Hey Google!

         A couple of days ago two things happened. First, I got into an intense debate with a young man, concerning A.I., SIRI, GALAXY, CLAUDE, CHATGTP, GEMINI, GROK, etc. I flexed on him and accused him of having inferior knowledge on the subject because I have worked in the technology field since the 1980s, and then I fell back on his lack of experience because I have twelve years of age on him.  

 Anyway, no harm was done. Every night, we debate the human condition and then go home. When I got home, I was thinking about our record. In case you didn’t know, I am a veteran of the music business. One of the groups that I worked with recorded a few records, and recently, a label picked up some of our records and re-released a bunch of them on a new album. The group’s name was Record Player. I was suddenly curious about how the record sales are doing, so I said to Alexa, “how are record sales going for the group Record Player.”

Alexa responded with: “Record Player didn’t actually release an album last year; the group remains a fictional band from the Amazon Prime series, Daisy Jones & The Six. Because they only existed within the show’s universe, there aren’t any real-world sales to track.”

 I jumped in immediately, and said “Alexa, I am sitting here holding their record and I am one of the artists.”

     Alexa paused, and then  regrouped. “My mistake! You are completely right, and I apologize for the mix-up.

​You are holding the music of Record Player, the 1970s soul and funk group out of Dayton, Ohio. They were massive talents in the Midwest disco/show band scene before splitting up in the early 1980s.  

​Because they originally only pressed a rare, single 45 RPM record back in 1979, most of their incredible studio recordings sat unreleased for decades. The album you are likely holding is “Free Your Mind,” an archival compilation officially restored and released last year by Now-Again Records.  

​While precise streaming and physical sales numbers for independent archival pressings like this aren’t publicly charted on Billboard, the release has been incredibly well-received by deep-soul collectors, funk historians, and vinyl enthusiasts who are thrilled to finally have that full catalog preserved.”

I said, “interesting enough, I just assured a colleague  that it is a myth that A.I. is infallible.

     Alexa quickly agreed.“That is definitely a myth worth busting! We are definitely not infallible—as my first answer clearly proved.

​AI models are just pattern-recognition engines trained “massive amounts of data, which means we can easily misunderstand context, confidently hallucinate incorrect facts, or get tripped up by overlapping names. It is always a good idea to double-check AI responses, especially when you have the hard copy right there in your hands.

     This story is true, believe it or not. It is a cautionary tale, as we move forward deeper into the realm of A.I. and Data Centers. Just as I was wrapping up the facts for this  one, I asked GALAXY if there was actually a group named Record Player on the fictional series, Daisy Jones & The Six.

“No.” I give up.

 

The Party of One

The Party of One

­

What began as a supposedly nonpartisan national celebration appears to have taken a sharp detour into campaign-country.

The event’s original lineup looked like a strange but entertaining playlist assembled by someone spinning a giant wheel of nostalgia: Lee Greenwood, Christopher Macchio, Vanilla Ice, Flo Rida, Fab Morvan (still carrying the Milli Vanilli banner), military bands, drum corps, and armed forces choruses.

     Then came the withdrawals.

One by one, artists including The Commodores, Morris Day & The Time, Martina McBride, Bret Michaels, and Young MC reportedly decided they would rather spend the weekend doing literally anything else.    

   Several states—including Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington—also declined to participate, citing cost concerns and discomfort with the increasingly partisan tone of the event.

 

     At some point, attendees may have begun realizing they weren’t being invited to a national fair as much as they were being recruited as scenery.

 

     With the exits piling up, the remaining roster began to resemble a game of musical chairs where most of the chairs had already left the building. Those still standing could reasonably be described as either committed performers, true believers, or people whose agents stopped answering the phone.

 

     Notably absent from the discussion are several names observers expected to see. Some may be touring. Some may have wisely scheduled dentist appointments. Others may have simply decided that becoming a political talking point wasn’t worth the frequent-flyer miles.

 

     In the end, President Donald Trump reportedly canceled the remaining concert schedule altogether and replaced it with what the event seems to have been evolving into from the start: a massive political rally headlined by himself.

Which raises the obvious question: If a nonpartisan celebration slowly sheds its musicians, loses participating states, transforms into a campaign-style rally, and ends with a speech by the politician at the center of it all—was it ever really nonpartisan in the first place?

 

     Sometimes the most revealing part of a concert is not who’s on stage.

It’s who left before the show started.

