US Politics: Mail and Managers for Mitch

[ThinkerX]

interesting exercise in 'double-speak' - and the political reality of obtaining disaster funding in the Trump era:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-states-seek-billions-to-brace-for-disaster-just-dont-call-it-climate-change/ar-BBZ9wVY?ocid=msnclassic

 

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is about to distribute billions of dollars to coastal states mainly in the South to help steel them against natural disasters worsened by climate change.

But states that qualify must first explain why they need the money. That has triggered linguistic acrobatics as some conservative states submit lengthy, detailed proposals on how they will use the money, while mostly not mentioning climate change.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, Zorral said:

I would consider the source here. Especially that "she's too erratic to be POTUS."  We've seen what erratic is by now and it sure as hell ain't Hillary.  We could say she hasn't got what it takes to be an effective politician, but that's not the same as erratic.

I've heard only good things about working with or for her, and never that she was abusive. But that doesn't carry any weight either, that I've never heard that.

 

Yeah it's possible that a lot of it is made up, exaggerated or used to push sexism, but the tales from the SS agents make it seem like she was pretty awful to people who are low on the totem pole.

[Gaston de Foix]

4 minutes ago, Triskele said:

43 minutes ago, Altherion said:

makes me think that the author is either behind the times or not fully aware of Warren's platform. She has gone quite a bit further than most of her fellow candidates and has promised to erase all federally-held student loans without congressional approval. I can't think of anything like this in American history and I suspect that if she somehow accomplished this (i.e. succeeded in her campaign and got this past the courts), there would be violence.

 

Violence? Because student-loan companies are so popular? 

[Altherion]

10 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Violence? Because student-loan companies are so popular?  

No, nobody likes the student loan companies. However, the debt in question belongs to the government so this would amount to a massive transfer of wealth from those who never went to college and those who paid off their loans in full to those who currently have student loan debt. The people who paid off their loans in full might be annoyed, but these tend to be wealthier and thus not likely to rock the boat. On the other hand, the people who never went to college include the poorest as well as those with the worst prospects. It's hard to predict how they would react.

[Zorral]

30 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

interesting exercise in 'double-speak' - and the political reality of obtaining disaster funding in the Trump era:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-states-seek-billions-to-brace-for-disaster-just-dont-call-it-climate-change/ar-BBZ9wVY?ocid=msnclassic

 

 

 

NYC's got a multi-billion sea gate / wall engineering plan to which bedbug said, "Don't cry to me, NYC when you drown.  Get a mop."

So corrupt and criminal transfer of funds from everywhere and anywhere to his cronies to build a totally stupid piece of shyte across rivers, private properties and environmental preserves are grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr8, but let's watch NYC drown.  Wonder how much federal money he's grabbing one way and another to keep mar a largo dry . . .  and for which he'll stiff the builders and keep it all for himself.

 

[DMC]

The notion violent class conflict in the United States will emerge via abolishing student loan debt is approaching rambling homeless guy on the street territory.

[Gaston de Foix]

17 minutes ago, Altherion said:

No, nobody likes the student loan companies. However, the debt in question belongs to the government so this would amount to a massive transfer of wealth from those who never went to college and those who paid off their loans in full to those who currently have student loan debt. The people who paid off their loans in full might be annoyed, but these tend to be wealthier and thus not likely to rock the boat. On the other hand, the people who never went to college include the poorest as well as those with the worst prospects. It's hard to predict how they would react.

I see. But aren't these companies private? I confess I don't know much about them. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

The notion violent class conflict in the United States will emerge via abolishing student loan debt is approaching rambling homeless guy on the street territory.

Don't give @Jace, Basilissa fan-fic materials dude.....

[Jace, Extat]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Don't give @Jace, Basilissa fan-fic materials dude.....

And on the fifteenth day of the fifteenth war of the fifteen years' war, ten thousand thousand peoples of every class were slaughtered in the battle that would become known as the Massacre of the Innocents. Bourbon Street has never recovered.

