the ballot.

 

The anti-abortionist were not dissuaded. They appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

 

The United States Supreme Court decides cases two ways. The Court actually hears oral argument and decides a case. Another way is for the Court to refuse to hear a case. In such instance, the decision of the court below from which the matter is being appealed is considered the last word. It is the law regarding the issue raised.

 

By refusing to hear the case and making that refusal known on October 28, 2012, the United States Supreme Court said in effect that it agreed with the decision of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Inherent in the actions of both Courts, was the fact that there are years of precedent supporting abortion. From Roe v. Wade to today. The Oklahoma Court said Roe v. Wade was still good law. The United States Supreme Court agreed with the Oklahoma Court by refusing to entertain the appeal.

 

Quite frankly, I was surprised by the United States Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case. The Court is basically conservative by a 5-4 majority. Is the conservative Supreme Court moving away from its previous hard line conservative positions? I do not know. The decision in the Parenthood case might lead one to think so. In any event, it is clear  that the United States Supreme Court has no intention of hearing a parenthood case. At least at this time.

PET CAT EUTHANIZED BY MISTAKE

This scenario recently occurred.

Coleen Conlon lives in Gardner, Massachusetts. She had a pet cat. Lady. Eight years old.

Lady had fleas. Coleen had her son take Lady to the vet for a flea bath. Lady had previously been cared for by the veterinarian. The veterinarian was the Broadway Animal Hospital. The Hospital was owned and operated by Dr. Michael Sheridan. A respected veterinarian in the area with thirty years experience.

Dr. Sheridan's Hospital provided forms to be signed by anyone requiring pet services. There was a form for flea services. There was a form for euthanasia. There was a form for every type service.

The son was mistakenly given the wrong form. He did not read it. He signed and returned it. Much like most of us humans do when we are being admitted to a hospital.

The form the son signed was for euthanasia. Not a flea bath.

When the son returned, he was informed Lady had been euthanized. The form mistake was discovered.

Coleen, her son and the rest of the family are distraught. Dr. Sheridan is sympathetic, but says the son should have read the form before signing.

The facts have the making of a law suit.

The question is what is the monetary value of a pet cat negligently killed. The answer depends on the State where the pet resided and the negligent act took place. In this instance, Massachusetts.

Let's begin at the beginning.

The law initially and for centuries was that a pet was property. Not human. As property, it could only be valued based on far market value less depreciation. Simply stated, Lady in this instance would be worth whatever the cost of buying a new cat, depreciated by the number of years Lady had already lived.

What is the dollar value of a pet cat under the fair market rule. Most cats are adopted. Taken in. I am unfamiliar with the price range of an ordinary cat. However, I cannot believe it would be much in dollars. $20-40 perhaps? Now subtract from that amount the fact that Lady had already lived half her anticipated life time. Subtract 50 per cent from the estimated fair market figure of $20-40.

That number represents the value of Lady in this day and age under the fair market approach.

Most States follow the fair market value rule. Pets are worth next to nothing in those States. The feelings of the pet owner are not taken into consideration.

Pets have increasingly become a member of the family, so to speak. Pets are loved as one's own offspring.

A new approach to pet valuation has developed and is developing. Though presently the law in only a few States. The developing legal concept is known as companion law. Companion law does not limit recovery for a dead pet to fair market value. It takes into consideration the same things that the law considers when a human is negligently killed. Emotional distress and uniqueness of the relationship.  Even the pet's pain and suffering.

Where does Florida stand? Where does Massachusetts stand?

The cases are split in Florida. Some courts recognize the progressive companion theory. Others, the fair market value of the pet.

Lady and her owner Coleen lived in Massachusetts. Massachusetts offers no help at all. I even question if a claim can be made under the fair market value theory.

Massachusetts has a statute that defines who and how recovery can be had in a death case. The statute applies to "...persons closely related."  Massachusetts courts have consistently held that a pet is neither a person nor is it legally able to be closely related. Ergo, Coleen would get nothing.

Only one State has dealt with the problem legislatively. Massachusetts makes its decision based on a statute. However, the statute is written for humans, even though applied in pet situations.

Tennessee has met the issue head on. Tennessee's law directly deals with companion pets. Legislatively and signed into law by the Governor. The statute permits lawsuits. With limitations. Top recovery is limited to $4,000. Better than nothing. The statute is limited to dogs and cats.

The law generally has many problems/issues with which to deal. Pet recovery is not near the top. However in a creeping fashion, the States are beginning to deal with the problem. The law is moving in the direction of companion statutes. At some point in the next 25 years, most States will be on the side of valuing the pet and permitting recovery. In 50 years, the issue will no longer be a problem. Companion recovery will be the law in every State. The law of the land.

DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

The adage different strokes for different folks applies to countries, also.
Greece, Italy, and China are perfect examples.

U.S. citizens must pay taxes. Every one. Even the rich. Unless of course
they legally have secreted funds in a Swiss bank account or off shore in
the Cayman Islands. There is legal tax avoidance. If the avoidance however
is illegal, such persons will be arrested and prosecuted to the full extent
of the law. Tax avoidance is not tolerated in the United States.