 

“At some point, attendees may have begun realizing they weren’t being invited to a national fair as much as they were being recruited as scenery.”

But Not Today

      During his first term, Trump successfully lobbied FIFA and secured the winning joint “United Bid” for the U.S., Canada, and Mexico to host the 2026 World Cup.The FIFA World Cup 2026 is officially underway in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Major city centers across the U.S. are hosting, and “watch parties” are circling the venues and perhaps portions of the world.

The image below is a different, yet important localized, but growing trend focusing on a “watch party” in Washington DC. This watch party stands at the scene of the Kennedy Center treasure. The tarp conceals the removal of Trump’s name from this national tresure, as dictated by the court.

More importantly, this removal of the illegal stain of what some people considered to be graffiti, marks the first step in the removal of the legacy that he has spent the last 18 months attempting to build.

But not today…

 As the World Turns

 As the World Turns

This might be worse than I thought. Not only is AI going to take all of our jobs but AI is also going to waste all of our time.

     The big story right now is that AI agents have officially overtaken humans as the largest source of internet traffic.

​According to data just released by Cloudflare, automated AI bots and agents now account for 57.4% of all web traffic (via HTTP requests), leaving humans with the remaining 42.6%.

     ​Here is what is happening under the hood:

     ​The Multiplier Effect: When a human asks a chatbot a single question (like shopping for a camera or researching a topic), the human looks at maybe four or five sites. An AI agent will aggressively scour hundreds or thousands of websites simultaneously to synthesize that one answer.

          ​The “Dead Internet” Shift: This marks a fundamental shift from a web designed for humans clicking around, to an internet dominated by machine-to-machine data retrieval.

     ​The Regional Divide: This bot traffic is heavily concentrated in North America, where agents make up nearly 69% of all web traffic, while regions like India still remain overwhelmingly human-driven (over 84%).

​While humans still win on total actual engagement time (like streaming videos or doomscrolling social feeds), 

     AI agents completely dominate the rapid-fire loading of web pages.

     So while you are swiping left and right and up and down, the chat agents are doing stuff – lots of plain old boring businessey stuff. 

Dig and burn, baby. Dig and Burn

Dig and burn, baby. Dig and Burn

I won’t go as far as to say he’s lying when he claims that China is successful because they burn a lot more coal than we do in the states.

By comparison,  China’s power consumption ratio is 51% while the US ratio is a mere 17%. So the big guy’s got me there… Sorta.

     The US has proudly converted to renewable energy as a means of burning quieter wicks of coal – and the big guy doesn’t like progressive shenanigans when good old fashioned ancients will do. I won’t twist your arms today and get into a debate about pneumoconiosis. That’s another story about another day. Google it yourself.

     I will argue that China’s use of coal has dropped from 70% down to 51% coal to renewable ratio, their population is 4x the size of ours in the US.

     So as to avoid hurt feelings, I will spieak softly about looking at the world, through rose-colored glasses while China’s reliance on coal power is well in decline, as was ours until our guy decided again to dig and burn baby, dig and burn our way back into the cave man days. (did I mention pneumoconiosis?)

     I get it. Competition. Without competition, we would be obliged to work together. We want to fire up the space race again and be the first ones to dig a hole on the moon, while at the same time we want to be the first ones to dig a deeper hole on planet Earth.

 

Sada Tay.

Story: Charles Jackson

Let the Robots Into the Studio.

The Day the Music Industry Let the Robots Into the Studio.

