(*R)Evolution & Video Video Video

As I type this quick note about the video revolution, ongoing, I am recording a live city hall broadcast SOLO. It once was a two person job, and could easily be more people, but it is now solo. The main job is operating 4 robotic cameras and a video switcher, but with our loss of the second person I also operate 2DVD decks, 1 VHS deck, and try to operate COMPIXMedia (CG Program) for title overlays and lower thirds.

Whew! All that AND I can type a blog too! (My secret - I only type when someone is talking for 5 min's plus and it gets boring. Blogging helps me to stay alert and ready to move.)

So this video revolution is happening. I've ramped up my output to get on the train. It's not easy, esp with the current economic crisis (which is a very soft way of saying THE LARGEST BANK ROBBERY IN WORLD HISTORY).

My scifi dystopia feature screenplay shows my suspicion of rulers and authority. I wrote characters coming from a wide range of diversity (ethnic, racial, gender-preference, and age) and possibly have room to film little bits all around the world. I don't have money for that -- yet -- but who says that should stop this project?

The LAUNCHED screening went well, but for me it was somewhat anti-climactic because:
a) I would have liked more collaboration on the final edit,
b) I felt like my final edit was not as 'slick' as it needed to be,
c) my final 3D animation could have been a bit 'slower' with smoother motion, but it did do what I had hoped (look good and allude to a mysterious unknown planetary ailment),
d) now I'm not sure what to do next with my film career or my life.

That about covers it. Whew.

In some ways, the latest months really have felt like "God does for you what you could not have done for yourself." I left corporate $100k living because I wanted to have a real, healthy, vibrant life. I have definitely had that over the last few years -- however the financial uncertainty and instability is not the easiest to cope with.
Can anyone relate?

I'm watching jobs vanish and loyal employees get dumped on their butts, even after working for years at jobs. It's powerful, tremendous, and sad. My temptation is always to blame (particularly during a criminal action like this), but in this case I want to offer my commiseration to those who are being betrayed.

Because ultimately, if a business is profitable and they are doing layoffs, it is those who are removing too much profit (generally via the upper positions) who have betrayed their loyal lower-income workers.

The biggest robbery in history -- cont'd

So by now you've bought the story that we're in a Depression/Recession, right? And the banks are 'desperate' for money, right? And we are inches away from a run on the banks, right?
So WTF is all this? (see article below)
Welcome to the whacked world of capitalism, where the rich execs live like kings, and the poor are supposed to shut up and take it.

Do you think Bush was a bad president? I do.
But I'm not a financial executive, or a weapons manufacturer exec, or a Haliburton employee, or an oil person. If I was one of those -- and totally ignored everything else -- there'd be ample incentive to think otherwise....

From a Yahoo News Associated Press article
The 116 banks that so far have received taxpayer dollars to boost them through the economic crisis gave their top tier of executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses and other benefits in 2007, an Associated Press analysis found.
...

Even where banks cut back on pay, some executives were left with seven- or eight-figure compensation that most people can only dream about. Richard D. Fairbank, the chairman of Capital One Financial Corp., ... still got $17 million in stock options. The McLean, Va.-based company received $3.56 billion in bailout money on Nov. 14.

John A. Thain, chief executive of Merrill Lynch, topped all corporate bank bosses with $83 million in earnings last year. Thain, a former chief operating officer for Goldman Sachs, came to Merrill Lynch in December 2007, avoiding the blame for a year in which Merrill lost $7.8 billion. Since he began work late in the year, he earned $57,692 in salary, a $15 million signing bonus and an additional $68 million in stock options. Like Goldman, Merrill tapped taxpayers for $10 billion on Oct. 28.

Wells Fargo of San Francisco, which took $25 billion in taxpayer bailout money, gave its top executives up to $20,000 each to pay financial planners.

At Bank of New York Mellon Corp., chief executive Robert P. Kelly's stipend for financial planning services came to $66,748, on top of his $975,000 salary and $7.5 million bonus. His car and driver cost $178,879. Kelly also received $846,000 in relocation expenses, including help selling his home in Pittsburgh and purchasing one in Manhattan, the company said.

Goldman Sachs, paying as much as $233,000 for an executive's car and driver, told its shareholders that financial counseling and chauffeurs were needed so executives would have more time to focus on their jobs.

JPMorgan Chase chairman James Dimon ran up a $211,182 tab for private jet travel last year when his family lived in Chicago and he was commuting to New York. The company received $25 billion in bailout funds.

Sherman, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said pay excesses undermine development of good bank economic policies and promote an escalating pay spiral among competing financial institutions — something particularly hard to take when banks then ask for rescue money. He wants them to come before Congress, like the automakers did, and spell out their spending plans for bailout funds. "The tougher we are on the executives that come to Washington, the fewer will come for a bailout," he said.

The Biggest Bank Robbery ever -- happening now

Let's call it what it is -- ** the biggest bank robbery of all time. **

Have you wondered why it's newsworthy that Obama has to take bold steps to protect homeowners? According to this Yahoo News article published today, the Treasury Department cannot prevent banks from using the bailout dollars for exhorbitant executive salaries.

Obama commits to support homeowners:
Obama's comments and the letter from House Republicans came a day after the Government Accountability Office, in the first comprehensive review of the rescue package, concluded that the Treasury Department has no mechanisms to ensure that banking institutions limit their top executives' pay and comply with other restrictions.

So far, the government has pledged to pour $250 billion into banks in return for partial ownership. It also has agreed to provide $40 billion to troubled insurer American International Group. In addition, $20 billion of the money was invested in Citigroup and another $20 billion went to the Federal Reserve to help ease credit stresses.

House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank said Treasury's response comes "very close to telling the institutions that they will be free to use the funds as they wish."

Back to rekzkarz' reality:
Wow. First, $20 billion doesn't sound like much when you're thinking about $750 billion, right? What does the number actually look like?
$20,000,000,000.00WHEW! That's BIG!!

If that $750 billion bailout went to the people themselves, ie US Citizens, we could all buy homes and have money to spare. It's already public money and should not be going to subsidize private industries which have poorly allocated their assets in risky debt -- particularly not to the upper class 'executives' of these failing companies.

Hey Bush, what happened to your "no subsidies" and "free enterprise" and "free market" slogans when your rich buddies screw up the US economy as badly as you screwed up USA Foreign Policy?

I was having a talk with some friends and we came to the conclusion that if it had been one or two banks doing these horrible banking practices, the CEO's would have been fired and the banks would have folded. But when ALL of the banks (with a few noteworthy exceptions), under the rubric of 'deregulation' and incentives for economic expansion, are allowed to practice STUPID economics which put everyone at risk ... THEN we are supposed to reward those institutions with public funding without ANY requirements, stipulations, or punitive treatment?

The same approach applied to credit card debtors sounds a little different: when a person gets way over their head in credit card debt, and then somehow loses their income because of gambling and is suddenly 'in the red', would we want the government to step in, pay off all their debts AND get them their salaries back -- without any consequence?!?!

Wasn't the issue originally the 'home mortgage' crisis? Why on Earth are we rewarding bankers (people with economics degrees and MBA's) for screwing up? Bush & co have succeeded in keeping the focus on the (stupid) banks and lending institutions and off the people that are actually suffering. Surprised?