Nothing at all to do with dogs, or with integrity if it comes to that!
Regular followers of this place know that I am a tremendous fan of George Monbiot, the Englishman who so regularly exposes stuff that needs to be aired and discussed. As his About page explains:
Here are some of the things I love: my family and friends, salt marshes, arguments, chalk streams, Russian literature, kayaking among dolphins, diversity of all kinds, rockpools, heritage apples, woods, fishing, swimming in the sea, gazpacho, ponds and ditches, growing vegetables, insects, pruning, forgotten corners, fossils, goldfinches, etymology, Bill Hicks, ruins, Shakespeare, landscape history, palaeoecology, Gavin and Stacey and Father Ted.
Here are some of the things I try to fight: undemocratic power, corruption, deception of the public, environmental destruction, injustice, inequality and the misallocation of resources, waste, denial, the libertarianism which grants freedom to the powerful at the expense of the powerless, undisclosed interests, complacency.
Here is what I fear: other people’s cowardice.
I still see my life as a slightly unhinged adventure whose perpetuation is something of a mystery. I have no idea where it will take me, and no ambitions other than to keep doing what I do. So far it’s been gripping.
Way back in the early days of Learning from Dogs, the blog that is, not the book, George was very gracious in giving me blanket permission to republish his posts, and many of them have appeared in this place.
So now read George Monbiot’s latest Rigging the Market. It is yet another example of what is going wrong in these times.
ooOOoo
Rigging the Market
3rd February 2016
Oil, the industry that threatens us with destruction, is being bailed out with public money
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 3rd February 2016
Those of us who predicted, during the first years of this century, an imminent peak in global oil supplies could not have been more wrong. People like the energy consultant Daniel Yergin, with whom I disputed the topic, appear to have been right: growth, he said, would continue for many years, unless governments intervened.
Oil appeared to peak in the United States in 1970, after which production fell for 40 years. That, we assumed, was the end of the story. But through fracking and horizontal drilling, production last year returned to the level it reached in 1969. Twelve years ago, the Texas oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens announced that “never again will we pump more than 82 million barrels”. By the end of 2015, daily world production reached 97 million.
Instead of a collapse in the supply of oil, we confront the opposite crisis: we’re drowning in the stuff. The reasons for the price crash – an astonishing slide from $115 a barrel to $30 over the past 20 months – are complex: among them are weaker demand in China and a strong dollar. But an analysis by the World Bank finds that changes in supply have been a much greater factor than changes in demand. Oil production has almost doubled in Iraq, as well as in the US. Saudi Arabia has opened its taps, to try to destroy the competition and sustain its market share: a strategy that some peak oil advocates once argued was impossible.
The outcomes are mixed. Cheaper oil means that more will be burnt, accelerating climate breakdown. But it also means less investment in future production. Already, $380 billion that was to have been ploughed into oil and gas fields has been held back. The first places to be spared are those in which extraction is most difficult or hazardous. Fragile ecosystems in the Arctic, in rainforests, in remote and stormy seas, have been granted a stay of execution.
BP reported a massive loss on Tuesday, partly because of low prices. A falling oil price drags down the price of gas, exposing coal mining companies to the risk of bankruptcy: good riddance to them. But some renewables firms are being tanked by the same forces: just as natural gas prices plunge, governments like the UK’s are stripping them of their subsidies. One day they will compete unaided, but not yet.
To cheer or lament these vicissitudes is pointless. They are chance events that counteract each other, and will at some point be reversed. The oil age, that threatens the conditions sustaining life on Earth, will come to an end through political, not economic, change. But the politics, for now, are against us.
Already, according to the IMF, more money is spent, directly and indirectly, on subsidising fossil fuels than on funding health services. The G20 countries alone spend over three times as much public money on oil, gas and coal than the whole world does on renewable energy. In 2014, subsidies for fossil fuel production in the UK reached £5 billion. Enough? Oh no. While essential public services are being massacred through want of funds, last year the government announced a further £1.3 billion in tax breaks for oil companies in the North Sea. Much of this money went to companies based overseas. They must think we’re mad.
Last week, David Cameron flew to Aberdeen, where he announced another £250 million of funding for, er, free enterprise, much (though not all) of which will be used to prop up oil and gas. A further £20 million of public money will be spent on seismic testing. Expect more whale strandings, and ask yourself why the industry that threatens our prosperity shouldn’t cover its own bloody costs.
The energy secretary, Amber Rudd, says she stands “100% behind” this “fantastic industry”. She will “build a bridge to the future for UK oil and gas”. Had she been born 300 years ago, I expect she would have said the same about the slave trade. In a few years’ time, her observations will look about as pertinent and about as ethical.
Oil companies have already been granted “ministerial buddies” to “improve access to government” – as if they didn’t have enough already. Now they get an “oil and gas ambassador”, and a new ministerial group, to “reiterate the UK Government’s commitment to supporting the oil and gas industry”. A leaked letter shows that Amber Rudd and other ministers want to silence local people, by transferring the power to decide whether fracking happens from elected councils to an unelected commission. Let’s sack the electorate and appoint a new one.
Compare all this to the government’s treatment of renewables. Local people have been given special new powers to stop onshore windfarms from being built. To the renewables companies Amber Rudd says this, “We need to work towards a market where success is driven by your ability to compete in a market, not by your ability to lobby government”. Strangely, the same rules do not apply to the oil companies. Your friends get protection. The free market is reserved for enemies.
Yes, I do mean enemies. An energy transition threatens the kind of people who attend the Conservative party’s fundraising balls. It corrodes the income of old school friends and weekend guests. For all the talk of enterprise, old money still nurtures its lively hatred of new money, and those who control the public purse use it to protect the incumbents from the parvenus. As they did for the bankers, our political leaders ensure that everyone must pay the costs imposed by the fossil fuel companies – except the fossil fuel companies.
So they lock us into the 20th Century, into industrial decline and air pollution, stranded assets and – through climate change – systemic collapse. Governments of this country cannot resist the future forever. Eventually they will succumb to the inexorable logic, and recognise that most of the vast accretions of fossil plant life in the Earth’s crust must be left where they are. And those massive expenditures of public money will prove to be worthless.
Crises expose corruption: that is one of the basic lessons of politics. The oil price crisis finds politicians with their free-market trousers round their ankles. When your friends are in trouble, the rigours imposed religiously upon the poor and public services suddenly turn out to be negotiable. Throw money at them, trash their competitors, rig the outcome: those who deserve the least receive the most.
I don’t know about you but I take the view that this essay from Monbiot is to be embraced. Simply because the more that stuff like this is aired, discussed and shared then the more likely that we ordinary folk can make a social and a political difference.
