You Won't Believe These Suez Canal Conspiracies
3 years ago
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Climate change by the numbers: The worst is yet to come
Climate change by the numbers: The worst is yet to come
click
snip
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” President Obama announced back in January at his second-term inauguration. Thus began another year of steady climate change, continued pollution of the atmosphere and half-hearted attempts at changing the world’s dire trajectory.
By many measures, 2013 wasn’t particularly extreme: it it wasn’t the hottest we’ve ever seen; its storms, by and large, weren’t the most devastating. Much of what occurred can best be seen as a sign of things to come. Droughts, believed to be exacerbated by climate change, will become more widespread. Wildfires are expected to get bigger, longer and smokier by 2050. Twelve months, after all, is but a short moment in Earth’s history. Only in the future, looking back, will we be able to recognize the true significance of many of this year’s big numbers:
click
snip
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” President Obama announced back in January at his second-term inauguration. Thus began another year of steady climate change, continued pollution of the atmosphere and half-hearted attempts at changing the world’s dire trajectory.
By many measures, 2013 wasn’t particularly extreme: it it wasn’t the hottest we’ve ever seen; its storms, by and large, weren’t the most devastating. Much of what occurred can best be seen as a sign of things to come. Droughts, believed to be exacerbated by climate change, will become more widespread. Wildfires are expected to get bigger, longer and smokier by 2050. Twelve months, after all, is but a short moment in Earth’s history. Only in the future, looking back, will we be able to recognize the true significance of many of this year’s big numbers:
7: Where 2013 ranks among the warmest years in history, according to the World Meteorological Association. Tied with 2003, the ranking is based on the year’s first nine months, during which average temperatures were 0.86°F above the 1960-1991 global average.
If memory swerves: The 1 percent laughs last, as Wall Street wins again
If memory swerves: The 1 percent laughs last, as Wall Street wins again
click
snip
Later that day, in a climate of almost complete panic, Merrill Lynch — the nation’s third-largest investment bank, which had fed at the same trough — managed to find shelter in the arms of Bank of America. By the next day, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department announced that they were saving AIG, the mammoth insurance company that had transformed itself into a stealth hedge fund. As for actual hedge funds, more than 700 of them collapsed in the subsequent four months. And Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the last two investment-banking leviathans, desperately registered themselves as “bank holding companies” and threw themselves upon the mercy of the all-forgiving Fed.
It was the unavoidable explosion after decades of deregulation and willful blindness. A kind of waste product had been deliberately moved through the bowels of a hundred shady mortgage outfits. It was then gilded by delusional ratings agencies and sold to the world by the most respected names in finance. Bribery and deceit and crazy incentives had been the laxatives that pushed this product down the pipe; money and bonhomie and reassuring economic theory had been the sedatives that put the regulators to sleep.
The industry would supervise itself, we were told — and we believed it. Instead our economic order turned out to be wobbly, even rotten. The great banks looked insolvent. The great capitalists looked like criminals.
click
snip
Later that day, in a climate of almost complete panic, Merrill Lynch — the nation’s third-largest investment bank, which had fed at the same trough — managed to find shelter in the arms of Bank of America. By the next day, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department announced that they were saving AIG, the mammoth insurance company that had transformed itself into a stealth hedge fund. As for actual hedge funds, more than 700 of them collapsed in the subsequent four months. And Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the last two investment-banking leviathans, desperately registered themselves as “bank holding companies” and threw themselves upon the mercy of the all-forgiving Fed.
It was the unavoidable explosion after decades of deregulation and willful blindness. A kind of waste product had been deliberately moved through the bowels of a hundred shady mortgage outfits. It was then gilded by delusional ratings agencies and sold to the world by the most respected names in finance. Bribery and deceit and crazy incentives had been the laxatives that pushed this product down the pipe; money and bonhomie and reassuring economic theory had been the sedatives that put the regulators to sleep.
The industry would supervise itself, we were told — and we believed it. Instead our economic order turned out to be wobbly, even rotten. The great banks looked insolvent. The great capitalists looked like criminals.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Friday, December 27, 2013
Coast Guard wants barges to ship fracking water : Stltoday
Coast Guard wants barges to ship fracking water : Stltoday
click link
snip
"We expect that shale gas wastewater can be transported just as safely," said Jennifer Carpenter, of American Waterways Operators, a trade group based in Washington, D.C.
Environment America, a federation of 29 state-based groups, strongly disagrees. The group said in a statement that it gathered 29,000 comments opposed to the proposal from people around the country. Courtney Abrams, the clean water program director for the group, urged the Coast Guard to "reject this outrageous proposal."
Extracting natural gas trapped in shale formations requires pumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the ground to break apart rock and free the gas. Some of that water, along with large quantities of existing underground water, returns to the surface, and it can contain high levels of salt, drilling chemicals, heavy metals and naturally occurring low-level radiation.
The Marcellus Shale formation, underlying large parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and some neighboring states, is the nation's most productive natural gas field. Thousands of new wells have been drilled there since 2008, and hundreds of millions of gallons of wastewater needs to be disposed of each year.
Some states, such as Texas and Ohio, have many underground waste disposal wells. But Pennsylvania has only a few, meaning the leftovers have to be shipped elsewhere.
click link
snip
"We expect that shale gas wastewater can be transported just as safely," said Jennifer Carpenter, of American Waterways Operators, a trade group based in Washington, D.C.
Environment America, a federation of 29 state-based groups, strongly disagrees. The group said in a statement that it gathered 29,000 comments opposed to the proposal from people around the country. Courtney Abrams, the clean water program director for the group, urged the Coast Guard to "reject this outrageous proposal."
Extracting natural gas trapped in shale formations requires pumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the ground to break apart rock and free the gas. Some of that water, along with large quantities of existing underground water, returns to the surface, and it can contain high levels of salt, drilling chemicals, heavy metals and naturally occurring low-level radiation.
The Marcellus Shale formation, underlying large parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and some neighboring states, is the nation's most productive natural gas field. Thousands of new wells have been drilled there since 2008, and hundreds of millions of gallons of wastewater needs to be disposed of each year.
Some states, such as Texas and Ohio, have many underground waste disposal wells. But Pennsylvania has only a few, meaning the leftovers have to be shipped elsewhere.
'Senator From Walmart' Hired By Monsanto, Scores Big In Post-Senate Life
old one. note: uswa opposed her in primary. good to see she is doing well.
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Retired Steelworkers honor Jane Becker with scholarship fund | The Labor Tribune
Retired Steelworkers honor Jane Becker with scholarship fund | The Labor Tribune:
click link
snip
click link
snip
Retired Steelworkers honor Jane Becker with scholarship fund
GIVING BACK: Retired Steelworker Virginia Ohlen (left) returns her drawing winnings to the SOAR scholarship fund, to the delight of Chapter President Jeff Rains and Recording Secretary Dorothy Asbury.
– Labor Tribune photo
– Labor Tribune photo
By CARL GREEN
Illinois Correspondent
Pontoon Beach IL – It was a time of great pride for Metro East Steelworkers when one of their own, George Becker, was elected the union’s international president in 1993.
Becker served through 2001, and he remains highly regarded for leading the union through mergers, reorganization, tough bargaining and safety improvements, years after his death in 2007.
But people here have also been proud of the efforts of his wife, Jane Becker, who died on July 19, 2013. She was an organizer and mentor for union and political workers, was active with charities, and played a vital role in helping to found Steelworkers Organization of Active Retirees (SOAR), the national retirees group.
GEORGE
BECKER
BECKER
So at its well-attended Christmas luncheon on Dec. 9 at the Venice Social Club in Pontoon Beach, the Retirees’ Local Chapter 7-34-2 honored Jane Becker by naming its scholarship program for her, just when the program is in an expansion mode.
The group’s scholarship chairman, Norma Gaines, said she thinks of Jane Becker whenever the group gets together each month.
“A lot of the people remember her efforts to form SOAR,” Gaines said. “It was an idea that was a long time in coming.”
Having the group has been important to members, she said. “Everybody still likes to see each other. It’s a great thing.”
One retired Steelworker, Bob Means, stood up at the luncheon to recall Jane Becker’s kindness when Means and his wife moved to Pittsburgh in 1984 to work for the international union staff.
JANE
BECKER
BECKER
“We didn’t know anyone there or what to do,” Means recalled. “Jane took us under her wing a
How the U.S. Government Can Follow Its Own Advice to Be a Responsible Consumer - Labor is Not a Commodity
How the U.S. Government Can Follow Its Own Advice to Be a Responsible Consumer - Labor is Not a Commodity
click link
- See more at: http://laborrightsblog.typepad.com/international_labor_right/2013/12/how-the-us-government-can-follow-its-own-advice-to-be-a-responsible-consumer.html#sthash.0sdkvVkR.dpuf
- See more at: http://laborrightsblog.typepad.com/international_labor_right/2013/12/how-the-us-government-can-follow-its-own-advice-to-be-a-responsible-consumer.html#sthash.0sdkvVkR.dpuf - See more at: http://laborrightsblog.typepad.com/international_labor_right/2013/12/how-the-us-government-can-follow-its-own-advice-to-be-a-responsible-consumer.html#sthash.0sdkvVkR.dpuf
click link
How the U.S. Government Can Follow Its Own Advice to Be a Responsible Consumer
By Bjorn Skorpen Claeson, International Labor Rights Forum
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
How the U.S. Government Can Follow Its Own Advice to Be a Responsible Consumer
By Bjorn Skorpen Claeson, International Labor Rights Forum
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
How the U.S. Government Can Follow Its Own Advice to Be a Responsible Consumer
By Bjorn Skorpen Claeson, International Labor Rights Forum
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
Today, the New York Times reports child labor, blocked fire exits, unsafe buildings, forced overtime and a range of other illegal, unsafe, and abusive conditions for garment workers in factories in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Haiti, Mexico, and Thailand. These factories have at least one thing in common: the United States government is a customer. That means these abuses take place with the support of our tax dollars and are carried out in our names. It also means the Obama administration “flouts its own advice” to private sector companies to use their purchasing power to improve working conditions in overseas garment factories.
Because the U.S. government is the world’s single largest buyer it could create a significant push for safe and decent working conditions in supplier factories across the globe by practicing what it preaches. How would it do that?
Monday, December 23, 2013
Saturday, December 21, 2013
Obamacare gains steam
Obamacare gains steam
click link
snip
A total of more than 1 million people have enrolled since Oct. 1, Obama said at his end-of-the-year press conference. That’s a jump from Nov. 30 when just 365,000 had signed up for private insurance in the new federal and state markets offering subsidized coverage.