To the last, Fincher defended his right to make a fictional story about a man blowing up debt. It should be noted that even his staunchest critic acknowledges the director's determination and dignity as the mob ripped his limbs asunder.

As for the United States... Well, it would be ground to powder.

[Altherion]

27 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

I see. But aren't these companies private? I confess I don't know much about them. 

The companies servicing the debt are private, but the debt itself is to the federal government. These companies will undoubtedly try to stop any such action for their own narrow interest, but nobody likes them. Also, they're not to be confused with private companies that originate loans -- the government cannot "forgive" loans that do not belong to it; the only way to do it would be to pay these originating private companies off (or outright confiscation, but I doubt even Warren would go that far).

[The Anti-Targ]

I don't see student debt forgiveness being a social unrest problem if 1) it is openly campaigned for by the winners of whatever elections are necessary to get it to actually happen, and 2) college education (at least to undergrad degree level) becomes free (govt funded) at all public universities.

Plenty of people who did pay off their student loan in full are not selfish arseholes and actually value an educated population as a public and social good, and would fully support debt forgiveness and a transition to state funded college education. Y'know, like me and all of my debt funded university educated family. I might be a little bit cheesed that the debt forgiveness didn't come through in time to wipe out some of my debt, but I would not stand in opposition to it just because I'm not going to personally benefit from it and demand that everyone suffer as I did out of spite.

What is the logic behind ending state funded education at high school graduation? People with degrees earn more over their lifetime than people without? Well, people with highschool diplomas earn more over their lifetime than people with only an elementary school education.

[ThinkerX]

Meanwhile in Kansas....what is it about red state politicians and Russia?

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/478898-kansas-city-radio-station-signs-deal-to-broadcast-russia-state-owned-media?fbclid=IwAR0Xl2foVnQncEu0n3Lvr63dmRPDSI4rczl6gKBlGhPxXRAzV0D8_RGURhI

The newspaper noted that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) found in 2017 that Sputnik and another Russia state-backed media outlet were involved in Moscow’s efforts to influence the 2016 election.

 

The outlets “contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences,” the DNI assessment added. 

Arnold Ferolito, who runs RM Broadcasting, disputed the assessment while criticizing the government's requirement that the Florida-based company register as a foreign agent.

“Ninety percent of the programming is generated right here in the United States,” Ferolito told the Star. 

“I just sell airtime that’s all I do,” he added. “The government put a gun to my head and forced me to sign.”

RM Broadcasting was ordered in 2019 to register as a foreign agent under the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act, which mandates that individuals or entities in the U.S. acting on a foreign government’s behalf make public their relationships, finances and activities.

[Larry of the Lawn]

5 hours ago, Triskele said:

There's a fascinating essay here that's sort of a "I'm an educated liberal and here's the problem with us educated liberals" take on how badly the Dems do with the proverbial white working class or the non-college population.  

I suspect it'll be quite controversial (TNR, unlimited clicks, I think).  Here's a sample:

 

 

 

Rant: 

It was "fascinating"... in its ability to make me physically and bodily angry as I read it. 

Mostly because it hit pretty close to home.  I went to a 4 year college for 2.5 years before I dropped out, for a variety of reasons.  For reference, I am 36, self-employed, and make less than 30k a year.

The author mentions the large number of people who start and then drop out of a 4 year program, but then he mostly forgets about this group, and instead generally uses a binary model for the entire article: grads or professionals or elite or 'us', and then nongrads or working class or poor or 'them'.  Liberals vs Trump voters.  I get he had to simplify things, but he seems to ignore the fact that especially within millennials there are degree holders who are working class, and there are plenty of professional class boomers without degrees.  The 'us' and 'them' aren't so monolithic, but I kind of get why he needs to do that.  

I am distinctly 'them' for this author and to me a lot of the assumptions are just wrong (I realize he needs to generalize) or are just expected outcomes of runaway capitalism.  

Quote

I think the working class—white, black, Latino—may have a sense of what is going on. OK, some of them have made a mess of their lives. But who can blame them entirely if they tell us to take our Pell Grants, our educational tax credits, and the rest and shove off?