The following beautiful example of the unconditional love of a dog was seen by my on the Care2 Petitions and Causes site. It just had to be shared with you, dear reader, because it is such a powerful reminder of what love and caring for others delivers. It was originally seen here and is republished within the terms of Care2.
ooOOoo
Baby Elephant, Rejected By His Herd, Finds Hope Again With German Shepherd
When Ellie arrived at the rhino orphanage he was critically ill with an umbilical hernia and had little chance of survival.
The game reserve usually rehabilitates baby rhinos, victims of South Africa’s poaching crisis, but is also home to other African wildlife like elephants, buffalo, leopards, giraffes, zebras, hyenas, and crocodiles.
So why is Ellie here? He was brought to the orphanage after he was rejected by his herd, in spite of numerous attempts to reunite him with his family.
When Ellie the elephant first arrived, his rescuers didn’t think he would make it, but they nursed him day and night.
Photo Credit: Screenshot from Youtube video
As Maren Trendler, a rehabilitation and crisis response expert at the orphanage, explains, “He also had a huge umbilical hernia and abscess. … In about 99 percent of these cases an umbilical abscess of that nature is fatal. … Against all odds, this little elephant is still with us.”
Ellie had an intolerance to milk and nothing seemed to work. So the orphanage decided to make him a special milk formula, and he slowly started to stabilize.
Eventually Ellie’s physical health improved, but his mental health did not, because elephants are social animals and known to be hard to raise away from a herd. He was depressed and lethargic until Duma, the German shepherd hero, swooped in.
With the arrival of Duma, a former service and sniffer dog, things seemed to turn around for Ellie. The young elephant had been lethargic, not interested in anything, until the orphanage introduced the two at a sand pile. Immediately Ellie started being interested in life again. Duma and Ellie became friends, bonding in spite of their many differences.
Photo Credit: Screenshot from Youtube video
For the past few weeks, their relationship has been growing so much that the carers have a “hard time keeping Duma away from the elephant,” Trendler explains.
Ellie’s future is still uncertain, since elephants generally need to be part of a herd to develop and grow. But right now, Ellie and Duma are happy together.
Published on Jan 14, 2016
Everyone loves a canine companion, and this baby elephant is no exception! The tiny pachyderm arrived at the Thula Thula Rhino Orphanage in South Africa after being rejected by his herd. Critically ill, the youngster had very little chance of survival. But thanks to round-the-clock care from sanctuary staff, and a bit of help from a special canine companion, the baby elephant is on the road to a full recovery. http://www.earthorganization.org/proj… https://www.facebook.com/rhinoorphanage
ooOOoo
Time and time again, the world of dogs reminds us humans of what we need to learn, and to learn reasonably quickly, if we are to leave a sustainable, fair and equitable world for our grandchildren.
So many who devote so much time and energy, and money no doubt!
Let me state quite clearly my position with regard to hunting wild animals – I abhor it! Technically speaking if someone’s only means of feeding themselves, as in staying alive, is through hunting then I guess that is acceptable. But hunting for any other purposes is beyond the pale. I know that many people, including friends, who live in this part of America would heartedly disagree with my position on hunting. So be it.
Thus when Jean and I look at those who work so hard to protect, sustain and support wild animals we are almost speachless with our admiration for them.
So what’s brought all this on today?
For a long time I have been a follower of the blogsite Canis Lupus 101. On the home page of Canis Lupus 101, on the left-hand sidebar, one can read a plea from Maggie Caldwell, Press Secretary for @Earthjustice, that, in part, says:
For centuries, wolves have been viewed with suspicion and hostility, based in humankind’s deep-rooted fear of the unknown and need to control the natural world.
The film offers an abbreviated history of the relationship between wolves and people—told from the wolf’s perspective—from a time when they coexisted to an era in which people began to fear and exterminate the wolves.
The return of wolves to the northern Rocky Mountains has been called one of America’s greatest conservation stories. But wolves are facing new attacks by members of Congress who are gunning to remove Endangered Species Act protections before the species has recovered.
Our millions of magnificient and adorable dogs owe their place in today’s world to the wolf. The fact that those who care are still fighting hard to save the wild wolf shows how disgraceful it is for those that see no harm in hunting wolves. Hunting a wolf in my book is hardly any different than going out and hunting a dog!
So with all that out of me, now read about the following glorious efforts to save the wild Mexican wolf. Originally published over on Canis Lupus 101.
ooOOoo
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Poaching slows Mexican wolf population recovery (video)
Brandon Loomis, The Republic | January 27, 2016
The annual Mexican gray wolf population survey in Alpine, Ariz., shows that poaching is slowing the species’ recovery.
After the wild Mexican wolf population tops 100 for the first time, 15 illegal shootings may slow recovery.
(Photo: Mark Henle, Mark Henle/The Republic)
ALPINE — Biologists hauled a 60-pound Mexican gray wolf from the chopper on Monday, limp but healthy with a lush winter mane. They called it the wolf’s worst day in months — dazed from having been darted from above, still rapidly licking his nose through a blindfold muzzle — but the male wolf was one of the fortunate among a divisive and still-embattled breed that has weathered an especially perilousyear of poachings.
Unknown shooters have illegally killed at least 15 Mexican wolves since officials reported a year ago that a record 110 were roaming wild in eastern Arizona and western New Mexico, according to a lead state biologist on the recovery program.
The poaching losses tripled from 2014, and were likely unprecedented in the 18 years since the first captive-bred lobos brought their once-exiled howls back to the Blue Range spanning the Apache and Gila national forests.
Wolf-recovery specialists, like those in Alpine this week, are working to make sure the survivors flourish instead of backsliding to a more critically endangered status.
The team of federal and state biologists carried Wolf No. M1342 on a mesh sling. They brought the wolf inside their pine-ringed Alpine field station and slid him onto a slab wooden table for a checkup and shots to keep him robust for an important breeding season this spring. They injected a second sedative that would put the wolf out cold for about an hour.
The scientists gathered round the Elk Horn pack’s would-be alpha male, prodding veins for intravenous fluids and pushing an oxygen tube up his black nostrils.They were counting on the wolf to return healthy to his young mate on snowy Escudilla Mountain, and produce their first successful litter to help extend recent annual gains in a slow-recovering population.
AZCENTRAL
As recently as five years ago, there were an estimated 50 Mexican wolves in the wild, less than half of last year’s count. Whether this year’s survey finds the population continuing to grow will depend on the 40 or so pups observed since last spring. Historically, about half of pups have survived their first year.
Besides the wolves that were shot, about a dozen more adults are missing, “fate unknown.”
M1342 was lucky to have a dart dangling from his paw, and not a trail of lead fragments through his chest. Shootings have always been a key threat since the 1998 reintroduction.