“That is a big deal,” Obama said of getting coverage for uninsured people. “That’s why I ran for this office.”
Separately, officials said 3.9 million people have qualified for government health care through the law’s Medicaid expansion. Even so, it’s too early to say that the health care rollout has turned the corner.
HealthCare.gov was down for part of the day Friday, as technicians attempted to fix an error that occurred Thursday night when the site was undergoing routine maintenance, officials explained.
click link
snip
A total of more than 1 million people have enrolled since Oct. 1, Obama said at his end-of-the-year press conference. That’s a jump from Nov. 30 when just 365,000 had signed up for private insurance in the new federal and state markets offering subsidized coverage.
“That is a big deal,” Obama said of getting coverage for uninsured people. “That’s why I ran for this office.”
Separately, officials said 3.9 million people have qualified for government health care through the law’s Medicaid expansion. Even so, it’s too early to say that the health care rollout has turned the corner.
HealthCare.gov was down for part of the day Friday, as technicians attempted to fix an error that occurred Thursday night when the site was undergoing routine maintenance, officials explained.
Shocking new trend: Conservative economists who don’t want to gut Social Security
Shocking new trend: Conservative economists who <em>don’t</em> want to gut Social Security
click link
snip
Instead, a fairly serious discussion ensued. Well-respected economists on both sides of the aisle agreed it would not be hard or costly to shore up benefits for the poor by as much as 10 or 15 percent, which would markedly improve their quality of life. While no specific commitment was made on where this discussion would go next, it was a sign that the entitlement reform debate is moving beyond just cuts and austerity.
“I have argued for a more far-reaching reform, similar to what you have in New Zealand or the U.K., where every retiree receives a flat benefit at the poverty level. The idea is that you take poverty among [America’s] seniors, which today is at 9 percent, down to zero percent,” said Andrew G. Biggs, an American Enterprise Institute scholar who was the head of Social Security research in the George W. Bush administration.
“On top of that, if you want to have a benefit above poverty, we need to sign people up for employer-sponsored plans or IRAs or something along those lines,” Biggs continued. “Social Security—I’m not going to say that it does not cut poverty. Clearly it does.”
Some of Biggs’ other ideas did not sit well with progressive economists, such as saying that benefits for middle-income earners were more than sufficient and could be cut, as well as suggesting it was a bad idea to raise taxes on wealthier Americans to better fund Social Security. But after years of threatened cuts to entitlements by the GOP and championed by Wall Street titans who want to avoid higher taxes, a serious discussion about updating the safety net was seen as a striking development.
click link
snip
Instead, a fairly serious discussion ensued. Well-respected economists on both sides of the aisle agreed it would not be hard or costly to shore up benefits for the poor by as much as 10 or 15 percent, which would markedly improve their quality of life. While no specific commitment was made on where this discussion would go next, it was a sign that the entitlement reform debate is moving beyond just cuts and austerity.
“I have argued for a more far-reaching reform, similar to what you have in New Zealand or the U.K., where every retiree receives a flat benefit at the poverty level. The idea is that you take poverty among [America’s] seniors, which today is at 9 percent, down to zero percent,” said Andrew G. Biggs, an American Enterprise Institute scholar who was the head of Social Security research in the George W. Bush administration.
“On top of that, if you want to have a benefit above poverty, we need to sign people up for employer-sponsored plans or IRAs or something along those lines,” Biggs continued. “Social Security—I’m not going to say that it does not cut poverty. Clearly it does.”
Some of Biggs’ other ideas did not sit well with progressive economists, such as saying that benefits for middle-income earners were more than sufficient and could be cut, as well as suggesting it was a bad idea to raise taxes on wealthier Americans to better fund Social Security. But after years of threatened cuts to entitlements by the GOP and championed by Wall Street titans who want to avoid higher taxes, a serious discussion about updating the safety net was seen as a striking development.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
These 7 corporate rip-offs will make you want to scream
These 7 corporate rip-offs will make you want to scream
click link
snip
1. Corporations Profit from Food Stamps
It’s odd to think about billion-dollar financial institutions objecting to cuts in the SNAP program, but some of them are administrators of the program, collecting fees from a benefit meant for children and other needy Americans, and enjoying subsidies of state tax money for services that could be performed by the states themselves. They want more people on food stamps, not less. Three corporations have cornered the market: JP Morgan, Xerox, and eFunds Corp.
According to a JP Morgan spokesman, the food stamp program “is a very important business to JP Morgan. It’s an important business in terms of its size and scale…The good news from JP Morgan’s perspective is the infrastructure that we built has been able to cope with that increase in volume..”
2. Crash the Economy, Get Your Money Back. Die with a Student Loan, Stay in Debt.
The financial industry has manipulated the bankruptcy laws to ensure that high-risk derivatives, which devastated the market in 2008, have FIRST CLAIM over savings deposit insurance, pension funds, and everything else.
click link
snip
1. Corporations Profit from Food Stamps
It’s odd to think about billion-dollar financial institutions objecting to cuts in the SNAP program, but some of them are administrators of the program, collecting fees from a benefit meant for children and other needy Americans, and enjoying subsidies of state tax money for services that could be performed by the states themselves. They want more people on food stamps, not less. Three corporations have cornered the market: JP Morgan, Xerox, and eFunds Corp.
According to a JP Morgan spokesman, the food stamp program “is a very important business to JP Morgan. It’s an important business in terms of its size and scale…The good news from JP Morgan’s perspective is the infrastructure that we built has been able to cope with that increase in volume..”
2. Crash the Economy, Get Your Money Back. Die with a Student Loan, Stay in Debt.
The financial industry has manipulated the bankruptcy laws to ensure that high-risk derivatives, which devastated the market in 2008, have FIRST CLAIM over savings deposit insurance, pension funds, and everything else.
Monday, December 16, 2013
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Take that, Paul Ryan! Elizabeth Warren beats back Social Security plot
Take that, Paul Ryan! Elizabeth Warren beats back Social Security plot
click link
snip
The Overton Window has shifted! At least in the case of Social Security.
The Overton Window — named for the late Joseph P. Overton of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy — is the frame through which acceptable options for public policy are viewed at any given time. Options that are outside of the frame (or “outside the box,” to use another metaphor) are deemed unworthy of consideration or mention by the bipartisan establishment, no matter how compelling those options may actually be. The Overton Window tends to be positioned by the owners and bureaucrats of the major media, who tend to share an elite consensus with politicians and the donors who fund them.
Until recently, in discussions of the future of Social Security the Overton Window was positioned to exclude any discussion of raising, rather than cutting, Social Security benefits. For the last generation, the range of permissible opinion with respect to the program — which most Americans depend on for nearly all of their income in old age — ranged from conservatives who wanted to abolish Social Security altogether, to press-anointed “progressives” and token Democrats who merely wanted to cut Social Security benefits. The option of maintaining scheduled Social Security benefits, and paying for them with higher taxes, was considered unworthy of discussion by the guardians of Overton Orthodoxy, both in the press and in the two major parties. As for expanding Social Security benefits — why, that’s crazy talk!
It’s safe to say that, within the bipartisan oligarchy, the alleged need to cut Social Security remains the consensus. But the Overton Window has shifted just a little to the left, and the idea of expanding Social Security, hitherto invisible through the frame, is now in the public field of vision.
click link
snip
The Overton Window has shifted! At least in the case of Social Security.
The Overton Window — named for the late Joseph P. Overton of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy — is the frame through which acceptable options for public policy are viewed at any given time. Options that are outside of the frame (or “outside the box,” to use another metaphor) are deemed unworthy of consideration or mention by the bipartisan establishment, no matter how compelling those options may actually be. The Overton Window tends to be positioned by the owners and bureaucrats of the major media, who tend to share an elite consensus with politicians and the donors who fund them.
Until recently, in discussions of the future of Social Security the Overton Window was positioned to exclude any discussion of raising, rather than cutting, Social Security benefits. For the last generation, the range of permissible opinion with respect to the program — which most Americans depend on for nearly all of their income in old age — ranged from conservatives who wanted to abolish Social Security altogether, to press-anointed “progressives” and token Democrats who merely wanted to cut Social Security benefits. The option of maintaining scheduled Social Security benefits, and paying for them with higher taxes, was considered unworthy of discussion by the guardians of Overton Orthodoxy, both in the press and in the two major parties. As for expanding Social Security benefits — why, that’s crazy talk!
It’s safe to say that, within the bipartisan oligarchy, the alleged need to cut Social Security remains the consensus. But the Overton Window has shifted just a little to the left, and the idea of expanding Social Security, hitherto invisible through the frame, is now in the public field of vision.
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Tea Party congressman warns Salon: Another shutdown may be coming!
Tea Party congressman warns Salon: Another shutdown may be coming!
click link
snip
By a 332-to-94 vote Thursday night, the House passed a budget deal that – despite taking money from federal workers’ pockets and leaving long-term unemployed in the lurch – was staunchly opposed by major right-wing groups. Among the critics was Tea Party stalwart and Kansas congressman Tim Huelskamp, whom Boehner kicked off the Budget Committee in an alleged purge last year. In an interview before the vote, Huelskamp charged that the deal “doesn’t avoid a government shutdown,” told Salon he hears rumors Boehner’s retiring, and skewered Paul Ryan’s response to right-wing attacks on the deal he brokered. A condensed version of our conversation follows.
Congressman Ryan described this as an agreement that “does not raise taxes, that does reduce the deficit and produces some certainty and prevents a government shutdown.” Why do you disagree with his assessment?
click link
snip
By a 332-to-94 vote Thursday night, the House passed a budget deal that – despite taking money from federal workers’ pockets and leaving long-term unemployed in the lurch – was staunchly opposed by major right-wing groups. Among the critics was Tea Party stalwart and Kansas congressman Tim Huelskamp, whom Boehner kicked off the Budget Committee in an alleged purge last year. In an interview before the vote, Huelskamp charged that the deal “doesn’t avoid a government shutdown,” told Salon he hears rumors Boehner’s retiring, and skewered Paul Ryan’s response to right-wing attacks on the deal he brokered. A condensed version of our conversation follows.
Congressman Ryan described this as an agreement that “does not raise taxes, that does reduce the deficit and produces some certainty and prevents a government shutdown.” Why do you disagree with his assessment?
Friday, December 13, 2013
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Hidden disaster in new budget: Demonic plot to raid pensions
Hidden disaster in new budget: Demonic plot to raid pensions
click link
snip
2013 has not been a pleasant year if you work for the federal government. You’ve been subject to pay freezes, furloughs and shutdowns. One of you got yelled at by a Tea Party Republican at the World War II memorial. And if Congress passes the budget deal announced Tuesday night by Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray – a big if – you will get a final Christmas present: You’ll have to pay more into your pension, an effective wage cut that just adds to the $114 billion, with a “B,” federal employees have already given back to the government in the name of deficit reduction.