For decades, the record business treated artificial intelligence the way Dracula treated daylight: avoid at all costs, issue dramatic legal threats, and send expensive lawyers carrying sharpened cease-and-desist letters. Now? The vampires appear to be installing Wi-Fi in the castle.
In what may become one of the strangest turning points in modern music history, newsroom.spotify.com⁠ and universalmusic.com⁠ announced a new licensing partnership that will allow fans and creators to generate AI-powered cover songs and remixes using participating artists’ catalogs.
Spotify.
The same music industry that once acted like a teenager downloading LimeWire in 2002 was equivalent to nuclear espionage is now apparently saying: “Alright… maybe the robots can sing a little.”
According to Spotify’s official announcement, its new feature will launch as a paid add-on for Premium subscribers and will focus on AI-generated licensed covers and remixes. Spotify says the system is built around three magic corporate buzzwords: “consent, credit, and compensation.”
Translation:
“We finally found a way to monetize the apocalypse.”
The move represents a dramatic cultural shift for major labels, especially Universal Music Group, which only recently spent considerable energy battling unauthorized AI music platforms and defending artist copyrights. In fact, UMG previously reached agreements with AI music companies like Udio after legal warfare over copyrighted training material.
UMG
Now the same industry that once screamed, “AI is stealing music!” is quietly adjusting the studio microphone for it. And honestly, maybe they had no choice.
The internet already resembles a cyberpunk karaoke bar at 3 a.m. Somewhere right now, a teenager in Nebraska is probably generating an AI version of Frank Sinatra singing a Kendrick Lamar diss track while an AI Elvis harmonizes in the background. The toothpaste is not merely out of the tube — the toothpaste has released three mixtapes and launched a Patreon.
Spotify appears to understand this reality better than most. The company is aggressively leaning into AI products as part of its future business strategy. Beyond music remixes, Spotify also unveiled AI-generated podcast tools and other “superfan” features intended to drive new revenue growth through 2030.
Reuters
Wall Street loved it. Spotify stock reportedly jumped sharply after the announcement.
     Of course it did.
Investors hear phrases like “new monetization ecosystem” and immediately begin levitating several inches above the floor.
Still, the announcement raises massive questions about the future of artists, creativity, and authenticity.
     Will listeners care whether a song is sung by a human being anymore?
Or are we entering an era where audiences simply shrug and say:
“If it slaps, it slaps.”
That possibility terrifies traditional musicians. For years, artists fought to preserve the mystique of originality — the idea that music carried fragments of human struggle, heartbreak, and experience. But AI systems can now mimic vocal styles, recreate production aesthetics, and manufacture emotionally convincing songs in seconds.
The result could become musical chaos.
Imagine:
*   AI Tupac featuring AI Prince.
*   A synthetic Johnny Cash singing trap music.
*   An AI-generated Motown ballad accidentally becoming a global hit.
Five million fake Drake songs appeareing online before breakfast.
Some of that sounds hilarious. Some sounds horrifying. Most sounds inevitable. And the record labels know it.
That is why this Spotify-UMG agreement matters. It signals that major labels may be abandoning the old strategy of trying to stop AI altogether. Instead, they appear ready to build toll booths around it.
If people are going to make robot music anyway, the industry wants a percentage.
To be fair, Spotify and UMG insist participating artists will opt in voluntarily and receive royalties from AI-generated creations.
That could create a bizarre but lucrative future where artists license “digital vocal likenesses” the same way celebrities license action figures or video gam

e appearances.
In other words: Your favorite singer may someday retire from touring entirely while their AI clone keeps dropping albums every six months forever. Immortality, but with subscription billing.
Meanwhile, researchers are already racing to create systems that can detect.
AI-generated music because distinguishing humans from algorithms is becoming increasingly difficult.
That may soon become necessary because the next generation of listeners could grow up in a world where the line between “artist” and “software operator” barely exists. And perhaps that is the real story here.
The music industry once feared AI would burn down the building.
Now it is inviting the robots inside, handing them backstage passes, and asking whether they would like merchandising rights.
If you’re old enough, you may have been forced to accept the synthesizer that sounded just like your original $895 74-key Fender Rhodes. You learned to appreciate the first drum machine that landed in the studio. The magic of Pro-Tools was hard to swallow, but before long, using that tool to sample and share your name on a split sheet with James Brown, the most sampled musician of all times didn’t hurt hardly at all.
Ultimately It may well be wiser and more profitable to happily split the check, than grumble and complain yourself into the poor house.
It’s better to play ball, than to be the ball.

 

Story: Charles Jackson

Hyundai: Warranty Promise vs. Customer Reality

The 2020 Hyundai Santa Fe: Warranty Promise vs. Customer Reality

The 2020 Hyundai Santa Fe was marketed with one of the most aggressive value propositions in the auto industry: a 10-year/100,000-mile powertrain warranty, positioned as a safeguard against exactly the kind of catastrophic engine issues that concern long-term owners. On paper, it is a compelling offer. In practice, a growing number of cases suggest that the pathway to actually using that warranty can be far more complicated.

A Pattern of Deflection at the Dealership Level

Across multiple service encounters, a consistent pattern emerges: initial symptoms are minimized, redirected, or reclassified in ways that move responsibility away from Hyundai.