The anti-wolf mentality commonly known as “shoot, shovel and shut up” is hard to combat. Bullets typically pass through a wolf’s body and leave little useful evidence, said Jeff Dolphin, Mexican wolf field supervisor for the Arizona Game and Fish Department. “You just can’t be everywhere at once,” Dolphin said.
Only a handful of what may be dozens of shooters have faced charges related to killing one of the protected wolves since 1998. Federal, state and non-governmental organizations offer a combined reward of up to $58,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of a wolf poacher.
A controversial task
Susan Dicks, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife veterinarian examines Wolf No. M1342. (Photo: Mark Henle/The Republic)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service veterinarian Susan Dicks coached the team of biologists and field technicians tending to M1342: how to draw blood for DNA and other tests; where to inject a rabies vaccine; how to determine age by measuring teeth; how to increase fluids or pour cooling alcohol on the paws if his temperature rises past 103 or so.
Besides the preventive medicine and data collection, the prime objective for M1342’s capture during a yearly aerial wolf survey was to fit it with a new transmitter collar. The collar he had received in a similar operation last year hadn’t functioned, so biologists only knew the wolf’s whereabouts by occasional observation. Uncollared wolves are difficult to track to ensure they’re not getting into trouble, such as by attacking livestock.
Not every wild Mexican wolf is collared, but scientists like to have them on a wolf of every generation in a pack. Last year’s survey counted 19 packs, including eight known to have a breeding pair.
AZCENTRAL
Studies show that these free-ranging wolves eat elk upward of 80 percent of the time, but cows are also occasionally on the menu. A government and non-profit fund pays for the losses. So far, the wolf program has paid out $68,000 for 50 confirmed livestock losses in 2015, and another $25,000 in claims is awaiting action by a compensation council. “It’s such a controversial program, and (people) want us to manage these animals,” Dicks explained. “The way we manage is with that collar. It communicates and tells us what they’re doing.”
The latest in a string of political struggles over the lightweight cousin of more plentiful northern gray wolves involves where they should be allowed.
Wolf advocates say they need unoccupied territory such as the forests around the Grand Canyon to sustain a population large and dispersed enough to withstand sudden die-offs. The governors of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah recentlyco-signed a letter to the federal program opposing such a northern expansion into previously undocumented wolf territory and instead backing a push south into Mexico.
The number of wolves needed to ensure long-term survival also is in dispute. Some want to hold the line around today’s numbers, but others say at least a sevenfold increase is needed.
Mexican wolf biologist Julia Smith carries Wolf No. M1342 from the helicopter to the Alpine field station. He was darted from a helicopter to have his radio collar replaced.
Federal recovery effort
Mark Henle/The Republic Arizona is a partner in the federal recovery effort within a recovery zone that stretches from New Mexico and onto the Mogollon Rim. Officials say the state has spent $3 million since the recovery program began with captive animals in the 1980s.
This week, the team said one wolf had roamed west to within 35 miles of Payson, though it was unclear whether it was wandering alone. Others were prowling below the Rim, south of Alpine.
M1342’s gray-brown fur was thick, with no signs of mange or fleas, but Dicks squeezed an anti-parasite lotion onto the skin between the shoulders as an extra precaution. The team slid the wolf into a large dog crate and set the wolf outside to recover his senses for a truck ride back up the mountain to freedom. “We’re trying to help them out before breeding season,” Dicks said. “The population is so small.”
The subspecies had dropped to seven holdouts in Mexico during the late 20th century, survivors of private and government hunters who cleared the region of what had commonly been considered a menace. They were removed from the wild and stocked a captive breeding program that at last count fostered more than 250 wolves at 55 sites in the U.S. and Mexico.
AZCENTRAL
A few years ago, the population struggled to stay atop 50 from one year to the next, hindered not just by illegal shootings or natural causes, but by government agents shooting or removing to captivity wolves that attacked livestock. Since then, the program has focused its efforts on conflict-avoidance, said John Oakleaf, field coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
With help from partners such as Defenders of Wildlife, the government has enlisted ranchers who accept payment for the wolves’ presence but also get help from range riders protecting cattle. It may have kept the number of illegal shootings from climbing even higher. “In the end,” Oakleaf said, “the tolerance of humans for wolves is what allows them to persist or not persist in the wild. It’s what drove them to extinction, or near extinction, and it’s what’s driving them toward recovery now.”
Final numbers next month
The Fish and Wildlife Service will release the final numbers from this year’s count next month. Until then, total deaths aren’t officially tallied, but Oakleaf acknowledged the illegal shootings will be “as high as we’ve ever documented.”
Dolphin put the number at 15, and said he doubts the population estimate will remain above 100 this year. Still, he’s optimistic after years of bigger struggles to stabilize the population.
All of the wolves now in the wild were born out there, which may make them better adapted than their parents were to hunting and surviving on game. A recent experiment showed that it’s possible to drop a captive-bred pup or two in with newborn wild litters, and the wild packs will raise them as their own. “The urgent thing is to get more wolves with genetically diverse backgrounds on the ground as quickly as possible.”
Wolf advocates are also cautiously optimistic, though they believe the packs need more territory, and more of a boost from now-rare releases of captive pairs in new haunts. “If you put (captive-bred) pups in the dens of existing packs, you may be increasing the number of animals,” Center for Biological Diversity wolf specialist Michael Robinson said, “but you’re not increasing their distribution.”
A common complaint of wolf proponents is that Mexican wolves, coming from such a limited breeding stock, lack genetic diversity and pay for it with smaller litters than other wolves have. “The urgent thing is to get more wolves with genetically diverse backgrounds on the ground as quickly as possible,” Robinson said.
Returning groggily to the wild
Wolf No. M1342 is released at Escudilla Mountain. (Photo: Mark Henle/The Republic)
After M1342 had regained enough of his senses to lift his head and sit up in the crate, Arizona Game and Fish biologist Brent Wolf and two colleagues loaded the crate onto a four-wheel-drive pickup and drove him back up Escudilla Mountain.
They drove as far as the truck would take them without getting stuck in the snow, getting as near as possible to the spot where the helicopter crew had darted M1342 and then set down to take the male from his mate.The return crew set the crate down at the edge of a snowy alpine meadow surrounded by scraggly willows and fat ponderosa pines, many of them torched and left bare by the massive 2011 Wallow Fire.
The groggy wolf took a few minutes to crawl out, then sat in the snow for several more. His golden-brown eyes stared toward the crew inside the pickup, and he licked the dart wound while waiting for the sedation to free his hind legs. The wolf walked slowly across the meadow, likely to be reunited with his mate once he heard a howl.