Greece tolerates tax avoidance. That is one reason why Greece is in trouble
economically. It is considered perfectly proper to avoid taxes in Greece.
Greece's tax delinquency is in the billions of euros.

Occasionally Greeks will be pursued for back taxes. Rarely, however.
Especially in the two years immediately preceding an election.

For the  the few arrested, there is no fear. Greek tax courts take 7-10
years to bring a tax avoidance case to trial.

Greek ship owners are a separate breed when it comes to paying taxes. They
are treated well by the government. Receive favored treatment. Much like
the fabled 2 per cent in the United States. That is why Greek ship owners
have tons of money while Greece itself is broke.

Italy has Silvio Berlusconi. A perfect example of the ineffectiveness of
the Italian court system. An example also that a people will tolerate
anything from a favored elected official.

Berlusconi was once Italy's Prime Minister. Was is the operative word. When
no longer the number one politician in Italy, he was arrested for four
years of tax fraud. His trial concluded last week. Berlusconi was found
guilty. He was sentenced to four years in jail. The sentence was
automatically reduced to one year because of an amnesty law. The amnesty
law recognizes that Italian jails are overcrowded. The law reduces
dramatically a criminal sentence.

Such does not bother  me. 

GIRL 10 GIVES BIRTH TO BABY BOY

What is about to be told is a story of biblical proportions.

 

In the days of Christ and before, child bearing commonly occurred between the ages of 9 and 12. Time changes things. Today 9-12 is not even considered.

 

Except. One of the exceptions involves certain states in Mexico.

 

A 10 year old pregnant girl was admitted to Women's Hospital in Puebla, Mexico on October 22, 2011. She was pregnant and suffering complications from the pregnancy, including seizures. Both mother and prospective child were in danger.

 

A cesarean was performed on the 10 year old girl on November 11, 2011. A baby boy was born prematurely. Thirty one weeks. Nine weeks too soon. Weighed 3.3 pounds. Following his birth, the baby suffered from pneumonia and other complications from premature birth. The child was placed in an Intensive Care Unit.

 

The mother was discharged a few days after the cesarean delivery.

 

The 10 year old mother was not a resident of Mexico. What she was doing in Puebla I have not been able to ascertain. Her home was just outside San Francisco.

 

The young mother made daily visits to her child. To breast feed the baby.

 

The authorities are nor certain how the 10 year old got pregnant. They suspect rape. The legal age of consent for a female in Mexico is 12. Rape it is regardless of how it occurred.

 

Puebla is pro life. Without question. It is illegal to terminate a pregnancy, unless the mother was the victim of a sexual assault. The possibility of an abortion was never relayed to the 10 year old or her parents. Nor was any investigation conducted by authorities prior to delivery to determine if the girl had been raped.

 

Life is legally defined in Puebla as "...from the moment of conception to natural death."

 

A little digging revealed that youthful girls becoming pregnant and giving birth is not uncommon in Mexico. A problem in and of itself. After birth, there was no support system in place to assist the very young mother and her infant child. Resulting in the probability an already bad situation becoming worse.

 

My concerns are several fold.

 

If there ever was the need for an abortion, this was it. Forget religion, forget politics, forget everything but the mother and child.

 

In the almost three weeks between the girl's admission and delivery, why was there a failure to advise the 10 year old and her parents of the legality of abortion in the event of a sexual assault?

 

What happened to adoption? Back in the 1960s when I started practicing law, births outside of wedlock occurred. Abortion was illegal. Adoption was the answer. There apparently was no pre birth adoption counseling. Following the birth, none was possible. The mother and child bonded almost instantaneously when breast feeding commenced and continued on a daily basis.

 

I searched and searched and could find nothing concerning the mother and child since the birth announcement in November. I assume both are residing with the 10 year old's parents outside San Francisco. The mother and/or child could end up on welfare. The taxpayers of California will support the child.

 

What of the 10 year old mother's health and mental condition?

 

Studies indicate that a mother under the age of 16 has a four times greater possibility of dying during child birth. The mother should never have been subjected to the danger. Fortunately, she did not die.

 

What of her mental well being. Studies suggest the 10 year old mother will have serious mental problems, including depression, as time goes on.

 

This 10 year old's problem was bungled before and after delivery.

 

Society should neither support nor encourage a 10 year old to continue carrying. Abortion was the answer. As a trained lawyer, I know that no law is without exception. Religion and politics should step aside in such a situation and permit/proceed with an abortion as soon as possible.

 

If the government involved is adamant and will not permit abortion, then a structure should be in place to advise adoption. One is definitely needed in Mexico where pregnancies involving the young are not uncommon.

 

If birth occurs, support systems should be in place to help guide the mother and child.

 

Abortion is not black and white. Though many perceive it that way. As indicated earlier, there should be exceptions. A pregnant 10 year old cries out for exception.

 

The proof of the pudding is where and in what condition the mother and child will be twenty years from now. I wish them both well. I do not know.