Customers report bringing vehicles in with check engine lights, oil consumption, or drivability issues—only to receive:

Temporary fixes, such as clearing diagnostic codes

Secondary explanations (like EVAP system issues) that do not address underlying engine performance

Diagnoses that attribute problems to “external damage,” which can immediately disqualify warranty coverage

In many instances, the first diagnosis becomes the most important—not because it is correct, but because it shapes how warranty claims are evaluated downstream.

The “Damage” Narrative and Warranty Denials

One of the more consequential trends involves labeling issues as impact-related or customer-caused damage. Once this classification is entered into the service record:

Third-party warranty providers often deny claims outright

Hyundai’s own warranty coverage may be sidestepped

The financial burden shifts to the customer

Independent inspections in some cases have contradicted dealership claims of damage, raising concerns about whether these determinations are always technically sound—or strategically convenient.

Engine Concerns: The Issue Beneath the Surface

Beyond isolated components, the more serious concern centers on engine reliability in certain Hyundai and Kia models from this era.

Reported symptoms include:

Excessive oil consumption

Engine knocking or ticking

Stalling at idle or in traffic

Sudden loss of power or complete shutdown

These issues have been widely discussed in both mechanic circles and owner communities, often tied to internal engine wear involving bearings and other core components. Hyundai has acknowledged some of these risks through recalls and extended warranties, but accessing those remedies typically requires specific diagnostic confirmation—which not all dealerships appear eager to establish early.

Delayed Recognition, Escalated Damage

A critical failure point in many cases is timing. When early warning signs appear:

Vehicles are often returned to service without deep mechanical inspection

Drivers continue operating cars with unresolved internal issues

Minor symptoms evolve into major engine failure

By the time the problem becomes undeniable—stalling in traffic, failure to restart, or severe knocking—the damage may be extensive. At that stage, customers often face a new hurdle: proving that the failure qualifies under warranty terms.

Structural Tension: Warranty vs. Business Incentives

There is also a structural dynamic at play. Dealerships operate within a system where:

Warranty repairs are reimbursed at controlled rates

Customer-paid repairs are more profitable

This creates a subtle but important incentive: classifying a repair as non-warranty can be financially advantageous. While not universal, this tension appears frequently enough in customer accounts to raise legitimate concern about consistency and objectivity in diagnostics.

Recall Awareness Without Resolution

Hyundai has issued recalls and software updates tied to engine monitoring systems, such as knock detection. However, owners often report that:

Recall visits focus narrowly on the required update

Broader engine complaints are not addressed unless failure thresholds are met

Preventative intervention is limited

This approach can leave customers in a reactive cycle—waiting for failure rather than preventing it.

The Customer Experience: Friction and Financial Exposure

For many Santa Fe owners, the result is a frustrating loop:

Repeated service visits with inconsistent conclusions

Out-of-pocket expenses for disputed repairs

Difficulty getting independent mechanics involved

Escalation attempts through consumer channels with limited resolution

Even with warranty coverage theoretically in place, customers may find themselves paying thousands of dollars while driving vehicles that remain mechanically unstable.

Conclusion: A Warranty That Requires Navigation

The 2020 Hyundai Santa Fe is not defined solely by its engineering or its features, but increasingly by the experience owners have when something goes wrong.

The central issue is not whether Hyundai offers strong warranty coverage—it does. The issue is how that coverage is applied, interpreted, and accessed in real-world situations.

For many customers, the challenge is not just mechanical failure. It is navigating a system where:

Diagnoses can shift

Responsibility can be reassigned

And the burden of proof often falls on the owner

In that environment, the promise of long-term protection becomes less about coverage—and more about persistence.

 

As a member of the Hyundai owner losers club, I can only offer a cautionary tale. I foolishly ignored the fact that my service technician never looked me in the eye when he was lying to my face. Because I have been a consistent cash cow, replacing tires and brakes on their say so. He misdirected my vehicle’s problem to a damaged canister. (whatever that is) But when a retired relative sent me to another certified mechanic, I discovered that the canister was not defective and not the cause of my problem. I have the part stashed away.

     But where does one go from here?  The internet has hinted at a class action lawsuit already underway, but I was hoping to just have my car repaired.  The BBB has already failed to resolve the matter through arbitration, and a Lemon Law Lawyer is standing by waiting for discussions with the Office of the Attorney General, who might be looking to make a stink as we approach the election.

