SAG and AMPTP

The Screen Actors Guild voted unanimously to ratify yet another contract with the AMPTP for TV/theater pretending that AMPTP will look at giving a fair share of profit sometime in the future. Unlike baseball's "player to be named later" which has been the same player, this profit sharing never is revisited.

Media is evolving at such a pace that internet and TV are already combining and soon will be one and the same. You will surf YouTube or its latest incarnation or replacement on your TV/computer.

Small gain was made in this upper class SAG railroaded contract for MADE-FOR new media projects, but no change was made for profits made by production companies from content produced for TV or theaters.

The members of the SAG board, who were elected to represent the membership (much like Congress) ignore the needs of the membership and set up deals for themselves (much like Congress). They also would have you believe that the background (or "extra") actors are the problem blocking the contract and negotiation.

A producer to remain nameless claims are not WORKING actors (I'd like to see the films where they don't work), regurgitates this, not knowing anything about the union nor actors, stating that they should not be allowed to vote. The TRUTH is that background talent does not make enough money for other benefits and their only hope is the 3% raise, barely cost of living. They wanted this last July when the contract ran out.

The million + upfront for film actors do not want to lose a bargaining chip that they aren't getting backend profit sharing. This would cut their upfront rate, some might lose a million or more. If the film or project does very well then they would receive money from DVD sales, ticket sales, etc. and might actually make more money. If the movie flops, they wouldn't make much more than their upfront contract amount. Letting the market decide, hmm sounds like capitalism.

SAG *censored* opposing view where many people will lose their health and pension benefits under the new contract and spewed propaganda largely from producer/actors. Hmm sounds like North Korea and all the countries censoring internet access to keep out opposing idealogies.

The WGA had the cajones to strike for a fair contract. I picketed with them in support for their contract. They only wanted a small percentage and that percentage would be $0 if no money was made. SAG did not have the cajones to demand the same thing.

The AMPTP will not take SAG seriously as they join AFTRA in putting BOARD members first. They left out "board" when trying to get members' votes to place them on the board.

I was skeptical about SAG president Alan Rosenberg until sitting in a meeting with him. He knows the union from top to bottom, the rich and middle-class and background and struggling actors. He sought to UNITE and address issues at all levels. He was railroaded by [Board] members first who had barely a majority of the board, about 52%. They stalled until they could get organized and have enough members bother to show up to a meeting and fire the chief negotiator, making a joke of the union.

Then they concede to AMPTP and wink at the "we'll look at that later" clause as if the big production companies were bankrupt like the car industry. % of zero is 0 never gets revisited, not with VHS, DVD, now new media. Besides allowing multiple airings within a week and 3 weeks for cable, which might play twice a day for those 3 weeks, or more. Besides that, the networks brag to shareholders how much money they are making on the internet. NONE of the multi-airing in the time period and internet streaming revenue is shared. Reruns are covered, however, and residuals from the additional advertising profits are shared.

If the union isn't going to stand up for anything, they might as well concede to a 20 year contract with the current rates and a fixed percentage bump. Leave a clause open for change for all the things that are never revisited.

So the totally ignorant may think that SAG got its act together. But in reality the AMPTP will not take SAG seriously and the disarray and fallout could be much worse than any strike ever could have been.

Federal Government and Ownership

The US federal government has been taking control of more and more companies lately. Some of these companies have assets that include current mortgaged and foreclosed properties. As we fear the government is bankrupting itself, barring its overwhelming debt to China, what will it decide is necessary to keep from going bankrupt when China call in the loans?

In the past, the federal government has made it illegal for citizens to own gold. Any gold was seized and owners who did not surrender the gold willingly were guilty of treason. If the current federal government were to take possession of all of the indebted assets it currently has available, it would not even have to make ownership of anything illegal (as it has done in the past) in order to amass unimaginable amounts of property.

With North Korea testing rocket launching capabilities and lying to its people, and the 6-member council unable to even formally condemn this act, we see China and Russia very likely to align themselves with North Korea if push comes to shove. If they became allied against us, what of the trillions in debt to China.

Consider all of those assets as collateral for the debt.

Remember that even though Putin is not the principal leader of Russia, he still remains in government and could be elected to power again.

Note that Khaddafi (FKA Qadaffi) is the current Libyan president, and the current rotating head of the African Union. One of the African leaders has been found guilty of war crimes and the Arab nations are divided over how or whether that should be handled. A Mediterranean trade group including some Arab nations could split and/or the African Union split in light of these and other developments in the area.

Tensions are growing among and within groups of nations.

What will the assets be worth that the federal government owns be worth if the dollar is devalued beyond our current belief?

There is already too much availability and control of currency value in the global market. It is too easily manipulation by OPEC (oil cartel) and the International Monetary Fund. Currency can be bought and sold and has speculation and betting as any stock or commodity. Recent ads make available currency trading to anyone who is willing to pay fees to do it.

We are coming to the point where all of the nonsense defining what anything is worth is meaningless. Everything that the free market tries to value is already corrupt with lobbying of the government and/or government officers' ownership in companies.

The conglomerated corruptions that have led the global economy(ies) to recession are leading to global regulations to prevent it from happening again. The global regulations will be a global socialist union and then God help us all.