The deal between House and Senate negotiators Ryan and Murray would reverse part of sequestration for 2014 and 2015, itself a major source of pain for federal workers. But negotiators want to pay for that relief in future years, with the overall package cutting the deficit by an additional $23 billion. And one of the major “pay-fors” is an increase in federal employee pension contributions. President Obama’s 2014 budget included such a proposal, which would have raised the employee contribution in three stages, from 0.8 percent of salary to 2 percent. Congress had already made this shift for new hires; the Obama proposal would affect all workers hired before 2012.
That proposed increased contribution translated to a 1.2 percent pay cut, and a total of around $20 billion in givebacks over 10 years. Negotiators were pressured by the powerful Maryland Democratic delegation, including Minority Leader Steny Hoyer, House Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen and Senate Appropriations Committee chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, into softening the blow on federal employees, many of whom live in their districts. According to Sen. Murray, the increase in contributions now equals about $6 billion over 10 years. But negotiators traded some of the cuts to federal employee pensions with different cuts to military pensions, also totaling $6 billion. So whatever the occupation, people who work for the government will bear the brunt of the pain.
click link
snip
2013 has not been a pleasant year if you work for the federal government. You’ve been subject to pay freezes, furloughs and shutdowns. One of you got yelled at by a Tea Party Republican at the World War II memorial. And if Congress passes the budget deal announced Tuesday night by Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray – a big if – you will get a final Christmas present: You’ll have to pay more into your pension, an effective wage cut that just adds to the $114 billion, with a “B,” federal employees have already given back to the government in the name of deficit reduction.
The deal between House and Senate negotiators Ryan and Murray would reverse part of sequestration for 2014 and 2015, itself a major source of pain for federal workers. But negotiators want to pay for that relief in future years, with the overall package cutting the deficit by an additional $23 billion. And one of the major “pay-fors” is an increase in federal employee pension contributions. President Obama’s 2014 budget included such a proposal, which would have raised the employee contribution in three stages, from 0.8 percent of salary to 2 percent. Congress had already made this shift for new hires; the Obama proposal would affect all workers hired before 2012.
That proposed increased contribution translated to a 1.2 percent pay cut, and a total of around $20 billion in givebacks over 10 years. Negotiators were pressured by the powerful Maryland Democratic delegation, including Minority Leader Steny Hoyer, House Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen and Senate Appropriations Committee chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, into softening the blow on federal employees, many of whom live in their districts. According to Sen. Murray, the increase in contributions now equals about $6 billion over 10 years. But negotiators traded some of the cuts to federal employee pensions with different cuts to military pensions, also totaling $6 billion. So whatever the occupation, people who work for the government will bear the brunt of the pain.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Friday, December 6, 2013
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Sunday, December 1, 2013
Sorry, neoliberals: Inequality is driven by greed, not technology
Sorry, neoliberals: Inequality is driven by greed, not technology
click link
snip
His argument echoes the conventional wisdom in economics, formulated by Lawrence Katz and Claudia Goldin, that skill-biased technological change can explain most of the increase in inequality. The premise is that technological developments have favored college-educated workers over unskilled labor, thereby increasing inequality. Since it was formulated, SBTC has drawn criticism. A 2002 paper by David Card first drew attention to potential holes in the explanation: a short period of stabilization in wage inequality in the 1990s during a technological boom and the failure to explain wage gaps between men and women as well as blacks and whites. A 2012 paper by Daron Acemoglu and David Autor noted other failures in the theory, namely that it could not explain the divergence in incomes that had occurred among skilled workers and why the real median wages could decline during a period of increasing productivity.
Now, Lawrence Mishel, Heidi Shierholz and John Schmitt have released a new study that questions SBTC as an explanation for increasing wage inequality. Mishel et al. argue that “job polarization,” the premise that more jobs have been created in low-wage sectors and high-wage sectors, thus driving wage inequality, doesn’t actually explain the problem. On the one hand, high-wage occupations have not significantly expanded their share of the workforce since 2000. On the other, low-wage jobs have not increased as a total share of employment since 1979.
click link
snip
His argument echoes the conventional wisdom in economics, formulated by Lawrence Katz and Claudia Goldin, that skill-biased technological change can explain most of the increase in inequality. The premise is that technological developments have favored college-educated workers over unskilled labor, thereby increasing inequality. Since it was formulated, SBTC has drawn criticism. A 2002 paper by David Card first drew attention to potential holes in the explanation: a short period of stabilization in wage inequality in the 1990s during a technological boom and the failure to explain wage gaps between men and women as well as blacks and whites. A 2012 paper by Daron Acemoglu and David Autor noted other failures in the theory, namely that it could not explain the divergence in incomes that had occurred among skilled workers and why the real median wages could decline during a period of increasing productivity.
Now, Lawrence Mishel, Heidi Shierholz and John Schmitt have released a new study that questions SBTC as an explanation for increasing wage inequality. Mishel et al. argue that “job polarization,” the premise that more jobs have been created in low-wage sectors and high-wage sectors, thus driving wage inequality, doesn’t actually explain the problem. On the one hand, high-wage occupations have not significantly expanded their share of the workforce since 2000. On the other, low-wage jobs have not increased as a total share of employment since 1979.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Tens of thousands protest, over 100 arrested in Black Friday challenge to Wal-Mart
Tens of thousands protest, over 100 arrested in Black Friday challenge to Wal-Mart
click link
note: some demonstrations in st louis area
click link
note: some demonstrations in st louis area
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Monday, November 25, 2013
Paul Krugman: California proves Obamacare is going to work
Paul Krugman: California proves Obamacare is going to work
click
snip
Finally, the California authorities have been especially forthcoming with data tracking the progress of enrollment. And the numbers are increasingly encouraging.
For one thing, enrollment is surging. At this point, more than 10,000 applications are being completed per day, putting the state well on track to meet its overall targets for 2014 coverage. Just imagine, by the way, how different press coverage would be right now if Obama officials had produced a comparable success, and around 100,000 people a day were signing up nationwide.
Equally important is the information on who is enrolling. To work as planned, health reform has to produce a balanced risk pool — that is, it must sign up young, healthy Americans as well as their older, less healthy compatriots. And so far, so good: in October, 22.5 percent of California enrollees were between the ages of 18 and 34, slightly above that group’s share of the population.
click
snip
Finally, the California authorities have been especially forthcoming with data tracking the progress of enrollment. And the numbers are increasingly encouraging.
For one thing, enrollment is surging. At this point, more than 10,000 applications are being completed per day, putting the state well on track to meet its overall targets for 2014 coverage. Just imagine, by the way, how different press coverage would be right now if Obama officials had produced a comparable success, and around 100,000 people a day were signing up nationwide.
Equally important is the information on who is enrolling. To work as planned, health reform has to produce a balanced risk pool — that is, it must sign up young, healthy Americans as well as their older, less healthy compatriots. And so far, so good: in October, 22.5 percent of California enrollees were between the ages of 18 and 34, slightly above that group’s share of the population.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Stop whining, centrists: Bipartisanship is a myth that’s never existed
Stop whining, centrists: Bipartisanship is a myth that’s never existed
click link
snip
One of the greatest myths about American politics is that there was once a golden age of bipartisanship in which responsible, enlightened statesmen set aside partisan differences in order to collaborate with their colleagues on the other side. This understanding of history underlies constant calls for “grand bargains” among left and right on the budget and other issues. It also permits figures like Ross Perot and Michael Bloomberg to pose as practical problem-solvers superior to petty partisan politicians.
Like most historical myths, the myth of bipartisanship is a poor guide to historical understanding and contemporary action.
Yes, bipartisanship was much higher in the mid-twentieth century than it is now. A new graphic provides a striking illustration of the ideological fissioning of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate.
click link
snip
One of the greatest myths about American politics is that there was once a golden age of bipartisanship in which responsible, enlightened statesmen set aside partisan differences in order to collaborate with their colleagues on the other side. This understanding of history underlies constant calls for “grand bargains” among left and right on the budget and other issues. It also permits figures like Ross Perot and Michael Bloomberg to pose as practical problem-solvers superior to petty partisan politicians.
Like most historical myths, the myth of bipartisanship is a poor guide to historical understanding and contemporary action.
Yes, bipartisanship was much higher in the mid-twentieth century than it is now. A new graphic provides a striking illustration of the ideological fissioning of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate.
Friday, November 22, 2013
Paul Krugman: Expand Social Security!
Paul Krugman: Expand Social Security!
click
snip
The second argument Krugman tackles, put forward recently by the Washington Post, is that the poverty rate for seniors is low — the implication being that they don’t need further assistance, anyway. Krugman’s response is to note that the official measurement of poverty among seniors is widely seen as flawed, and flawed in a way that underestimates levels of senior poverty. While many believe the poverty rate among seniors to be 9 percent, Krugman says it’s more likely around 15 percent. And what’s more, it’s likely to increase in the years ahead as more struggling retirees enter the system.
But the biggest reason to expand Social Security, Krugman says, is the failure of 401(k)s. “At this point,” Krugman writes, “it’s clear that the shift to 401(k)s was a gigantic failure. Employers took advantage of the switch to surreptitiously cut benefits; investment returns have been far lower than workers were told to expect; and, to be fair, many people haven’t managed their money wisely.”
click
snip
The second argument Krugman tackles, put forward recently by the Washington Post, is that the poverty rate for seniors is low — the implication being that they don’t need further assistance, anyway. Krugman’s response is to note that the official measurement of poverty among seniors is widely seen as flawed, and flawed in a way that underestimates levels of senior poverty. While many believe the poverty rate among seniors to be 9 percent, Krugman says it’s more likely around 15 percent. And what’s more, it’s likely to increase in the years ahead as more struggling retirees enter the system.
But the biggest reason to expand Social Security, Krugman says, is the failure of 401(k)s. “At this point,” Krugman writes, “it’s clear that the shift to 401(k)s was a gigantic failure. Employers took advantage of the switch to surreptitiously cut benefits; investment returns have been far lower than workers were told to expect; and, to be fair, many people haven’t managed their money wisely.”
Thursday, November 21, 2013
Right-wing pension-cutters get humiliated by their own survey data
Right-wing pension-cutters get humiliated by their own survey data
click link
snip
Of course, that doesn’t mean the Plot Against Pensions won’t move forward. Between money from billionaires, cash from Wall Streeters looking to profit from pension conversions, and support from conservative activists who ideologically oppose the idea of guaranteed retirement income, the plot has vast resources behind it.