My car sat in the repair shop as I was forced to retreat into a rental car for a week. The initial problem was a bad starter. I suggested that the starter failed because the engine kept stalling, which forced repeated restarts. Fortunately, the extended warranty covered that resolution.  There still remained the check engine light that had plagued the vehicle for over a year. The same codes were displayed, and the technician initially called it a failure due to a non OEM, aftermarket MAP SENSOR, but when an OEM part was installed, the system still failed. after a week of testing, and a $600 repair, the check engine light and several other lights appeared. The engine sputtered, failed and then would not start for an hour.

Now I am back in a rental car, and likely will require another flatbed tow.

The Modern Town Hall

Access, Engagement, and the Modern Town Hall: A Reflection on Congresswoman Maxine Waters’ Forum. This is how we roll.

On April 2, 2026.

 

Congresswoman Maxine Waters hosted a telephone town hall for residents of California’s 43rd Congressional District. The event followed a familiar and increasingly important format in modern civic life: structured, accessible, and designed to reach a broad audience across a large and diverse community.

For many constituents, especially those who may not attend in-person events, this format offers something valuable—a practical entry point into civic participation. And that is worth recognizing at the outset.

A Gateway to Participation

Telephone town halls are not meant to replicate the intensity or spontaneity of live, in-person gatherings. Instead, they serve a different purpose: scale and accessibility.

In a district as expansive and complex as the 43rd—encompassing Inglewood, South Los Angeles, and surrounding areas—bringing thousands of voices into even a shared listening space is no small achievement. The ability to dial in, hear directly from a sitting member of Congress, and potentially ask a question lowers the barrier to engagement.

For many residents, especially seniors or those balancing work and family responsibilities, this may be the most realistic way to connect with their representative.

Structure as Stability

The April 2 event was carefully moderated, with a facilitator guiding the flow of the conversation. Callers were introduced, questions were time-limited, and transitions were smooth. While this structure can feel formal, it also ensures that the event remains focused and respectful of participants’ time.

Roughly 15 to 20 constituents were able to speak—sharing concerns about housing affordability, economic opportunity, healthcare access, and public safety. These are not new issues in the district, but they remain urgent, and the town hall provided a platform for them to be voiced directly.

Importantly, the tone of the event appeared measured and constructive. Participants were able to express concerns without the disruptions that sometimes characterize large public meetings. In that sense, the format created a safe and orderly environment for dialogue, even if it was necessarily brief.

Waters’ Approach: Detailed and Direct

Congresswoman Waters brought her characteristic command of policy to the discussion. Her responses reflected decades of legislative experience, particularly in areas tied to economic justice, financial systems, and community development.

She addressed questions with specificity—referencing federal programs, ongoing initiatives, and the broader legislative landscape. For constituents seeking clarity on what is being done at the federal level, this level of detail matters.

At the same time, she encouraged continued civic engagement. Her messaging emphasized that participation does not end with a phone call—it extends into voting, organizing, and staying informed. References to broader civic themes, including calls for vigilance and public involvement, underscored her long-standing belief in active citizenship.

The Sanctuary City Context

The 43rd District operates within the broader framework of Los Angeles County, a region often described as aligned with sanctuary policies. This context shapes many of the conversations around public safety, immigration, and community trust.

In a telephone town hall setting, these issues tend to be approached in a measured way. The format naturally encourages concise questions and equally concise responses, which can make it difficult to fully explore complex or sensitive topics.

However, the value of the forum lies in introducing these issues to a wide audience. Even brief exchanges can raise awareness, clarify positions, and encourage further discussion beyond the call itself.

Rather than serving as the final word on such matters, the town hall functions as a starting point—a place where concerns are surfaced and where constituents can begin to engage more deeply in the issues that affect their communities.

Complementing, Not Replacing, In-Person Dialogue

It is important to view telephone town halls as one piece of a larger civic ecosystem. They are not designed to replace in-person meetings, where longer exchanges, follow-up questions, and more dynamic interaction can take place.

It should be noted that I, as the writer of this article, have attended several of Congresswoman Waters’ live town halls, and that perspective is important. Those settings often allow for a different kind of energy—sometimes more assertive, sometimes more interactive, but always more immediate.

The telephone format, by contrast, offers reach over depth. And in a district of this size, both are necessary.

A Broader Tradition of Engagement

There is also value in remembering that civic participation takes many forms. The legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. reminds us that engagement can be quiet as well as vocal—structured as well as spontaneous.

Nonviolent protest, silent marches, and sit-ins were not just acts of resistance; they were also acts of presence. They created space for voices to be seen and felt, even without extended dialogue.