Fuck this guy.  So much.

The tone is so fucking patronizing.  Made a mess of our lives?  My life is fine, despite not being able to afford health insurance and still having over $20k in student debt towards a degree I never completed.  Which ruined my credit and has helped keep me more or less financially destitute and without savings.  For a few years I lived in a van, before it was the cool thing for rich liberals to do, so I could use the money I saved on rent to chip away at my student loans.  You know what would help?  The bottom 80% of the population being fairly compensated for our labor.  The wage and income inequality is the big obstacle.  Material gains for the working class.

  And this is where Altherion is wrong on the student debt angle.  It's not a redistribution of wealth to those who have degrees.  It's not taking from the working class to give to the professionals.  It will also give a lot of people saddled with student debt that never even got the fucking degrees a chance to get out from under pile of debt.  Those people, self included, are working class.  It would be great to see  public dollars actually go to people isnteadof oil companies or tax cuts for the 1%.  The only us vs them that matters is the super rich vs everyone else.  This upper middle class vs lower middle class vs working class ...it's all bullshit.  If anyone who is reading this makes less than 250k year you shouldn't even give a fuck about debt getting wiped out.  And if you make more than that, well fuck you too.

It's not going to hurt you.  You're already benefitting massively from the caste system here. 

I have friends with college degrees who work as servers and bartenders.  I know plenty of blue collar people without degrees who vote Dem.  

And then the shit about the working class being authoritarian parents... Well maybe.  But not all working class people work in authoritarian workplaces.  I'm self-employed.  My parents were both self-employed and working class.  All the author's navel gazing seemed to rely heavily on forcing everyone to be either "votes Dem, affluent, professional, and educated" or "votes GOP, poor, working class, and uneducated".  This may be convenient but he relies on it overmuch.

The one thing he got right was that educated liberals should probabaly stop worrying about how to woo back the white working class.   I still think the idea that the white working class was Trump's kingmaker in 2016 is mostly bullshit and it's gotten way too much narrative weight the last three years.  

The problems the author talks about are real but they can probabaly be better addressed through an actual fair, progressive tax policy, and a robust social safety net.  The problem is the inequality and lack of class mobility.  

[Zorral]

It seems the answer is three: affordable health care, affordable housing and affordable education.  At this point each of those can bankrupt easily any single person who isn't already pretty darned well off, or just isn't available at all, or burden us with insurmountable debt.

[Larry of the Lawn]

21 minutes ago, Triskele said:

Nice post, kind of what I expected some of.  And "thought-provoking" would have been a better choice of words than "fascinating" on my part.

Is he wrong on the suggestion though about Dems not talking about education so much?  I don't mean the debt forgiveness part but the "more education" being sold as a solution to the economy's problems.  

No, I don't think he's wrong there. We must be doing something wrong, the Danish stuff was some food for thought.

Also called to mind the bullshit jobs thread and what do we really need to train people to do

[Martell Spy]

28 minutes ago, Triskele said:

Nice post, kind of what I expected some of.  And "thought-provoking" would have been a better choice of words than "fascinating" on my part.

Is he wrong on the suggestion though about Dems not talking about education so much?  I don't mean the debt forgiveness part but the "more education" being sold as a solution to the economy's problems.  

It's yet more bullshit. First, and perhaps the more important thing, It's a favorite distraction of those that want wealth inequality to continue in America.  You start talking about a wealth tax or minimum wage increases and someone will bring up education as a distraction. 

Second not all degrees are equal.

Third, A degree not paired with the right internship or experience is a lot less effective.

4th, social connections are often tons more important to long-term income. Would you rather have a standard 4 year degree or be Donald Trump's son? Which would lead to higher earnings, regardless of talent?

Obviously public education is very important and you want to keep it universal in quality and access. The problem is when it gets used as a distraction from actually taking steps to tackle inequality. And income inequality has a direct impact on the learners anyway as it is their non-school environment.

[Altherion]

48 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

And this is where Altherion is wrong on the student debt angle.  It's not a redistribution of wealth to those who have degrees.  It's not taking from the working class to give to the professionals.