Will those massive resources be able to manufacture a sea change in public opinion? Will they make Americans hate public employees and punish those employees by stripping them of the retirement benefits they were promised? It is certainly possible — but it looks like it is going to be a lot harder (and probably more expensive) to engineer such a scam than the anti-pension activists once thought.
click link
snip
Of course, that doesn’t mean the Plot Against Pensions won’t move forward. Between money from billionaires, cash from Wall Streeters looking to profit from pension conversions, and support from conservative activists who ideologically oppose the idea of guaranteed retirement income, the plot has vast resources behind it.
Will those massive resources be able to manufacture a sea change in public opinion? Will they make Americans hate public employees and punish those employees by stripping them of the retirement benefits they were promised? It is certainly possible — but it looks like it is going to be a lot harder (and probably more expensive) to engineer such a scam than the anti-pension activists once thought.
How Wall Street — not pensioners — wrecked Detroit
How Wall Street — not pensioners — wrecked Detroit
click link
snip
No doubt, there is a tiny grain of truth in this otherwise inaccurate story. Yes, it is true, Detroit is a cautionary tale for governments about financial management and legacy costs. However, it is not a cautionary tale about allegedly greedy employees living the MTV Cribs life off taxpayers. As an eye-opening new report from a former Goldman Sachs executive documents, it is instead yet another cautionary tale about Wall Street’s too-good-to-be-true schemes that end up being, well, too good to be true.
Commissioned by the think tank Demos, the new report out today from former investment banker Wallace Turbeville shows that contrary to the myths about a bloated municipal government overspending on lavish social services, Detroit’s “overall expenses have declined over the last five years” by $419 million thanks to the city “laying off more than 2,350 workers, cutting worker pay, and reducing future healthcare and future benefit accruals for workers.” Today, Turbeville notes that “Detroit has a significantly smaller workforce per capita than comparable cities.” Yet, those draconian cuts still left the city with an annual $198 million shortfall because of three big problems — none of which has anything to do with supposedly greedy public workers and their allegedly overly “generous” pension benefits.
click link
snip
No doubt, there is a tiny grain of truth in this otherwise inaccurate story. Yes, it is true, Detroit is a cautionary tale for governments about financial management and legacy costs. However, it is not a cautionary tale about allegedly greedy employees living the MTV Cribs life off taxpayers. As an eye-opening new report from a former Goldman Sachs executive documents, it is instead yet another cautionary tale about Wall Street’s too-good-to-be-true schemes that end up being, well, too good to be true.
Commissioned by the think tank Demos, the new report out today from former investment banker Wallace Turbeville shows that contrary to the myths about a bloated municipal government overspending on lavish social services, Detroit’s “overall expenses have declined over the last five years” by $419 million thanks to the city “laying off more than 2,350 workers, cutting worker pay, and reducing future healthcare and future benefit accruals for workers.” Today, Turbeville notes that “Detroit has a significantly smaller workforce per capita than comparable cities.” Yet, those draconian cuts still left the city with an annual $198 million shortfall because of three big problems — none of which has anything to do with supposedly greedy public workers and their allegedly overly “generous” pension benefits.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Have Social Security Benefits Really Been Cut by 19 Percent?
Have Social Security Benefits Really Been Cut by 19 Percent?
click link for old story
snip
he National Academy of Social Insurance, of which I’m a member, has released a new issue brief titled “Social Security Beneficiaries Face 19% Cut; New Revenue Can Restore Balance.” The paper argues that, based on changes implemented in the 1983 Social Security reforms—increases in the normal retirement age from 65 to 67; a one-time reduction in COLA payments; and the taxation of retirement benefits—future retirees will receive benefits 19 percent lower than what they would have received had the 1983 reforms not been implemented. Consequently, NASI argues, well, new revenues can restore balance.
Some perspective is needed. First, the 1983 reforms didn’t only reduce benefits; they also increased taxes, by covering newly hired federal workers and non-profit associations, accelerating tax increases already on the books, prohibiting state/local workers from leaving the system, and so on. Together, tax increases made up around 38 percent of the total changes in the 1983 reforms, and that’s even if you count the taxation of benefits as a benefit cut rather than a tax. How to categorize the taxation of benefits is ambiguous and I can go either way, although I’d note that benefit taxation tends not to affect low- and middle-income retirees very much. (This might be the first time I’ve seen NASI opposed to taxes on high earners.) Overall, the 1983 reforms were more balanced than you might guess from reading NASI’s paper alone.
click link for old story
snip
he National Academy of Social Insurance, of which I’m a member, has released a new issue brief titled “Social Security Beneficiaries Face 19% Cut; New Revenue Can Restore Balance.” The paper argues that, based on changes implemented in the 1983 Social Security reforms—increases in the normal retirement age from 65 to 67; a one-time reduction in COLA payments; and the taxation of retirement benefits—future retirees will receive benefits 19 percent lower than what they would have received had the 1983 reforms not been implemented. Consequently, NASI argues, well, new revenues can restore balance.
Some perspective is needed. First, the 1983 reforms didn’t only reduce benefits; they also increased taxes, by covering newly hired federal workers and non-profit associations, accelerating tax increases already on the books, prohibiting state/local workers from leaving the system, and so on. Together, tax increases made up around 38 percent of the total changes in the 1983 reforms, and that’s even if you count the taxation of benefits as a benefit cut rather than a tax. How to categorize the taxation of benefits is ambiguous and I can go either way, although I’d note that benefit taxation tends not to affect low- and middle-income retirees very much. (This might be the first time I’ve seen NASI opposed to taxes on high earners.) Overall, the 1983 reforms were more balanced than you might guess from reading NASI’s paper alone.
How the Tea Party helped a military giant bully its workers
How the Tea Party helped a military giant bully its workers
click link
snip
Boeing is the $100 billion aerospace giant whose business includes selling fighters, bombers and missiles to the government. As I’ve reported, through a series of prolonged strikes, employees at its Washington state factories have extracted a share of the bounty from that business, and secured a level of economic security largely unheard of in America’s fastest-growing post-crash sectors.
This year Boeing, in a move the Seattle Times noted could “rapidly compress” the company’s “exit from Washington state,” threatened to build its next big airplane line somewhere new – at great short-term cost to the company – if union members didn’t cough up massive concessions in exchange for a promise to keep it in state.
Local Machinists Union president Tom Wroblewski reportedly tore up Boeing’s pension-replacing contract extension proposal at a union meeting and called it a “piece of crap,” but ultimately “declined to give specific direction” in Wednesday’s vote and “publicly stressed that the deal would bring job security.” The members still voted no, prompting Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to tweet, “Tough news from [union local] @IAM751 tonight,” Boeing to announce it was “left with no choice but to open the process competitively and pursue all options for the [new] 777X,” and Wroblewski to declare that the union had “preserved something sacred by rejecting the Boeing proposal,” and voice his “hope” that “Boeing won’t discard our skills …”
So Boeing Machinists declined to hand over future pensions as a ransom for protecting future jobs. Still, somewhere, South Carolina Gov. and self-described “union-buster” Nikki Haley must be smiling.
click link
snip
Boeing is the $100 billion aerospace giant whose business includes selling fighters, bombers and missiles to the government. As I’ve reported, through a series of prolonged strikes, employees at its Washington state factories have extracted a share of the bounty from that business, and secured a level of economic security largely unheard of in America’s fastest-growing post-crash sectors.
This year Boeing, in a move the Seattle Times noted could “rapidly compress” the company’s “exit from Washington state,” threatened to build its next big airplane line somewhere new – at great short-term cost to the company – if union members didn’t cough up massive concessions in exchange for a promise to keep it in state.
Local Machinists Union president Tom Wroblewski reportedly tore up Boeing’s pension-replacing contract extension proposal at a union meeting and called it a “piece of crap,” but ultimately “declined to give specific direction” in Wednesday’s vote and “publicly stressed that the deal would bring job security.” The members still voted no, prompting Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to tweet, “Tough news from [union local] @IAM751 tonight,” Boeing to announce it was “left with no choice but to open the process competitively and pursue all options for the [new] 777X,” and Wroblewski to declare that the union had “preserved something sacred by rejecting the Boeing proposal,” and voice his “hope” that “Boeing won’t discard our skills …”
So Boeing Machinists declined to hand over future pensions as a ransom for protecting future jobs. Still, somewhere, South Carolina Gov. and self-described “union-buster” Nikki Haley must be smiling.
Listen up, Arne Duncan: Racist defense of Common Core won’t derail coalition to fight corporate school reform which hurts kids
Listen up, Arne Duncan: Racist defense of Common Core won’t derail coalition to fight corporate school reform which hurts kids
CLICK
snip
Too Much Reliance on Testing
Chief among the complaints of students, parents and teachers are the overemphasis on and poor quality of standardized tests that schools are made to impose.
In many states, including New York, very young children now face a battery of exams. The Daily News reported, “Because of a tough new curriculum and teacher evaluations, 4- and 5-year-olds are learning how to fill in bubbles on standardized math tests.” Giving bubble tests to kindergartners has become the order of the day in many schools, even though testing at this age group “is slow and traumatic,” and “trying to get a proper answer was next to impossible.”
According to an article in the Washington Post, because these tests increasingly require students to fill out the forms on computers, “educators around the country are rushing to teach typing to children who have barely mastered printing by hand.”
In later grades, students can encounter exams practically around every corner. In Pittsburgh, a local reporter found that public schools this school year have to administer “a total of more than 270 tests … to students in kindergarten through 12th grade. In fourth grade alone, there are 33 required tests … The district has no choice … the state mandates them.”
CLICK
snip
Too Much Reliance on Testing
Chief among the complaints of students, parents and teachers are the overemphasis on and poor quality of standardized tests that schools are made to impose.
In many states, including New York, very young children now face a battery of exams. The Daily News reported, “Because of a tough new curriculum and teacher evaluations, 4- and 5-year-olds are learning how to fill in bubbles on standardized math tests.” Giving bubble tests to kindergartners has become the order of the day in many schools, even though testing at this age group “is slow and traumatic,” and “trying to get a proper answer was next to impossible.”
According to an article in the Washington Post, because these tests increasingly require students to fill out the forms on computers, “educators around the country are rushing to teach typing to children who have barely mastered printing by hand.”
In later grades, students can encounter exams practically around every corner. In Pittsburgh, a local reporter found that public schools this school year have to administer “a total of more than 270 tests … to students in kindergarten through 12th grade. In fourth grade alone, there are 33 required tests … The district has no choice … the state mandates them.”