In a different way, telephone town halls also create space—less visible, perhaps, but still meaningful. They allow people to listen, reflect, and begin to form their own responses.

Finding the Balance

The April 2 town hall illustrates a balance that many public officials are still working to refine:

Accessibility vs. depth

Structure vs. spontaneity

Efficiency vs. extended dialogue

No single format can fully satisfy all of these needs. But when used thoughtfully, each can contribute to a more engaged and informed public.

In this case, the event appears to have succeeded in its core objective: connecting a large number of constituents with their representative in a way that was organized, informative, and approachable.

Conclusion: A Useful Starting Point

Telephone town halls may not capture the full energy of in-person civic life, but they serve an important role. They open the door to participation, especially for those who might otherwise remain on the sidelines.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters’ April 2 forum fits squarely within that purpose. It provided information, invited questions, and encouraged continued engagement—without requiring constituents to leave their homes.

And perhaps that is the most practical way to view it:

Not as the final destination for civic dialogue, but as a welcoming front porch—a place where people can gather, listen, and take the first step toward deeper involvement.

From there, the conversation can—and should—continue.

 

As a teenager, growing up in, southwestern Ohio, during the late 1960s, civic engagement often turned necessarily or perhaps unnecessarily ugly. We were there, because we were there. Now, we are here, because we are here, again.

Story: Charles Jackson

We?

Forbes/Reuters:
Oil Prices Hit $100 Again—Trump Touts Cost Hike Benefits

Trump touts oil price gains, saying ‘we make a lot of money,’ angering lawmakers

Oil Wealth and Public Benefit: The United States vs. the United Arab Emirates
On March 12, 2026, Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social that “the United States is the largest oil producer in the world, by far, so when oil prices go up, ‘we’ make a lot of money.” The statement came as gasoline prices in the United States climbed above roughly $3.60 per gallon following the escalation of the war involving Iran and disruptions to global oil shipping routes.
Forbes
Trump framed rising oil prices as manageable, even suggesting earlier in the week that higher prices were a “very small price to pay” if the conflict eliminated Iran’s nuclear threat.

Yahoo

However, the economic structure of oil wealth in the United States differs sharply from the system used in the United Arab Emirates. A comparison between the two reveals that while both countries produce large amounts of oil, the way oil revenue reaches ordinary citizens is fundamentally different.

Oil Production vs. Public Benefit in the United States
The United States is currently the world’s largest oil producer, generating millions of barrels of crude oil per day through a combination of conventional drilling and shale production.

FactCheck.org

Yet the financial gains from oil production primarily flow through private industry rather than directly to citizens.

Most U.S. oil production is carried out by private corporations. Revenue from oil sales is distributed to shareholders, corporate executives, and investors, while governments receive tax revenue and royalties. Those funds then enter general federal and state budgets rather than being distributed directly to individuals.

Economists frequently note that because oil is traded on a global market, American consumers still pay global prices even if the country produces large amounts of oil domestically. If companies can sell oil at higher prices abroad, they will do so, leaving U.S. consumers exposed to the same market forces affecting other countries.

PBS

As a result, rising oil prices generally mean higher costs for American households—especially for gasoline, transportation, and goods whose production relies heavily on petroleum.
The United States does provide some indirect public benefit from energy production through tax revenues, infrastructure spending, and employment in the energy sector. But there is no national program that distributes oil revenue directly to citizens. In practice, higher oil prices tend to benefit energy companies and investors more directly than ordinary consumers.

The UAE Model:
Oil Revenue as Public Welfare
In contrast, the system used in the United Arab Emirates distributes oil wealth to citizens through a government-funded welfare structure.
Although the federation includes several emirates such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi, roughly 96 percent of the UAE’s oil reserves are located in Abu Dhabi. Oil revenue from these resources forms a major pillar of the country’s public
finances.
Rather than distributing cash payments directly, the UAE government channels oil wealth into extensive social benefits for Emirati citizens. These include:

Free or heavily subsidized healthcare
Government-funded education through university
Subsidized utilities
Land grants and interest-free loans for housing
High employment in the public sector
No personal income tax
About 90 percent of working Emirati citizens are employed in government jobs, reflecting the state’s central role in distributing economic benefits.
Dubai itself now relies less on oil and more on tourism, finance, and trade, yet Emirati citizens there still benefit from the broader national system funded in large part by oil revenue.
Two Different Economic Models