The two are believed to have mated last year, but did not produce any surviving pups, Wolf said. That’s common among first-timers, he said, and their experience should help them when they try again. “I’d be shocked if they didn’t have pups this spring,” Wolf said while reversing and turning the truck to head back down the mountain.
GALLERY
Mexican wolf biologist Julia Smith carries Wolf No. M1342 from the helicopter to the Alpine field station. He was darted from a helicopter to have his radio collar replaced. Mark Henle/The RepublicJulia Smith holds Wolf No. M1342 on his way to the Alpine field station. Mark Henle/The RepublicMexican wolf biologist Brent Wolf weighs Wolf No. M1342 in the Alpine field office. Mark Henle/The RepublicWolf No. M1342’s teeth are measured. Mark Henle/The RepublicMeasurements are taken of Wolf No. M1342’s paws. Mark Henle/The RepublicWolf No. M1342 is 3 years old and a member of the Elk Horn Pack. Mark Henle/The RepublicWolf No. M1342 got a checkup and shots to keep him robust for the important breeding season this spring. Mark Henle/The RepublicFrom left, Dr. Susan Dicks and intern Rowan Converse carry Wolf No. M1342’s kennel. Mark Henle/The RepublicFrom left, interns Hannah Manninen and Becca Thomas-Kuzilik release Wolf No. M1342 at Escudilla Mountain. Mark Henle/The RepublicWolf No. M1342 walked slowly across the meadow, likely to be reunited with his mate once he heard a howl. Mark Henle/The RepublicWolf No. M1342 and his mate are believed to have mated last year, but did not produce any surviving pups. Researchers say their experience should help the wolves when they try again. Mark Henle/The Republic
ooOOoo
Golly, I so do admire the good people who undertake this caring work on behalf of the wolves. And great photographs Mark Henle of The Republic.
According to the National Anti-Vivisection Society, dogs taking part in scientific experiments are made to inhale toxic substances through masks, force feed through tubes, and are strapped in harnesses while being injected with drugs.
The facility is owned by a US firm and would be Britain’s second facility for breeding beagles specifically to be cut open and experimented on while still alive.
The other facility breeds 3,000 beagles for animal testing each year.
As at 09:30 PST yesterday, the target of 310,000 supporters of the petition was just short by 761 persons. Fingers and toes crossed that by the time this post is published the target will have been met. I know there are many caring readers of this blog who wouldn’t hesitate for a moment to sign the petition.
Yesterday, I offered the account of physicist Paul Dirac falling in love with Margit Wigner, the sister of a Hungarian physicist. It was my way of opening a window into the mind of one individual, albeit a very clever one, falling in love. However, the conclusion, that won’t surprise anyone, is that the state of love in us humans is more mystery than fact!
Dogs have no such problem in showing their state of love!
A few days ago, in comments to a recent post, the author, John Zande wrote:
We were so heartbroken after losing Arthur so unexpectedly (an astonishing dog we found with a massive tumor in his eye) in Sao Paulo we literally moved cities. I couldn’t stand being in the same neighbourhood. Too much reminded me of him.
Then in response to my reply went on to say:
They are amazing creatures. The dog across the street from us died almost a year ago to the day. Beautiful dog, not so good owners (never paid her any attention, fed her crap… we’d sneakily feed her mince and chicken and treats every night). She had many male visitors (they never neutered her), but one in particular, Hop-along, a crippled dog from a street over considered her his wife/girlfriend. When she died it was only us and Hop-along who grieved. It was amazing. He held vigil outside her house for 2 weeks solid after she died, day and night. He never left. He just stood there.
More than thirty-five years ago, when I was working in Colchester, Essex, England, I met Roger Davis. It was Roger that introduced me to gliding (sailplaning in American speak!) courtesy of Rattlesden Gliding Club. Roger and I have stayed in touch ever since including, of course, keeping in touch with Sheila, Roger’s wife, and much of the family.
Yesterday, in an exchange of emails, Roger sent this:
Just back from taking Ralph (now 89) to day surgery at Broomfields.His companion since Freda his wife died two years ago is Sasha, a blonde Alsatian. He always had Alsatians so no surprise when this one appeared.
The love and companionship offered by Sasha to Ralph.
I was moved equally by John’s love for Arthur, Hop-along’s love for his female canine love, and the love of Sasha for Ralph.
With seventeen pets here at home Jean and I should live forever!
Another Saturday and another gentle post about the power of our wonderful pets. (Oh, and who, as I did, missed the fact that yesterday was not only a Friday the Thirteenth but the third one this year!)
Anyway, back to the plot!
Last Monday, Mother Nature Network published an item about how good pets are for our health. It seemed the perfect item to share with all of you this Saturday.
ooOOoo
11 studies that prove pets are good for your health
Check out the ways your 4-legged friends enhance your physical and emotional health.
By: Sidney Stevens, November 9, 2015.
Pets strengthen our hearts, calm our nerves and a whole lot more. (Photo: Juanedc.com /flickr)
If you have pets you already know the joy and love they bring to your life. Now science is confirming just how good they really are for you — both mentally and physically.
How do they help? One theory is that pets boost our oxytocin levels. Also known as the “bonding hormone” or “cuddle chemical,” oxytocin enhances social skills, decreases blood pressure and heart rate, boosts immune function and raises tolerance for pain. It also lowers stress, anger and depression.
No surprise then that keeping regular company with a dog or cat (or another beloved beast) appears to offer all these same benefits and more. Read on to discover the many impressive ways a pet can make you healthier, happier and more resilient.
1. Pets alleviate allergies and boost immune function
One of your immune system’s jobs is to identify potentially harmful substances and unleash antibodies to ward off the threat. But sometimes it overreacts and misidentifies harmless stuff as dangerous, causing an allergic reaction. Think red eyes, itchy skin, runny nose and wheezing. You’d think that having pets might trigger allergies by kicking up sneeze-and-wheeze-inducing dander and fur. But it turns out that living with a dog or cat during the first year of life not only cuts your chances of having pet allergies in childhood and later on but also revs up your immune system and lowers your risk of eczema and asthma. In fact, just a brief pet encounter can invigorate your disease-defense system. In one study, petting a dog for only 18 minutes raised immunoglobulin A (IgA) levels in college students’ saliva, a sign of robust immune function.
2. Pets up your fitness quotient
This one applies more to dog owners. If you like walking with your favorite canine, chances are you’re fitter and trimmer than your non-dog-walking counterparts and come closer to meeting recommended physical activity levels. One study of more than 2,000 adults found that regular dog walkers got more exercise and were less likely to be obese than those who didn’t walk a dog. In another study, older dog walkers (ages 71-82) walked faster and longer than non-pooch-walkers, plus they were more mobile at home.