Monday, November 18, 2013
Saturday, November 16, 2013
American manufacturing isn’t dead yet. In fact, it’s growing
American manufacturing isn’t dead yet. In fact, it’s growing
click
snip
The report indicates businesses were increasing orders and output even in the face of the 16-day federal government closing in October. The housing rebound and demand for vehicles, the mainstays of manufacturing, will help to sustain economic growth that’s forecast to cool in the wake of last month’s fiscal gridlock.
“We’ve seen decent growth in manufacturing,” said Brian Jones, senior U.S. economist at Societe Generale in New York, who correctly projected the drop in total production. “Demand is holding up. The economy in general is doing better.”
The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey of economists called for a 0.2 percent rise in total industrial production. September output was revised up to a 0.7 percent gain from a previously reported 0.6 percent advance. Estimates of the 84 economists surveyed by Bloomberg ranged from a drop of 0.2 percent to an increase of 0.5 percent.
click
snip
The report indicates businesses were increasing orders and output even in the face of the 16-day federal government closing in October. The housing rebound and demand for vehicles, the mainstays of manufacturing, will help to sustain economic growth that’s forecast to cool in the wake of last month’s fiscal gridlock.
“We’ve seen decent growth in manufacturing,” said Brian Jones, senior U.S. economist at Societe Generale in New York, who correctly projected the drop in total production. “Demand is holding up. The economy in general is doing better.”
The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey of economists called for a 0.2 percent rise in total industrial production. September output was revised up to a 0.7 percent gain from a previously reported 0.6 percent advance. Estimates of the 84 economists surveyed by Bloomberg ranged from a drop of 0.2 percent to an increase of 0.5 percent.
Friday, November 15, 2013
The president strikes back: Insurance companies get their justified comeuppance
The president strikes back: Insurance companies get their justified comeuppance
click
snip
If your health insurance carrier has canceled your plan in anticipation of the launch of the Affordable Care Act, the administrative fix President Obama announced Thursday doesn’t guarantee you can get it back.
But setting aside logistical hurdles, it loosens regulations to allow insurance companies to reinstate the plans for another year, if they so choose — and if they first fully apprise you of your other options, including expanded benefits and the potential availability of premium support, on the exchanges.
This solution combines a clever p.r. stunt, a stalling tactic, an act of retribution, the genuine possibility of transition assistance for some, and a large political and substantive gamble. It bears the hallmarks of desperation and frustration and determination, but it just might work.
The idea isn’t to retroactively fulfill the promise he made to everyone whose plans have been canceled, but to demonstrate to the public that there’s now nothing in law requiring carriers to dump policyholders or uphold their cancelation notices, so that the public takes its concerns and grievances directly to the carriers. That would alleviate pressure on Democratic lawmakers to vote under duress for legislation that would undermine the Affordable Care Act more dramatically.
click
snip
If your health insurance carrier has canceled your plan in anticipation of the launch of the Affordable Care Act, the administrative fix President Obama announced Thursday doesn’t guarantee you can get it back.
But setting aside logistical hurdles, it loosens regulations to allow insurance companies to reinstate the plans for another year, if they so choose — and if they first fully apprise you of your other options, including expanded benefits and the potential availability of premium support, on the exchanges.
This solution combines a clever p.r. stunt, a stalling tactic, an act of retribution, the genuine possibility of transition assistance for some, and a large political and substantive gamble. It bears the hallmarks of desperation and frustration and determination, but it just might work.
The idea isn’t to retroactively fulfill the promise he made to everyone whose plans have been canceled, but to demonstrate to the public that there’s now nothing in law requiring carriers to dump policyholders or uphold their cancelation notices, so that the public takes its concerns and grievances directly to the carriers. That would alleviate pressure on Democratic lawmakers to vote under duress for legislation that would undermine the Affordable Care Act more dramatically.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Saturday, November 9, 2013
Friday, November 8, 2013
Do you earn more than a Somali pirate?
Do you earn more than a Somali pirate?
click
snip
They estimate that the owners of 179 ships hijacked between 2005 and 2012 paid out ransoms totaling between $339 million and $413 million, or an average payment per vessel of around $2.3 million.
But the pirate foot soldiers — the men with guns who illegally take to the seas to hunt down ships — earned only $30,000-$75,000 each, with the first to board a targeted vessel winning a $10,000 bonus.
It turns out that some pirate attacks were shoestring operations while others, well-equipped with weapons, boats, satellite phones and GPS locators, cost tens of thousands of dollars to launch.
Much of the takings of individual pirates were whittled away on the mild narcotic “khat” and food that is provided on credit during long months of negotiations during which the pirates guard the vessels and their crew, meaning their takeaway was frequently even lower. It was also quickly frittered away on imported SUVs, alcohol and more khat.
click
snip
They estimate that the owners of 179 ships hijacked between 2005 and 2012 paid out ransoms totaling between $339 million and $413 million, or an average payment per vessel of around $2.3 million.
But the pirate foot soldiers — the men with guns who illegally take to the seas to hunt down ships — earned only $30,000-$75,000 each, with the first to board a targeted vessel winning a $10,000 bonus.
It turns out that some pirate attacks were shoestring operations while others, well-equipped with weapons, boats, satellite phones and GPS locators, cost tens of thousands of dollars to launch.
Much of the takings of individual pirates were whittled away on the mild narcotic “khat” and food that is provided on credit during long months of negotiations during which the pirates guard the vessels and their crew, meaning their takeaway was frequently even lower. It was also quickly frittered away on imported SUVs, alcohol and more khat.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
The bottom 90 percent have no voice in Washington
The bottom 90 percent have no voice in Washington
click link
snip
So how to explain this paradox?
As of November 1 more than 47 million Americans have lost some or all of their food stamp benefits. House Republicans are pushing for further cuts. If the sequester isn’t stopped everything else poor and working-class Americans depend on will be further squeezed.
We’re not talking about a small sliver of America here. Half of all children get food stamps at some point during their childhood. Half of all adults get them sometime between ages 18 and 65. Many employers – including the nation’s largest, Walmart – now pay so little that food stamps are necessary in order to keep food on the family table, and other forms of assistance are required to keep a roof overhead.
The larger reality is that most Americans are still living in the Great Recession. Median household income continues to drop. In last week’s Washington Post-ABC poll, 75 percent rated the state of the economy as “negative” or “poor.”
So why is Washington whacking safety nets and services that a large portion of Americans need, when we still very much need them?
It’s easy to blame Republicans and the rightwing billionaires that bankroll them, and their unceasing demonization of “big government” as well as deficits. But Democrats in Washington bear some of the responsibility. In last year’s fiscal cliff debate neither party pushed to extend the payroll tax holiday or find other ways to help the working middle class and poor.
click link
snip
So how to explain this paradox?
As of November 1 more than 47 million Americans have lost some or all of their food stamp benefits. House Republicans are pushing for further cuts. If the sequester isn’t stopped everything else poor and working-class Americans depend on will be further squeezed.
We’re not talking about a small sliver of America here. Half of all children get food stamps at some point during their childhood. Half of all adults get them sometime between ages 18 and 65. Many employers – including the nation’s largest, Walmart – now pay so little that food stamps are necessary in order to keep food on the family table, and other forms of assistance are required to keep a roof overhead.
The larger reality is that most Americans are still living in the Great Recession. Median household income continues to drop. In last week’s Washington Post-ABC poll, 75 percent rated the state of the economy as “negative” or “poor.”
So why is Washington whacking safety nets and services that a large portion of Americans need, when we still very much need them?
It’s easy to blame Republicans and the rightwing billionaires that bankroll them, and their unceasing demonization of “big government” as well as deficits. But Democrats in Washington bear some of the responsibility. In last year’s fiscal cliff debate neither party pushed to extend the payroll tax holiday or find other ways to help the working middle class and poor.
Saturday, November 2, 2013
How the 1 percent always wins: Liberal washing is the right’s new favorite tactic
How the 1 percent always wins: Liberal washing is the right’s new favorite tactic
click link
Liberal washing has always been around, of course. But it has really risen to prominence — and dominance — in modern times. Indeed, one of the most reliable political axioms of the last 30 years is this: If corporate America cooks up a scheme to rip off the middle class, Republicans will provide the bulk of the congressional votes for the scheme — but enough establishment-credentialed liberals inevitably will endorse the scheme to make it at least appear to be mainstream and bipartisan. Yes, it seems no matter how venal, underhanded or outright corrupt a heist may be, there always ends up being a group of icons with liberal billing ready to drive the getaway car.
The most reliable way to liberal-wash something is to get a famous Democrat to support it. This is because even though many Democratic politicians, party officials, operatives and pundits are neither liberal nor progressive, the media nonetheless usually portrays all people affiliated with the Democratic Party as uniformly liberal on all issues.
The famous examples of liberal washing come from the White House. A few decades ago, Democratic President Bill Clinton liberal-washed corporatist schemes like NAFTA and financial deregulation. Today, it is Democratic President Barack Obama liberal-washing the insurance industry’s healthcare initiatives and now joining with a handful of Democratic legislators to liberalwash – and legitimize – the right-wing crusade to slash Social Security benefits.
But, then, as evidenced by just the last few months of news, liberal washing also operates just as powerfully in other political arenas.
click link
Liberal washing has always been around, of course. But it has really risen to prominence — and dominance — in modern times. Indeed, one of the most reliable political axioms of the last 30 years is this: If corporate America cooks up a scheme to rip off the middle class, Republicans will provide the bulk of the congressional votes for the scheme — but enough establishment-credentialed liberals inevitably will endorse the scheme to make it at least appear to be mainstream and bipartisan. Yes, it seems no matter how venal, underhanded or outright corrupt a heist may be, there always ends up being a group of icons with liberal billing ready to drive the getaway car.
The most reliable way to liberal-wash something is to get a famous Democrat to support it. This is because even though many Democratic politicians, party officials, operatives and pundits are neither liberal nor progressive, the media nonetheless usually portrays all people affiliated with the Democratic Party as uniformly liberal on all issues.
The famous examples of liberal washing come from the White House. A few decades ago, Democratic President Bill Clinton liberal-washed corporatist schemes like NAFTA and financial deregulation. Today, it is Democratic President Barack Obama liberal-washing the insurance industry’s healthcare initiatives and now joining with a handful of Democratic legislators to liberalwash – and legitimize – the right-wing crusade to slash Social Security benefits.