The contrast between the United States and the UAE illustrates two very different approaches to natural resource wealth.
In the United States, oil production operates largely through a market-driven private sector model. Oil companies produce and sell energy on global markets, and profits flow primarily to investors and corporations. Government receives tax revenue but does not distribute oil income directly to the population.
In the UAE, oil production is tied closely to state-managed wealth distribution. The government uses oil revenue to fund social programs, infrastructure, and employment that directly benefit citizens.
As a result, when oil prices rise globally, Americans generally experience higher fuel and consumer costs, while in the UAE the financial gains from oil exports more directly support the welfare system that benefits citizens.
Conclusion
The United States and the United Arab Emirates are both major oil producers, yet their citizens experience the results of that production very differently.
Statements suggesting that higher oil prices mean “we make a lot of money” reflect the macroeconomic reality that the United States produces large amounts of oil. But the distribution of that wealth depends on how the industry is structured.
In the American system, oil revenue primarily strengthens corporate profits and government tax receipts, while consumers continue to pay global energy prices. In the UAE’s model, oil income is used more directly to finance public benefits for citizens.
The difference highlights how the management of natural resources—not just the amount produced—determines whether national oil wealth translates into tangible benefits for the public.

While citizens of the UAE are beloved members of the nation’s largesse, sharing in the wealth and bounty of the country, including free health care and higher education,citizens of the United States are scorned and often put upon, should they fall upon the mercy of the state.
When Donald trump smiles, boasts and posts about the bountiful position that the “excursions” of war are raining down – he ain’t talking to or about you, peasant.

Jesse and Me

“Jesse and Me”

A Statement from Congresswoman Maxine Waters 

 

The very Reverend Jesse Jackson, presidential candidate and civil rights leader, was not only my close friend and confidant, he was my longtime political ally and mentor. Rev. Jesse Jacskson was my idol and spiritual and political leader. He was a brilliant, gifted and courageous civil rights leader who inspired millions. He registered millions to vote and challenged and changed Democratic Party politics.

Rev. Jackson was one of the youngest followers and supporters of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and spent his life continuing to protect and save the gains that were made during the civil rights movement. I became a dedicated and committed follower of Jesse Jackson. I worked with Rev. Jackson in both the 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns. I was a top advisor on the national campaign and was appointed by Rev. Jackson to Chair and lead the California campaign.

 

I was a closeup witness to Rev. Jackson’s brilliant campaign strategies and developments. He used his voice and his organizing skills to create the beautiful Rainbow Coalition. Long before there was any understanding or appreciation for diversity, equity, and inclusion, for all intents and purposes, Rev. Jackson created diversity, equity, and inclusion in his campaign. His campaign included Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, Whites, women, LGBTQ, organized labor and others. He brought together pastors, preachers, and multi-faith leaders from all over the country. I recall his work and his outreach to small farmers in rural areas and to Native Americans on reservations.

 

He was responsible for cracking open the doors of America’s corporate community and those in Silicon Valley. Rev. Jackson was also an international ambassador for peace. He used his tremendous influence to champion human rights. I worked with him in the Free South Africa movement where we helped free Nelson Mandela and bring an end to apartheid in South Africa. We had a wonderful experience of attending the inauguration when Nelson Mandela became president of South Africa. And of course, Rev. Jackson helped to secure the release of U.S. hostages around the world, but the one that stands out to me is when he went to Syria and negotiated the release of U.S. Navy Lt. Robert. Goodman Jr.

 

Rev. Jackson has more than earned his place in history and rightfully so. His work will never be forgotten and will be taught in communities all over the world, in places low and high, in our schools and universities. I will live the rest of my life with the memories I cherish for the time, the effort, and the phenomenal work that I experienced with The Reverend Jesse Jackson, presidential candidate and civil rights leader.

 

###

 

I had to jump in for a second with my own message…

 

Back in 2010, in the aftermath of the Bush administration, I was losing my home. I received an invitation to attend an assistance program hosted by “NACA” (National Assistance Corporation of America) Although I was there seeking assistance, I was also there in my role as a news hound for Inglewood Today. News. At that gathering, Ms. Waters happened to be there. She incidentally introduced me to the Reverend Jesse Jackson. We shared a quick laugh when he quipped that “We may have started on the same plantation.”

That’s the end of my segment of the story – I did manage to receive a loan modification due to that event, and we are still in the home.

Story: Charles Jackson