Dog owners who take their canine companions on walks tend to be trimmer and fitter than their fellow dog-less peers. (Photo: AMatveev/Shutterstock)
3. Pets dial down stress
When stress comes your way, your body goes into fight-or-flight mode, releasing hormones like cortisol to crank out more energy-boosting blood sugar and epinephrine to get your heart and blood pumping. All well and good for our ancestors who needed quick bursts of speed to dodge predatory saber-toothed tigers and stampeding mastodons. But when we live in a constant state of fight-or-flight from ongoing stress at work and the frenetic pace of modern life, these physical changes take their toll on our bodies, including raising our risk of heart disease and other dangerous conditions. Contact with pets seem to counteract this stress response by lowering stress hormones and heart rate. They also lower anxiety and fear levels (psychological responses to stress) and elevate feelings of calmness.
4. Pets boost heart health
Pets shower us with love so it’s not surprising they have a big impact on our love organ: the heart. Turns out time spent with a cherished critter is linked to better cardiovascular health, possibly due to the stress-busting effect mentioned above. Studies show that dog owners have a lower risk of heart disease, including lower blood pressure and cholesterol. Dogs also benefit patients who already have cardiovascular disease. They’re not only four time more likely to be alive after a year if they own a dog, but they’re also more likely to survive a heart attack. And don’t worry, cat owners — feline affection confers a similar effect. One 10-year study found that current and former cat owners were 40 percent less likely to suffer a heart attack and 30 percent less likely to die of other cardiovascular diseases.
5. Make you a social — and date — magnet
Four-legged companions (particularly the canine variety that pull us out of the house for daily walks) help us make more friends and appear more approachable, trustworthy and date-worthy. In one study, people in wheelchairs who had a dog received more smiles and had more conversations with passersby than those without a dog. In another study, college students who were asked to watch videos of two psychotherapists (depicted once with a dog and once without) said they felt more positively toward them when they had a dog and more likely to disclose personal information. And good news for guys: research shows that women are more willing to give out their number to men with a canine buddy.
A dog can make you appear friendlier and more approachable to others. (Photo: CandyBox Images/Shutterstock)
6. Provides a social salve for Alzheimer’s patients
Just as non-human pals strengthen our social skills and connection, cats and dogs also offer furry, friendly comfort and social bonding to people suffering from Alzheimer’s and other forms of brain-destroying dementia. Several canine caregiver programs now exist to assist at-home dementia patients with day-to-day tasks, such as fetching medication, reminding them to eat and guiding them home if they’ve wandered off course. Many assisted-living facilities also keep resident pets or offer therapy animal visits to support and stimulate patients. Studies show creature companions can reduce behavioral issues among dementia patients by boosting their moods and raising their nutritional intake.
7. Enhances social skills in kids with autism
One in nearly 70 American kids has autism (also known as autism spectrum disorder, or ASD), a developmental disability that makes it tough to communicate and interact socially. Not surprisingly, animals can also help these kids connect better to others. One study found that youngsters with ASD talked and laughed more, whined and cried less and were more social with peers when guinea pigs were present. A multitude of ASD animal-assisted therapy programs have sprung up in recent years, featuring everything from dogs and dolphins to alpacas, horses and even chickens.
Animal-assisted therapy helps kids with autism and other developmental disabilities learn social skills. (Photo: UCI UC Irvine/flickr)
8. Dampens depression and boosts mood
Pets keep loneliness and isolation at bay and make us smile. In other words, their creature camaraderie and ability to keep us engaged in daily life (via endearing demands for food, attention and walks) are good recipes for warding off the blues. Research is ongoing, but animal-assisted therapy is proving particularly potent in deterring depression and other mood disorders. Studies show that everyone from older men in a veterans hospital who were exposed to an aviary filled with songbirds to depressed college students who spent time with dogs reported feeling more positive.
9. Defeats PTSD
People haunted by trauma like combat, assault and natural disasters are particularly vulnerable to a mental health condition called post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Sure enough, studies show that the unconditional love — and oxytocin boost — of a pet can help remedy the flashbacks, emotional numbness and angry outbursts linked to PTSD. Even better, there are now several programs that pair specially trained service dogs and cats with veterans suffering from PTSD.
10. Fights cancer
Animal-assisted therapy helps cancer patients heal emotionally and physically. Preliminary findings of an on-going clinical trial by the American Humane Association shows that therapy dogs not only erase loneliness, depression and stress in kids fighting cancer, but canines can also motivate them to eat and follow treatment recommendations better — in other words participate more actively in their own healing. Likewise, new research reveals a similar lift in emotional well-being for adults undergoing the physical rigors of cancer treatment. Even more astounding, dogs (with their stellar smelling skills) are now being trained to literally sniff out cancer.
11. Puts the kibosh on pain
Millions live with chronic pain, but animals can soothe some of it away. In one study, 34 percent of patients with the pain disorder fibromyalgia reported pain relief (and a better mood and less fatigue) after visiting for 10-15 minutes with a therapy dog compared to only 4 percent of patients who just sat in a waiting room. In another study, those who had undergone total joint replacement surgery needed 28 percent less pain medication after daily visits from a therapy dog than those who got no canine contact.
ooOOoo
When I was setting this post up and copying across all the many links I was aware that there was a mountain of information out there. You may want to take some time and explore those links. For example, the link to HABRI- Human-Animal Research Initiative looks incredibly interesting. Then there was the link to the work being undertaken by the American Humane Association, that link being to this video that I am presenting here to close off today’s post.
Wherever you are in the world look after yourself and care for all those lovely pets out there. Love them so dearly!
Staying with the theme of our lives being “rebooted” by our dogs.
Again, as so often occurs, a thought or reply left by someone to a previous post kicked off a new post for me.
So it was yesterday when Hariod commented: “This is the organisation that brought dogs into the care home my father lived in: http://www.petsastherapy.org/”
That website is full of great information and any readers living in the UK who have not come across them before are highly recommended to have a good browse. One item that caught my eye was the Precious Memories link.
The loss of a pet is always a devastating and traumatic experience but even more so for the owner of a PAT dog or cat who has brought much love and companionship to many people, as well as to their owners.
This page contains lasting memorials to some PAT dogs and PAT cats who have given much to society by regularly visiting in Hospitals, Hospices, Residential homes or Day Care Centres.
Baggy was a Finnish Lapphund and a wonderful and loving companion. She enjoyed taking part in many canine events including passing the KCGC Bronze, Silver & Gold awards, agility, showing and heel work to music, Baggy loved to go on a camping trip in the caravan or a trip down the river in our boat.