But, then, as evidenced by just the last few months of news, liberal washing also operates just as powerfully in other political arenas.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
States will determine Obamacare’s success
States will determine Obamacare’s success
click link
snip
Is it Dec. 15, the last day consumers can enroll for coverage that begins on Jan. 1? Or March 31 when the enrollment period for buying insurance for 2014 closes?
In my mind, there is a different date that will have far more bearing on the number of people covered under the law. It’s June 28, 2012, the date the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the act’s constitutionality.
What most people remember about the high court’s decision is that it upheld the core of the law: an individual mandate that requires practically everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.
But the most consequential part of the ruling, which got less attention at the time, gave states discretion over whether to expand their Medicaid programs for the poor.
The law originally called for each state to expand Medicaid to people making less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level (now $15,856 for a household of one or $32,499 for a household of four). But the court said states could refuse to go along and not risk losing the federal government’s contribution to their Medicaid programs.
click link
snip
Is it Dec. 15, the last day consumers can enroll for coverage that begins on Jan. 1? Or March 31 when the enrollment period for buying insurance for 2014 closes?
In my mind, there is a different date that will have far more bearing on the number of people covered under the law. It’s June 28, 2012, the date the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the act’s constitutionality.
What most people remember about the high court’s decision is that it upheld the core of the law: an individual mandate that requires practically everyone to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.
But the most consequential part of the ruling, which got less attention at the time, gave states discretion over whether to expand their Medicaid programs for the poor.
The law originally called for each state to expand Medicaid to people making less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level (now $15,856 for a household of one or $32,499 for a household of four). But the court said states could refuse to go along and not risk losing the federal government’s contribution to their Medicaid programs.
What's More Common: UFO Sightings or Voter Fraud?
http://www.youtube.com/v/PbK92gCfXHA?version=3&autohide=1&feature=share&autohide=1&attribution_tag=BuqOaGXGqXqZhryRleONWQ&showinfo=1&autoplay=1
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Nixon proposed today’s Affordable Care Act
Nixon proposed today’s Affordable Care Act
click link
snip
Not surprisingly, private health insurers cheered on the Republicans while doing whatever they could to block Democrats from creating a public insurance system.
In February 1974, Republican President Richard Nixon proposed, in essence, today’s Affordable Care Act. Under Nixon’s plan all but the smallest employers would provide insurance to their workers or pay a penalty, an expanded Medicaid-type program would insure the poor, and subsidies would be provided to low-income individuals and small employers. Sound familiar?
Private insurers were delighted with the Nixon plan but Democrats preferred a system based on Social Security and Medicare, and the two sides failed to agree.
Thirty years later a Republican governor, Mitt Romney, made Nixon’s plan the law in Massachusetts. Private insurers couldn’t have been happier although many Democrats in the state had hoped for a public system.
When today’s Republicans rage against the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, it’s useful to recall this was their idea as well.
click link
snip
Not surprisingly, private health insurers cheered on the Republicans while doing whatever they could to block Democrats from creating a public insurance system.
In February 1974, Republican President Richard Nixon proposed, in essence, today’s Affordable Care Act. Under Nixon’s plan all but the smallest employers would provide insurance to their workers or pay a penalty, an expanded Medicaid-type program would insure the poor, and subsidies would be provided to low-income individuals and small employers. Sound familiar?
Private insurers were delighted with the Nixon plan but Democrats preferred a system based on Social Security and Medicare, and the two sides failed to agree.
Thirty years later a Republican governor, Mitt Romney, made Nixon’s plan the law in Massachusetts. Private insurers couldn’t have been happier although many Democrats in the state had hoped for a public system.
When today’s Republicans rage against the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, it’s useful to recall this was their idea as well.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Sunday, October 27, 2013
12 other governments that spy on their citizens
12 other governments that spy on their citizens
click link
note: governments have always spied on citizens, check labor history and more
click link
note: governments have always spied on citizens, check labor history and more
Saturday, October 26, 2013
(HD) VIDEO: NC GOP Chair Calls Blacks Lazy And Stupid On Daily Show Inte...
note: what an idiot, make up your own mind
GOP’s Obamacare conspiracy: Sabotage from the inside
GOP’s Obamacare conspiracy: Sabotage from the inside
click link
snip
Yes, the Affordable Care Act rollout of the exchanges is a mess — and I agree with Brian Beutler and Jonathan Cohn that liberals should be pressing the White House hard to get it fixed, and with Ezra Klein that the ACA’s “success doesn’t depend on spin or solidarity. What matters for the law — and for the people who are depending on it — is how well it actually works.”
So I definitely don’t think the president and his administration should be let off the hook for the very real problems that have plagued the program this month.
Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that whatever their own responsibility for what’s gone wrong, the White House shares responsibility with the Republicans who have spent three years actively attempting to undermine the law. I’m not talking about repeal votes, which (while silly after a while) were totally legitimate, or about running against the program in subsequent elections, which was again entirely fair. No, I’m talking about actions designed — usually openly — not to make the law work better in their view, but to make it harder for the law to work well.
click link
snip
Yes, the Affordable Care Act rollout of the exchanges is a mess — and I agree with Brian Beutler and Jonathan Cohn that liberals should be pressing the White House hard to get it fixed, and with Ezra Klein that the ACA’s “success doesn’t depend on spin or solidarity. What matters for the law — and for the people who are depending on it — is how well it actually works.”
So I definitely don’t think the president and his administration should be let off the hook for the very real problems that have plagued the program this month.
Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that whatever their own responsibility for what’s gone wrong, the White House shares responsibility with the Republicans who have spent three years actively attempting to undermine the law. I’m not talking about repeal votes, which (while silly after a while) were totally legitimate, or about running against the program in subsequent elections, which was again entirely fair. No, I’m talking about actions designed — usually openly — not to make the law work better in their view, but to make it harder for the law to work well.
Friday, October 25, 2013
Thursday, October 24, 2013
GOP leader to Obama: “I cannot even stand to look at you”
GOP leader to Obama: “I cannot even stand to look at you”
click link
snip
During the negotiations over the government shutdown, one House GOP leader said to President Obama, “I cannot even stand to look at you,” according to a recent Facebook post from Illinois’ Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.
“Many Republicans searching for something to say in defense of the disastrous shutdown strategy will say President Obama just doesn’t try hard enough to communicate with Republicans,” the post begins. “But in a ‘negotiation’ meeting with the president, one GOP House Leader told the president: ‘I cannot even stand to look at you.’”
“What are the chances of an honest conversation with someone who has just said something so disrespectful?” the post goes on to ask.
click link
snip
During the negotiations over the government shutdown, one House GOP leader said to President Obama, “I cannot even stand to look at you,” according to a recent Facebook post from Illinois’ Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.
“Many Republicans searching for something to say in defense of the disastrous shutdown strategy will say President Obama just doesn’t try hard enough to communicate with Republicans,” the post begins. “But in a ‘negotiation’ meeting with the president, one GOP House Leader told the president: ‘I cannot even stand to look at you.’”
“What are the chances of an honest conversation with someone who has just said something so disrespectful?” the post goes on to ask.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
History tricked the Tea Party
History tricked the Tea Party
click link
snip
Thoreau concluded “Civil Disobedience” by “imagining a State” that would let a few people
Those same right-wingers would probably run fastest of all from another luminary, Walt Whitman, who was surely marching to his own drummer when he rhapsodized about his own transcendental moments: “From this hour, freedom! From this hour I ordain myself loos’d of limits and imaginary lines.” Where the Tea Party would erect fences stronger and higher, Whitman would have every fence torn down.
click link
snip
Thoreau concluded “Civil Disobedience” by “imagining a State” that would let a few people
live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.Today’s right-wing extremists would probably run from Thoreau’s view of life even faster than from Jefferson’s. But there is no denying that their obsession with shrinking government stands in a long, distinguished line of American tradition where these two luminaries shine so bright.
It would be a state of perfect Transcendentalist anarchy, where everyone would fulfill all the duties of neighbors and fellow-men not because they were following the government’s laws but because they were letting nature take its course within them, living deep and sucking all the marrow out of life.
Those same right-wingers would probably run fastest of all from another luminary, Walt Whitman, who was surely marching to his own drummer when he rhapsodized about his own transcendental moments: “From this hour, freedom! From this hour I ordain myself loos’d of limits and imaginary lines.” Where the Tea Party would erect fences stronger and higher, Whitman would have every fence torn down.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Monday, October 21, 2013
Two SF transit workers die as strike goes on
Two SF transit workers die as strike goes on
click link
snip
Just 48-hours after BART workers went on strike over pay and workplace rules, two workers were struck and killed by an out-of-service train during a track inspection.
On Sunday the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 canceled picket lines for the day to attend a vigil for the deceased workers. The strikers — around 2,000 transit employees — will resume picketing on Monday. Meanwhile federal authorities are investigating the deaths.
click link
snip
Just 48-hours after BART workers went on strike over pay and workplace rules, two workers were struck and killed by an out-of-service train during a track inspection.
On Sunday the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 canceled picket lines for the day to attend a vigil for the deceased workers. The strikers — around 2,000 transit employees — will resume picketing on Monday. Meanwhile federal authorities are investigating the deaths.
Ignore Tom Friedman!: Unions warn Obama against benefit cut fetish
Ignore Tom Friedman!: Unions warn Obama against benefit cut fetish
click link
snip
With the immediate government shutdown and debt ceiling showdown now past, the nation’s largest union federation is warning of dire consequences if the president and his party once again push so-called entitlement reforms.
“The labor movement is going to fight to the death to stop cuts to Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid,” AFL-CIO policy director Damon Silvers told Salon Thursday afternoon. “Not ‘unreasonable cuts.’ Not ‘cuts without tax increases.’ Cuts period. We’re against all of them, we will fight them ferociously, and we will give no cover to any Democrat who supports them.”
Silvers said it would be “simply an invitation to a fratricide in the Democratic Party” for the president to take up a renewed push for “chained CPI,” a proposed change in cost of living calculations that would reduce future Social Security benefits. “It hits the absolute most vulnerable people …” charged Silvers. “It’s a proposal that has no merit at all other than that billionaires like it.”
As I’ve noted, President Obama has repeatedly touted “chained CPI” – to the chagrin of some progressive activists and elected Democrats – as an example of both his commitment to Social Security’s future and his commitment to good faith negotiations with Republicans.
===
note: for years soar 11-3 has warned democrats about such things ignore us on this and you are bigger fools than teabaggers think.
I for one do not wish to ally with these folks over social security cuts
click link
snip
With the immediate government shutdown and debt ceiling showdown now past, the nation’s largest union federation is warning of dire consequences if the president and his party once again push so-called entitlement reforms.