I did not say it was a redistribution of wealth to those who have degrees -- this is obviously wrong for two reasons and I was deliberately being precise to avoid both of them. Here's my original statement: "this would amount to a massive transfer of wealth from those who never went to college and those who paid off their loans in full to those who currently have student loan debt."

 

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, Martell Spy said:

It's yet more bullshit. First, and perhaps the more important thing, It's a favorite distraction of those that want wealth inequality to continue in America.  You start talking about a wealth tax or minimum wage increases and someone will bring up education as a distraction. 

Second not all degrees are equal.

Third, A degree not paired with the right internship or experience is a lot less effective.

4th, social connections are often tons more important to long-term income. Would you rather have a standard 4 year degree or be Donald Trump's son? Which would lead to higher earnings, regardless of talent?

Yeah, I hear you on the angle that it doesn't solve the problem that there are always going to be jobs that don't (and shouldn't) need a college education.  This is the same thing that people who argue against a minimum wage on the basis of "well work hard and get a better job" miss out on - those jobs are still out there and someone else is just working for an unliveable wage now.  

If these working class jobs paid a living wage none of the other stuff would matter as much.  

I would like to see more vocational programs in the US especially for the trades.  There's pretty good programs if you want to go into a union and work mostly commercial stuff, but for most residential work or anything outside of super urban environments only plumbing, electrical, and HVAC have much in the way of is training available.  Some parts of the country have decent Auto tech/mechanic training at community colleges.  But culturally these programs have often (and I think this is actually getting better now and less of a stigma) as somewhere for the fuckups and idiots to go.  

I remember in 7th or 8th grade a representative from a nearby tech highschool coming in and doing a presentation on how you could go there and then after graduation get placed right into an apprenticeship.  Afterwards a bunch of the teachers told us it was basically for kids with disciplinary problems and we should set our sights higher.  This goes back to the tone of the article.  I think this stigma is decreasing but it's a thing.

[Larry of the Lawn]

18 minutes ago, Altherion said:

I did not say it was a redistribution of wealth to those who have degrees -- this is obviously wrong for two reasons and I was deliberately being precise to avoid both of them. Here's my original statement: "this would amount to a massive transfer of wealth from those who never went to college and those who paid off their loans in full to those who currently have student loan debt."

 

Ah, alright, my mistake.  Please accept my apologies for the misreading.  

I still don't think you'd see violence in the streets because the people who are benefitting and those who could allegedly feel aggrieved are much more closely linked than either you or the author are giving credit for.  

 

***And sorry for the triple post***

[Larry of the Lawn]

5 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's the thing though, it's just rumors. I totally believe the comb incident, but other than that, idk. I never experienced anything like that while working for her, and I can only recall one time where she probably crossed a professional line, but it was super minor. I think if anything she suffers from her sometimes unrealistic standards and expectations and that some overworked disgruntled ex-staffers exaggerated a lot of things. And quite frankly, the Obama folks were so much more guilty of that.

As said in another comment, her immediate staff love her. But there are all kinds of stories about her mistreating lower level staff and the Secret Service seemed to hate her guts. Here's just a taste:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/21/hillary-clinton-nasty-her-security-staffs-accounts/

That could very well all be the case.  It's pretty irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned considering that she's polling in the low since digits.  I thought one of the more laughable lines from the endorsement was where they said her low numbers weren't a problem because John Kerry was also polling that low right now in 2004. Yeah, that worked out great for Kerry.  

I guess if you're the NYT none of it matters.  They literally just hyped this shit up for clicks and views.  They could have endorsed a Tingle-esque The Manifestation of Big Structural Change Reaching Across the Aisle, and instead of an article just had a picture of three racoons in a trenchcoat wearing a Buttigieg mask, and it would have worked out just as well for them.  

I saw a breakdown of the votes on the editorial board they used to make the pick- Warren had the most, but Booker (despite having dropped out) had more votes than Klobuchar.  It got people to talk about the NYT endorsement though.  Maybe marketing jobs aren't bullshit after all.