Baggy had two litters of puppies and two sons one from each litter are PAT dogs and her grand daughter is also a PAT dog. Baggy was my first PAT dog and she loved to go visiting in our local Residential home bringing joy and love to many people.
We love and miss Baggy so much our special sweet little friend.
Sheila Hall
The last aspect of the Pets As Therapy site that I want to refer to is their blog: Dog Dog Dog. Do drop in there and read some of the wonderful stories of those caring dogs.
That very nicely leads on to two videos that I quickly came across.
The first is described, thus:
Published on Dec 19, 2013
Follow Fraser, a black lab-golden mix, who has been a part of HCA Virginia’s unique Pet Therapy program since 2007. For several years, Fraser has spread comfort, compassionate care and joy to the faces of countless patients and staff at Chippenham and Johnston-Willis Hospitals from Tucker Pavilion and the Thomas Johns Cancer Hospital to many other areas. Catch a glimpse of how pet therapy is a source of alternative care for those in need.
While the second is about the therapy dog test.
Published on Dec 16, 2012
Achilles, my German Shepherd Dog, taking the Therapy Dog International test for certification.
Having this certification will allow Achilles and I to visit people in the hospital and other health care facilities.
Achilles is an AKC Obedience trained competitor and was able to pass the TDI test using that training and experience rather than special training for the test.
If you are interested in making your dog a TDI Therapy Dog go to their web site for information on how to accomplish that.
This is no conundrum: a direct contrast to yesterday.
The benefits of having a dog or two (or nine) are boundless and have been documented for thousands of years. Indeed, a quick web search revealed that Alexander Pope, the 18th-century English poet, is the attributed author of the quote, “Histories are more full of examples of the fidelity of dogs than of friends.”
Nevertheless, it was still a joy to come across the documentary film Dogs On The Inside.
Filmed in a Massachusetts prison, DOGS ON THE INSIDE follows the birth of a relationship between abandoned rescue dogs and prison inmates as they work together toward a second chance at a better life. Giving a voice to a forgotten dog and a forgotten man, the film is a life-affirming testament to the power of second chances.
The film was released in February 2014, and here is the trailer.
In general, it seems to have gathered good reviews with this one from Amazon being typical of what I have seen.
I had tears in my eyes during several segments of this film. Such a lovely connection between the rescue workers and the dogs. Then, the inmates and the dogs. And, finally, the photos of their forever homes and families. Bravo to all at Don’t Throw Us Away. People like you, who work to save and rehab these animals, are amazing.
You are also recommended to read the review that is on the Ecorazzi website. Here’s a flavour of that review:
Two parties neglected and forgotten become the powerful emotional center of an uplifting new documentary, Dogs on the Inside.
We’re taken to Massachusetts, where there exists a unique, mutually-beneficial rehabilitation program that finds rescue dogs paired with prison inmates.
This documentary, from directors Brean Cunningham and Douglas Seirup, follows a handful of inmates at a correctional facility involved in Don’t Throw Us Away, a program that partners them with neglected dogs. For the animal, benefits include exercise, attention, and care while shelters remain crowded. For the prisoners, they have a chance to form connections and work towards parole.
It’s fascinating throughout watching both sides – scared dogs and (emotionally) guarded inmates – warm to one another, seemingly leaving their past behind.
That’s at the heart of this illuminating, heartwarming film: second chances. Early on, it’s easy to see the parallels between these two groups – with the comparisons handled tactfully throughout a film that never strays from its simple, honest goal. Dogs never preaches or calls for political or social change; it more so asks the viewer to be willing to forgive and welcome in those which have been cast aside. When an inmate says, ‘they come from a bad life, they haven’t seen love in while,’ he isn’t necessarily talking just about the dog.
Let me close with this heart-stirring photograph that was included in the above review.
So much to learn from our precious, gorgeous dogs!
What is happening in beautiful Indonesia is beyond imagination.
I am indebted to John Zande for introducing me to the word kakistocracy, that he explained means: “government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power.”
For what is happening in Indonesia could well be an awful example of kakistocracy in action.
Like numerous others I knew that there were fires burning in Indonesia and that it was all somehow caught up in illegal logging, but knew little over and above that. And that is the crux of the title of a recent essay from George Monbiot: Nothing to See Here. It really is a “must read” essay and is republished below with Mr. Monbiot’s very kind permission. As with most of his essays, they are published in the Guardian newspaper. In this case, the Guardian version includes photographs that vividly underline the terrible situation out there. I agonised about copying them from the Guardian article, without explicit permission to so do, but have nevertheless done so on the basis of this story needing to make the maximum impact on readers. The photographs are inserted in Monbiot’s essay very closely to the format that is presented in the Guardian article.
ooOOoo
Nothing to See Here
30th October 2015
‘Children are being prepared for evacuation in warships already some have choked to death. Species are going up in smoke at an untold rate.’ Photograph: Ulet Ifansasti/Getty Images
In the greatest environmental disaster of the 21st Century (so far), Indonesia has been blotted out by smoke. And the media.
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 30th October 2015.
I’ve often wondered how the media would respond when eco-apocalypse struck. I pictured the news programmes producing brief, sensational reports, while failing to explain why it was happening or how it might be stopped. Then they would ask their financial correspondents how the disaster affected share prices, before turning to the sport. As you can probably tell, I don’t have an ocean of faith in the industry for which I work.
What I did not expect was that they would ignore it.
A great tract of the Earth is on fire. It looks as you might imagine hell to be. The air has turned ochre: visibility in some cities has been reduced to 30 metres. Children are being prepared for evacuation in warships; already some have choked to death. Species are going up in smoke at an untold rate. It is almost certainly the greatest environmental disaster of the 21st Century – so far.
[NB: The video that is embedded in the Guardian version is without sound. I have added one that is also a Greenpeace video, with sound, further on in the post.]
And the media? It’s talking about the dress the Duchess of Cambridge wore to the James Bond premiere, Donald Trump’s idiocy du jour and who got eliminated from the Halloween episode of Dancing with the Stars. The great debate of the week, dominating the news across much of the world? Sausages: are they really so bad for your health?
What I’m discussing is a barbeque on a different scale. Fire is raging across the 5000-kilometre length of Indonesia. It is surely, on any objective assessment, more important than anything else taking place today. And it shouldn’t require a columnist, writing in the middle of a newspaper, to say so. It should be on everyone’s front page.
It is hard to convey the scale of this inferno, but here’s a comparison that might help: it is currently producing more carbon dioxide than the US economy. In three weeks the fires have released more CO2 than the annual emissions of Germany.