“The labor movement is going to fight to the death to stop cuts to Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid,” AFL-CIO policy director Damon Silvers told Salon Thursday afternoon. “Not ‘unreasonable cuts.’ Not ‘cuts without tax increases.’ Cuts period. We’re against all of them, we will fight them ferociously, and we will give no cover to any Democrat who supports them.”
Silvers said it would be “simply an invitation to a fratricide in the Democratic Party” for the president to take up a renewed push for “chained CPI,” a proposed change in cost of living calculations that would reduce future Social Security benefits. “It hits the absolute most vulnerable people …” charged Silvers. “It’s a proposal that has no merit at all other than that billionaires like it.”
As I’ve noted, President Obama has repeatedly touted “chained CPI” – to the chagrin of some progressive activists and elected Democrats – as an example of both his commitment to Social Security’s future and his commitment to good faith negotiations with Republicans.
===
note: for years soar 11-3 has warned democrats about such things ignore us on this and you are bigger fools than teabaggers think.
I for one do not wish to ally with these folks over social security cuts
Eugene Robinson: Not a good fight : Stltoday
Eugene Robinson: Not a good fight : Stltoday
click link
snip
President Obama’s victory last week was as complete and devastating as Sherman’s march through the South. But there is no early sign that the zealots of the anti-government far right have learned the lessons of their defeat — which means that more battles lie ahead.
House Speaker John Boehner was not being honest Wednesday when he explained the GOP surrender by saying, “We fought the good fight; we just didn’t win.” This was not a good fight. Republicans picked an objective that was never realistic — forcing Obama to nullify the Affordable Care Act, his biggest achievement — and tactics that amounted to self-immolation.
Boehner knew from the start that the GOP would be blamed for shuttering the government and that he could never really allow the Treasury to default. So what on earth was the point?
click link
snip
President Obama’s victory last week was as complete and devastating as Sherman’s march through the South. But there is no early sign that the zealots of the anti-government far right have learned the lessons of their defeat — which means that more battles lie ahead.
House Speaker John Boehner was not being honest Wednesday when he explained the GOP surrender by saying, “We fought the good fight; we just didn’t win.” This was not a good fight. Republicans picked an objective that was never realistic — forcing Obama to nullify the Affordable Care Act, his biggest achievement — and tactics that amounted to self-immolation.
Boehner knew from the start that the GOP would be blamed for shuttering the government and that he could never really allow the Treasury to default. So what on earth was the point?
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Saturday, October 19, 2013
Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare
Inside the Fox News lie machine: I fact-checked Sean Hannity on Obamacare
click link
snip
I asked Allison if she’d shopped on the exchange, to see what a plan might cost under the new law. She said she hadn’t done so because she’d heard the website was not working. Would she try it out when it’s up and running? Perhaps, she said. She told me she has long opposed Obamacare, and that the president should have focused on tort reform as a solution to bringing down the price of healthcare.
I tried an experiment and shopped on the exchange for Allison and Kurt. Assuming they don’t smoke and have a household income too high to be eligible for subsidies, I found that they would be able to get a plan for around $7,600, which would include coverage for their uninsured daughter. This would be about a 60 percent reduction from what they would have to pay on the pre-Obamacare market.
Allison also told me that the letter she received from Blue Cross said that in addition to the policy change for ACA compliance, in the new policy her physician network size might be reduced. That’s something insurance companies do to save money, with or without Obamacare on the horizon, just as they raise premiums with or without Obamacare coming.
If Allison’s choice of doctor was denied her through Obamacare then, yes, she could have a claim that Obamacare has hurt her. But she’d also have thousands of dollars in her pocket that she didn’t have before.
click link
snip
I asked Allison if she’d shopped on the exchange, to see what a plan might cost under the new law. She said she hadn’t done so because she’d heard the website was not working. Would she try it out when it’s up and running? Perhaps, she said. She told me she has long opposed Obamacare, and that the president should have focused on tort reform as a solution to bringing down the price of healthcare.
I tried an experiment and shopped on the exchange for Allison and Kurt. Assuming they don’t smoke and have a household income too high to be eligible for subsidies, I found that they would be able to get a plan for around $7,600, which would include coverage for their uninsured daughter. This would be about a 60 percent reduction from what they would have to pay on the pre-Obamacare market.
Allison also told me that the letter she received from Blue Cross said that in addition to the policy change for ACA compliance, in the new policy her physician network size might be reduced. That’s something insurance companies do to save money, with or without Obamacare on the horizon, just as they raise premiums with or without Obamacare coming.
If Allison’s choice of doctor was denied her through Obamacare then, yes, she could have a claim that Obamacare has hurt her. But she’d also have thousands of dollars in her pocket that she didn’t have before.
America Wants No Cuts to Social Security
note: no democrat was sent to dc to cut social security. if they wish to win in 14 and 16, cutting social security is not the way. ditto that for pubs
so much for blogger's opinion and keep that in mind.
when corporations and rich start paying fair share, come back and we will talk.
Friday, October 18, 2013
BlueGreen Alliance Roundtable Challenges Young Leaders to Mobilize, Expand Clean Economy and Prevent Climate Change
BlueGreen Alliance Roundtable Challenges Young Leaders to Mobilize, Expand Clean Economy and Prevent Climate Change
click link
snip
PITTSBURGH, PA – The United Steelworkers (USW) today hosted a BlueGreen Alliance roundtable to discuss strategies for mobilizing the next generation of leaders in business, labor and government to create family sustaining jobs that also combat the effects of climate change.
Steelworkers joined local elected officials and representatives from green industries at the USW international headquarters to discuss how young leaders can move forward in expanding the clean economy, focusing on environmentally friendly policies that will also create good, middle class jobs.
“In our union, we have seen first-hand that we can have both good jobs and work towards a clean, green environment,” said USW International President Leo W. Gerard. “But we also have seen the pain that comes when these jobs get shipped overseas. A bright future for young people is one where we have a sustainable environment and a healthy economy that is built around domestic manufacturing that helps us achieve our clean energy goals.” Speakers focused on President Obama’s climate action plan and other policies that will help create jobs and prevent climate change for decades to come.
click link
snip
PITTSBURGH, PA – The United Steelworkers (USW) today hosted a BlueGreen Alliance roundtable to discuss strategies for mobilizing the next generation of leaders in business, labor and government to create family sustaining jobs that also combat the effects of climate change.
Steelworkers joined local elected officials and representatives from green industries at the USW international headquarters to discuss how young leaders can move forward in expanding the clean economy, focusing on environmentally friendly policies that will also create good, middle class jobs.
“In our union, we have seen first-hand that we can have both good jobs and work towards a clean, green environment,” said USW International President Leo W. Gerard. “But we also have seen the pain that comes when these jobs get shipped overseas. A bright future for young people is one where we have a sustainable environment and a healthy economy that is built around domestic manufacturing that helps us achieve our clean energy goals.” Speakers focused on President Obama’s climate action plan and other policies that will help create jobs and prevent climate change for decades to come.
GOP lawmaker voted against debt deal because he thought it funded Joseph Kony
GOP lawmaker voted against debt deal because he thought it funded Joseph Kony
click link
snip
Republican Rep. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina voted against the debt deal Wednesday night for a great many reasons, and one of those reasons is that he thought that the bipartisan legislation to reopen the government included funding for the Lord’s Resistance Army, a Ugandan militant group led by exiled war criminal Joseph Kony.
This is not true. But that didn’t stop Mulvaney from including it in his statement denouncing the deal!
“Finally, the ‘deal’ is full of pork,” Mulvaney said. “A dam project in Kentucky got extra money; the state of Colorado got money to help with its flooding; and the ‘Lord’s Resistance Army’ received special funds. Those may be worth discussing, but that will never happen now, as they were crammed into this ‘deal’ in order to help it pass. So much for the ‘clean’ bill that my Democrat colleagues said they wanted so badly.”
click link
snip
Republican Rep. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina voted against the debt deal Wednesday night for a great many reasons, and one of those reasons is that he thought that the bipartisan legislation to reopen the government included funding for the Lord’s Resistance Army, a Ugandan militant group led by exiled war criminal Joseph Kony.
This is not true. But that didn’t stop Mulvaney from including it in his statement denouncing the deal!
“Finally, the ‘deal’ is full of pork,” Mulvaney said. “A dam project in Kentucky got extra money; the state of Colorado got money to help with its flooding; and the ‘Lord’s Resistance Army’ received special funds. Those may be worth discussing, but that will never happen now, as they were crammed into this ‘deal’ in order to help it pass. So much for the ‘clean’ bill that my Democrat colleagues said they wanted so badly.”
Thursday, October 17, 2013
GOP reeling after epic defeat
GOP reeling after epic defeat
click link
snip
With the government reopened, the debt ceiling lifted, and Obamacare mostly untouched, there’s little doubt that the GOP has suffered one of its worst defeats in years. And as a report in the New York Times makes clear, members of the Party know it.
“We managed to divide ourselves on something we were unified on, over a goal that wasn’t achievable,” Republican Senator Roy Blunt told the Times. “The president probably had the worst August and early September any president could have had. And we managed to change the topic.”
Other Republican senators were equally distraught. “If you look back in time and evaluate the last couple of weeks, it should be titled ‘The Time of Great Lost Opportunity,’” said South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham. “I’m trying to forget it,” said Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. “Here we are. Here we are. We predicted it. Nobody wanted it to be this way.”
click link
snip
With the government reopened, the debt ceiling lifted, and Obamacare mostly untouched, there’s little doubt that the GOP has suffered one of its worst defeats in years. And as a report in the New York Times makes clear, members of the Party know it.
“We managed to divide ourselves on something we were unified on, over a goal that wasn’t achievable,” Republican Senator Roy Blunt told the Times. “The president probably had the worst August and early September any president could have had. And we managed to change the topic.”
Other Republican senators were equally distraught. “If you look back in time and evaluate the last couple of weeks, it should be titled ‘The Time of Great Lost Opportunity,’” said South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham. “I’m trying to forget it,” said Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. “Here we are. Here we are. We predicted it. Nobody wanted it to be this way.”
That’s how you treat a bully!: Democrats win — and learn a huge lesson
That’s how you treat a bully!: Democrats win — and learn a huge lesson
click link
They’re also getting a promise of formal negotiations over the budget. Now that should happen anyway, so that’s not a big deal. But Democrats have spent the last month on GOP turf: conceding that they must talk about deficit reduction, with pious nods to Saints Simpson and Bowles and now, yuck, Blessed Leon Panetta — and that they’re open to everything. And most of them mean it.