‘The great debate of the week, dominating the news across much of the world? Sausages: are they really so bad for your health?’ Photograph: Abdul Qodir/AFP/Getty
But that doesn’t really capture it. This catastrophe cannot be measured only in parts per million. The fires are destroying treasures as precious and irreplaceable as the archaeological remains being levelled by Isis. Orang utans, clouded leopards, sun bears, gibbons, the Sumatran rhinoceros and Sumatran tiger, these are among the threatened species being driven from much of their range by the flames. But there are thousands, perhaps millions, more.
One of the burning islands is West Papua, a nation that has been illegally occupied by Indonesia since 1963. I spent six months there when I was 24, investigating some of the factors that have led to the current disaster. At the time, it was a wonderland, rich with endemic species in every swamp and valley. Who knows how many of those have vanished in the past few weeks? This week I have pored and wept over photos of places I loved, that have now been reduced to ash.
Nor do the greenhouse gas emissions capture the impact on the people of these lands. After the last great conflagration, in 1997, there was a missing cohort in Indonesia of 15,000 children under the age of three, attributed to air pollution. This, it seems, is worse. The surgical masks being distributed across the nation will do almost nothing to protect those living in a sunless smog. Members of parliament in Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo) have had to wear face masks during debates. The chamber is so foggy that they must have difficulty recognising each other.
It’s not just the trees that are burning. It is the land itself. Much of the forest sits on great domes of peat. When the fires penetrate the earth, they smoulder for weeks, sometimes months, releasing clouds of methane, carbon monoxide, ozone and exotic gases like ammonium cyanide. The plumes extend for hundreds of miles, causing diplomatic conflicts with neighbouring countries.
Why is this happening? Indonesia’s forests have been fragmented for decades by timber and farming companies. Canals have been cut through the peat to drain and dry it. Plantation companies move in to destroy what remains of the forest to plant monocultures of pulpwood, timber and palm oil. The easiest way to clear the land is to torch it. Every year, this causes disasters. But in an extreme El Niño year like this one, we have a perfect formula for environmental catastrophe.
The current president, Joko Widodo, is – or wants to be – a democrat. But he presides over a nation in which fascism and corruption flourish. As Joshua Oppenheimer’s documentary The Act of Killing shows, leaders of the death squads that helped murder around a million people during Suharto’s terror in the 1960s, with the approval of the West, have since prospered through other forms of organised crime, including illegal deforestation.
They are supported by a paramilitary organisation with three million members, called Pancasila Youth. With its orange camo-print uniforms, scarlet berets, sentimental gatherings and schmaltzy music, it looks like a fascist militia as imagined by JG Ballard. There has been no truth, no reconciliation; the mass killers are still greeted as heroes and feted on television. In some places, especially West Papua, the political murders continue.
Those who commit crimes against humanity don’t hesitate to commit crimes against nature. Though Joko Widodo seems to want to stop the burning, his reach is limited. His government’s policies are contradictory: among them are new subsidies for palm oil production that make further burning almost inevitable. Some plantation companies, prompted by their customers, have promised to stop destroying the rainforest. Government officials have responded angrily, arguing that such restraint impedes the country’s development. That smoke blotting out the nation, which has already cost it some $30 billion? That, apparently, is development.
Our leverage is weak, but there are some things we can do. Some companies using palm oil have made visible efforts to reform their supply chains; but others seem to move slowly and opaquely. Starbucks, PepsiCo, Kraft Heinz and Unilever are examples. Don’t buy their products until they change.
On Monday, Widodo was in Washington, meeting Barack Obama. Obama, the official communiqué recorded, “welcomed President Widodo’s recent policy actions to combat and prevent forest fires”. The ecopalypse taking place as they conferred, that makes a mockery of these commitments, wasn’t mentioned.
Governments ignore issues when the media ignores them. And the media ignores them because … well there’s a question with a thousand answers, many of which involve power. But one reason is the complete failure of perspective in a deskilled industry dominated by corporate press releases, photo ops and fashion shoots, where everyone seems to be waiting for everyone else to take a lead. The media makes a collective non-decision to treat this catastrophe as a non-issue, and we all carry on as if it’s not happening.
At the climate summit in Paris in December, the media, trapped within the intergovernmental bubble of abstract diplomacy and manufactured drama, will cover the negotiations almost without reference to what is happening elsewhere. The talks will be removed to a realm with which we have no moral contact. And, when the circus moves on, the silence will resume. Is there any other industry that serves its customers so badly?
A quick web search will offer endless pictures of this great tragedy but I will leave you with three; two showing the extent of the smoke and one that is much more an intimate photograph of the suffering animals.
oooo
oooo
In this Thursday, March 1, 2012, Indonesian veterinarian Yenni Saraswati, top center, of Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Programme (SOCP) examines the condition of an injured Sumatran orangutan found by environmental activists at a palm oil plantation in Rimba Sawang village, Aceh province, Indonesia. Conservationists say fires in an Indonesian swamp forest may have killed a third of the rare Sumatran orangutans living there and all of them may be lost this year. Binsar Bakkara, Associated Press.
Monbiot wrote: “Those who commit crimes against humanity don’t hesitate to commit crimes against nature.”
One cannot avoid reflecting that this would not have happened if there hadn’t been, “government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power.”
This is not some intellectual exercise; far from it!
As often happens, a number of seemingly disconnected articles and reports seem to have provided a common theme. A theme that has previously been aired on Learning from Dogs yet a theme that always needs to be in the front of our faces: integrity.
The revelation that humanity’s dominant characteristic is, er, humanity will come as no surprise to those who have followed recent developments in behavioural and social sciences. People, these findings suggest, are basically and inherently nice.
Saying that “people are good, while tolerating bad things” is an ineffective morality. The crux, indeed, is the moral nature of institutions, controlled by a few, not whether humans are kind or not.
That struck me as central to the theme: it is the terrible lack of integrity that we see in those who hold positions of power that totally overrides the premise that people are fundamentally good.
The next article read was an essay by Professor Michael Perelman published on Naked Capitalism. Perelman is a professor of economics at California State University. He also writes at Unsettling Economics. Here is a little from that essay:
The architecture of inequality must be carefully constructed. As the founding fathers of the United States clearly understood, democracy must be kept in check. For this purpose, they invented the Electoral College to prevent the president from being elected by popular vote.
To ensure an effective electoral system, an obsequious media must be skilled in drowning the public with a flood of misinformation to maintain a constant level of fear to make them more likely to side with the CS (corporate system).
If there is ever one example of how that lack of integrity manifests itself in our world it is through inequality. Professor Perelman’s essay is clearly written “tongue-in-cheek” but that doesn’t lessen the impact of his essay. Try his closing paragraphs: (CES = a subset of CS; WEM = The Wondrous Efficiency of Markets)
Regulators are not the only ones to see the benefits of working with the CES. Politicians who resign or are defeated are almost inevitably destined to enjoy the benefits of their dedication to the WEM with the returns from taking a rewarding position with a major corporation, lobbying, or even a lucrative contract to write a book that virtually no one would want to read.
When done correctly, this system works magnificently, although it periodically it seems to fall apart until the detested government apparatus rescues it. In the meantime, huge amounts of wealth and income fall into the hands of the top 1%, the people of greatest importance, while the rest of the public can enjoy watching the spectacular performance of the CES, a reward worthy of their place in society especially because envy of the wealthy brethren will obviously make them work harder to succeed, adding to WEM.
All power to WEM!
Does this have anything to do with dogs?
Yes!
Let me steal a little from Chapter 16: Community from my forthcoming book:
When dogs lived in the wild, their natural pack size was about fifty animals and there were just three dogs that had pack status: the mentor, minder and nanny dogs, as described in Chapter 5. [Pharaoh: the Teaching Dog] As was explained in that chapter, all three dogs of status are born into their respective roles and their duties in their pack are instinctive. There was no such thing as competition for that role as all the other dogs in that natural pack grouping would be equal participants with no ambitions to be anything else.
Anyone who has had the privilege of living with a group of dogs will know beyond doubt that they develop a wonderful community strength. Let’s reflect on the lessons being offered for us in this regard by our dogs.
To reinforce the fact that this is not a new phenomena, at the time I was drafting my book last November, a new report was issued by the Center of Economic Policy Research (CEPR) on the latest (American) Survey of Consumer Finances. It painted a picture very familiar to many: the rich becoming richer while those with less wealth are falling further and further behind.
David Rosnick of the CEPR, and one of the report co-authors, made this important observation:
The decline in the position of typical households is even worse than the Consumer Finances survey indicates. In 1989, many workers had pensions. Far fewer do now. The value of pensions isn’t included in these surveys due to the difficulty of determining what they are worth on a current basis. But they clearly are significant assets that relatively few working age people have now.
Sharmini Peries, of The Real News Network, in an interview with David Rosnick, asked:
PERIES: David, just quickly explain to us what is the Consumer Finance Survey. I know it’s an important survey for economists, but why is it important to ordinary people? Why is it important to us?
ROSNICK: So, every three years, the Federal Reserve interviews a number of households to get an idea of what their finances are like, do they have a lot of wealth, how much are their house’s worth, how much they owe on their mortgages, how much they have in the bank account, how much stocks do wealthy people own. This gives us an idea of their situations, whether they’re going to be prepared for retirement. And we can see things like the effect of the housing and stock bubbles on people’s wealth, whether they’ve been preparing for eventual downfalls, how they’ve reacted to various economic circumstances, how they’re looking to the long term. So it’s a very useful survey in terms of finding out how households are prepared and what the distribution of wealth is like.
PERIES: So your report is an analysis of the report. And what are your key findings?
ROSNICK: So, largely over the last 24 years there’s been a considerable increase in wealth on average, but it’s been very maldistributed. Households in the bottom half of the distribution have actually seen their wealth fall, but the people at the very top have actually done very well. And so that means that a lot of people who are nearing retirement at this point in time are actually not well prepared at all for retirement and are going to be very dependent on Social Security in order to make it through their retirement years.
PERIES: So, David, address the gap. You said there’s a great gap between those that are very wealthy and those that are not. Has this gap widened over this period?
ROSNICK: It absolutely has. As, say, the top 5 percent in wealth, the average wealth for people in the top 5 percent is about 66 percent higher in 2013, the last survey that was completed, compared to 1989. By comparison, for the bottom 20 percent, their wealth has actually fallen 420 percent. They basically had very little to start with, and now they have less than little.
PERIES: So the poorer is getting poorer and the richer is getting extremely richer.
ROSNICK: Very much so.
To my way of thinking, if in the period 1989 through to 2013 “the average wealth for (American) people in the top 5 percent is about 66 percent higher” and “for the bottom 20 percent, their wealth has actually fallen 420 percent” it’s very difficult not to see the hands of greed at work and a consequential devastating increase in inequality.
In other words, the previous few paragraphs seemed to present, and present clearly, the widening gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’, comparatively speaking, and that it was now time for society to understand the trends, to reflect on where this is taking us, if left unchallenged, and to push back as hard as we can both politically and socially.
I wrote that shortly before another item appeared in my email ‘in-box’ in the middle of November (2014), a further report about inequality that, frankly, emotionally speaking, just smacked me in the face. It seemed a critical addition to the picture I was endeavouring to present.
Namely, on the 13th October, 2014, the US edition of The Guardian newspaper published a story entitled: US wealth inequality – top 0.1% worth as much as the bottom 90%. The sub-heading enlarged the headline: Not since the Great Depression has wealth inequality in the US been so acute, new in-depth study finds.
The study referred to was a paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, based on research conducted by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman. The paper’s bland title belied the reality of the research findings: Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913.
As the Guardian reported:
Wealth inequality in the US is at near record levels according to a new study by academics. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%. For the bottom 90% of families, a combination of rising debt, the collapse of the value of their assets during the financial crisis, and stagnant real wages have led to the erosion of wealth. The share of wealth owned by the top 0.1% is almost the same as the bottom 90%.
The picture actually improved in the aftermath of the 1930s Great Depression, with wealth inequality falling through to the late 1970s. It then started to rise again, with the share of total household wealth owned by the top 0.1% rising to 22% in 2012 from 7% in the late 1970s. The top 0.1% includes 160,000 families with total net assets of more than $20m (£13m) in 2012.
In contrast, the share of total US wealth owned by the bottom 90% of families fell from a peak of 36% in the mid-1980s, to 23% in 2012 – just one percentage point above the top 0.1%.
The report was not exclusively about the USA. As the closing paragraphs in The Guardian’s article illustrated:
Among the nine G20 countries with sufficient data, the richest 1% of people (by income) have increased their income share significantly since 1980, according to Oxfam. In Australia, for example, the top 1% earned 4.8% of the country’s income in 1980. That had risen to more than 9% by 2010.
Oxfam says that in the time that Australia has held the G20 presidency (between 2013 and 2014) the total wealth in the G20 increased by $17tn but the richest 1% of people in the G20 captured $6.2tn of this wealth – 36% of the total increase.
I find it incredibly difficult to have any rational response to those figures. I am just aware that there is a flurry of mixed emotions inside me and, perhaps, that’s how I should leave it. Nonetheless, there’s one thing that I can’t keep to myself and that this isn’t the first time that such inequality has arisen; the period leading up the the Great Depression of the 1930s comes immediately to mind.
Learning from Dogs 