I just watched Sen. Chuck Schumer tell MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that once this deal is out of the way, Congress will resume budget negotiations, and everything, including so-called “entitlements,” must be on the table. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was a little bit more balanced, insisting Democrats should only look at entitlement cuts in exchange for more revenues from people who can pay more. “Why should Granny pay the price?” without asking the rich to share the sacrifice, Pelosi asked.
But with all due respect to the once (and perhaps future) speaker, who’s been the toughest Democrat over the last five years: The answer is Granny shouldn’t pay any price. When Social Security needs “fixing,” we should lift the cap on income subject to the payroll tax. The chained CPI is a cut and shouldn’t be a first offer, but a last resort.
click link
They’re also getting a promise of formal negotiations over the budget. Now that should happen anyway, so that’s not a big deal. But Democrats have spent the last month on GOP turf: conceding that they must talk about deficit reduction, with pious nods to Saints Simpson and Bowles and now, yuck, Blessed Leon Panetta — and that they’re open to everything. And most of them mean it.
I just watched Sen. Chuck Schumer tell MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that once this deal is out of the way, Congress will resume budget negotiations, and everything, including so-called “entitlements,” must be on the table. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was a little bit more balanced, insisting Democrats should only look at entitlement cuts in exchange for more revenues from people who can pay more. “Why should Granny pay the price?” without asking the rich to share the sacrifice, Pelosi asked.
But with all due respect to the once (and perhaps future) speaker, who’s been the toughest Democrat over the last five years: The answer is Granny shouldn’t pay any price. When Social Security needs “fixing,” we should lift the cap on income subject to the payroll tax. The chained CPI is a cut and shouldn’t be a first offer, but a last resort.
“They’re fools — and work for fools!”: Grayson on GOP staffers (and much more)
“They’re fools — and work for fools!”: Grayson on GOP staffers (and much more)
click link
snip
On the first day of the government shutdown, firebrand Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson told Salon that Republicans’ on-the-job drinking was partially to blame. Now he says the current showdown will end the party – for good.
In an interview late Tuesday afternoon, Grayson accused Republicans of pushing “health suppression” and measures “torturing” congressional staffers, and repeatedly “dragging America into heavy traffic.” The Florida Democrat also defended the effectiveness of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, predicted the demise of any “Great Betrayal” targeting Social Security or Medicare, and said voters will soon send the Republican Party “to the ash heap of history.” A condensed version of our conversation follows.
What’s your sense of what’s going on in the House right now?
Pathetic flailing around to little or no purpose.
What do you think John Boehner is trying to accomplish?
John Boehner is trying to maintain his position as President Obama’s golf partner.
Do you think the intention is to pass something that will become law?
No. I think that has never been the Tea Party’s intention. The Tea Party’s intention is destruction.
click link
snip
On the first day of the government shutdown, firebrand Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson told Salon that Republicans’ on-the-job drinking was partially to blame. Now he says the current showdown will end the party – for good.
In an interview late Tuesday afternoon, Grayson accused Republicans of pushing “health suppression” and measures “torturing” congressional staffers, and repeatedly “dragging America into heavy traffic.” The Florida Democrat also defended the effectiveness of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, predicted the demise of any “Great Betrayal” targeting Social Security or Medicare, and said voters will soon send the Republican Party “to the ash heap of history.” A condensed version of our conversation follows.
What’s your sense of what’s going on in the House right now?
Pathetic flailing around to little or no purpose.
What do you think John Boehner is trying to accomplish?
John Boehner is trying to maintain his position as President Obama’s golf partner.
Do you think the intention is to pass something that will become law?
No. I think that has never been the Tea Party’s intention. The Tea Party’s intention is destruction.
Congress votes to avoid default, open government : Stltoday
Congress votes to avoid default, open government : Stltodayu
click link
note: loonies running the mad house, this whole affair it seems. a moment of sanity does not undo months of insane movement and speech
click link
note: loonies running the mad house, this whole affair it seems. a moment of sanity does not undo months of insane movement and speech
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
John Boehner: A pathetic profile in Jell-O
John Boehner: A pathetic profile in Jell-O
click link
snip
It’s an insult to all Americans’ intelligence and good will if the debt ceiling and government shutdown crisis end the way so many pundits of average intelligence, myself included, said it had to: with House Speaker John Boehner turning to the real speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to get the job done.
I mean, what do most pundits know? It could have taken a different turn, right? Except we’ve seen this movie many times before: Whether it’s keeping open the government when Boehner first took his job in 2011, or the August 2011 debt-ceiling deal, or the fiscal cliff deal last January, or Hurricane Sandy aid, or the farm bill, or… well, it’s been clear for a while that the only way Boehner can pass legislation that will pass the Democrat-controlled Senate (numerically controlled; the gateway to legislation can be blocked by the GOP minority) is by turning to Pelosi and asking her to corral her caucus and vote.
So this crisis may end the same way. It may: We started Tuesday believing a Senate deal was likely, and the House GOP rejected it. Then they rejected the deal Boehner proposed. Obviously, almost anything remains possible.
Let’s take
click link
snip
It’s an insult to all Americans’ intelligence and good will if the debt ceiling and government shutdown crisis end the way so many pundits of average intelligence, myself included, said it had to: with House Speaker John Boehner turning to the real speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to get the job done.
I mean, what do most pundits know? It could have taken a different turn, right? Except we’ve seen this movie many times before: Whether it’s keeping open the government when Boehner first took his job in 2011, or the August 2011 debt-ceiling deal, or the fiscal cliff deal last January, or Hurricane Sandy aid, or the farm bill, or… well, it’s been clear for a while that the only way Boehner can pass legislation that will pass the Democrat-controlled Senate (numerically controlled; the gateway to legislation can be blocked by the GOP minority) is by turning to Pelosi and asking her to corral her caucus and vote.
So this crisis may end the same way. It may: We started Tuesday believing a Senate deal was likely, and the House GOP rejected it. Then they rejected the deal Boehner proposed. Obviously, almost anything remains possible.
Let’s take
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
USW Calls on Crown Holdings CEO to End Attacks on Wages and Living Standards - PR Newswire - The Sacramento Bee
USW Calls on Crown Holdings CEO to End Attacks on Wages and Living Standards - PR Newswire - The Sacramento Bee: "WHO: Fred Redmond, United Steelworkers (USW) International Vice President Frank Snyder, Secretary-Treasurer of Pennsylvania AFL-CIO Leaders from USW Local 9176 Members from other USW locals in the area
WHAT: Rally at Crown Holdings Headquarters
WHEN: 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, Oct. 16
WHERE: Crown Holdings Headquarters, 1 Crown Way, Philadelphia, Pa. 19154
WHY: The rally will call on Crown Holdings to end its attack on its Toronto workforce and negotiate a fair contract that reflects workers' contributions to the company's financial success.
The USW represents 850,000 members in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean. It is the largest private-sector union in North America, representing workers in a range of industries including metals, mining, rubber, paper and forestry, oil refining, health care, security, hotels, and municipal governments and agencies."
'via Blog this'
WHAT: Rally at Crown Holdings Headquarters
WHEN: 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, Oct. 16
WHERE: Crown Holdings Headquarters, 1 Crown Way, Philadelphia, Pa. 19154
WHY: The rally will call on Crown Holdings to end its attack on its Toronto workforce and negotiate a fair contract that reflects workers' contributions to the company's financial success.
The USW represents 850,000 members in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean. It is the largest private-sector union in North America, representing workers in a range of industries including metals, mining, rubber, paper and forestry, oil refining, health care, security, hotels, and municipal governments and agencies."
'via Blog this'
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Texas fertilizer plant fined $118,300 for safety violations
Texas fertilizer plant fined $118,300 for safety violations
click link
snip
The West, Texas, fertilizer plant that explosed in April, killing 15, injuring hundreds of others and causing an estimated $100 million in damages, has been cited for two dozen serious safety violations. The plant faces $118,300 in federal fines, although those may end up being reduced if the company appeals.
The citations were issued Wednesday by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, although the announcement was delayed due to the government shutdown. Dallas News has the details on the charges:
All 24 violations are classified as serious, and eight pertain directly to West Fertilizer and parent Adair Grain’s stockpile of solid ammonium nitrate fertilizer. The ammonium nitrate exploded after the building housing it caught fire from an undetermined cause.
click link
snip
The West, Texas, fertilizer plant that explosed in April, killing 15, injuring hundreds of others and causing an estimated $100 million in damages, has been cited for two dozen serious safety violations. The plant faces $118,300 in federal fines, although those may end up being reduced if the company appeals.
The citations were issued Wednesday by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, although the announcement was delayed due to the government shutdown. Dallas News has the details on the charges:
All 24 violations are classified as serious, and eight pertain directly to West Fertilizer and parent Adair Grain’s stockpile of solid ammonium nitrate fertilizer. The ammonium nitrate exploded after the building housing it caught fire from an undetermined cause.
To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary
To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary
click link
snip
It’s three years away, but the ongoing government shutdown and debt ceiling debate makes it clear that Democrats need to be thinking now about a candidate able to effectively counter the Tea Party caucus in Congress — which thanks to gerrymandering, isn’t going anywhere until 2020.
While the Republican field is already loaded with possible candidates — Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush III and Bobby Jindal – the Democratic field is apparently sealed: Hillary Clinton.
RealClearPolitics finds Hillary getting 61 percent of the vote in a Democratic primary against Joe Biden (11), Elizabeth Warren (7), Andrew Cuomo (2), John Warner (1) and Martin O’Malley (0). There is a SuperPAC (with 1,000,000-plus Facebook “likes”) designed to lay the groundwork for a Clinton presidential run.
There is certainly a strategic reason for Democrats to play down Clinton: three more years under press scrutiny will only make her less appealing. But there are other reasons to question whether America needs another Clinton presidency.
click link
snip
It’s three years away, but the ongoing government shutdown and debt ceiling debate makes it clear that Democrats need to be thinking now about a candidate able to effectively counter the Tea Party caucus in Congress — which thanks to gerrymandering, isn’t going anywhere until 2020.
While the Republican field is already loaded with possible candidates — Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush III and Bobby Jindal – the Democratic field is apparently sealed: Hillary Clinton.
RealClearPolitics finds Hillary getting 61 percent of the vote in a Democratic primary against Joe Biden (11), Elizabeth Warren (7), Andrew Cuomo (2), John Warner (1) and Martin O’Malley (0). There is a SuperPAC (with 1,000,000-plus Facebook “likes”) designed to lay the groundwork for a Clinton presidential run.
There is certainly a strategic reason for Democrats to play down Clinton: three more years under press scrutiny will only make her less appealing. But there are other reasons to question whether America needs another Clinton presidency.
Friday, October 11, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)