This is a Frontline Special that aired in November of last year. Back in 2012 they interviewed three families, focusing on the children and how their family's economic situations affected them. Then they returned in 2017 to see how their lives had changed, or not. When governments enact policies these are the people whose lives are impacted the most. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican these are the people for whom you need to provide support and help in times of need. We cannot ever be considered prosperous or successful as long as the neediest among us have no future.
So when you consider policy choices make sure that first you do no harm.
The video is just shy of an hour long.
124 comments:
"We're sorry, but this video is not available in your region due to rights restrictions."
:-(
I'm sorry, Petes, I didn't realize that the Frontline site restricted access to countries abroad. I think I posted a link to that site before about Saudi Arabia. Maybe you didn't see that one then.
I'll remember that in the future. I don't think there is anything on YouTube about this show, except perhaps trailers. But I'll keep an eye out, in case I can post a link in a future comments section.
As I said in the post they interviewed people back in 2012 to see how the economy had impacted their lives. This was originally aired back then. One family's main breadwinner had worked as an independent contractor in the construction industry, before the Great Recession, and as of 2012 he hadn't really recouped what he had lost. The second family's main breadwinner was also connected to support retail whose fortunes rose and fell with housing remodeling, Lowes. The last family was headed by a single mother who had gone back to school for further job training. The whole video revolved around the perspective of their children to their family situations. They were all struggling.
Frontline then jumped forward five years to 2017 to see how these people had fared since 2012. One of the older kids, who had been thirteen in 2012, had ended up falling in with a bad crowd and getting into trouble with the law, but had moved to Chicago to live with his grandparents and had started over. He always dreamed of playing football. But he is now working and saving money to try to pursue his dream. One girl described being bullied by classmates, but was still trying to look toward a brighter future. This family just had a new addition in 2012, a baby brother who had autism. Both his brother and sister dote on him, saying he was the saving grace in the family circumstances. His brother who is now 19 is working in the construction industry. The third family, consisting of two children and their mother, are now living in a trailer. They had just moved into a motel at the end of 2012, after losing their house. They had help from their grandmother. However, she and the mother now have been diagnosed with cancer. Different kinds. So their health issues are of a major concern. One of those circumstances where Medical Assistance is, sort of, of value. Unfortunately the surgeon who was to treat the mother does not accept Iowa Medicaid. And of concern to the daughter, because now she is worried that this is something she will also get later.
It shows very well how people's circumstances can change quickly along with the economy or medical issues. That's why at least some safety net is needed to help those through times when they get tough.
One thing a number of the kids said was that they knew that going to school and getting good grades was a ticket out to a, hopefully, better life.
"I didn't realize that the Frontline site restricted access to
countries abroad."
I don't think that's an across-the-board thing. Different programs will have different producers and different ideas of just what Frontline was licensed to do with their films.
Couple of things… 1) Bannon has been forced to resign from Breitbart. Trump's going back to work with the ‛establishment’ wing of the Republican Party.
2) Senator Diane Feinstein has released the transcript of the Senate Intelligence Committee's interview with the owners of Fusion GPS (the organization that employed Christopher Steele) after the leading Republicans on the Committee released (leaked) selected portions of their testimony. The owners countered that with a demand that the Committee release the entire transcript and the Republican Chairman refused, so Diane Feinstein (ranking Democrat on the Committee) took it upon herself to release the transcript. Possibly illegal, technically. Probably no way they'll ever get a conviction on that. One of the things that stand out is that the FBI had an informant inside the Trump campaign who was apparently ratting out Trump on his contacts with the Russians. This may get big, and soon. WaPo (There's a WaPo for ya to rant about Marcus. Rave on!)
"…who was apparently ratting out Trump on his contacts with
the Russians."
In real time, ratting them out in real time, not later. I probably didn't make that clear.
Skipping past the gossipy part (the fun part), Ezra Klien has a very unfavorable analysis of what Wolff's book tells us about Trump. Vox
A judge in CA has just blocked the Trump admin plan to roll back DACA.
Trump has a Trump-Friendly Supreme Court to go to eventually.
In a case that's probably more important, and also more likely to survive appeal, a federal appellate court (three judge panel) in North Carolina has thrown out the Republican designed gerrymandered district map for the sin of being too blatantly partisan. This is important stuff. NYT
I think that analysis by Ezra Klien is spot on. Trump & Co never really expected to win, they don't really know what to do with the Presidency, leading to the infighting and power grabbing by various factions, and Trump himself is a mix of conflicting emotional impulses.
The pressures of the presidency would be enough to break almost anyone, but Trump is less suited to the work, and to the backlash, than most. The strain is already showing — Trump’s workday, reportedly, has shrunk to a gentle 11 am to 6 pm. But the bulk of his first term remains, and it could include his financial secrets being revealed to the world, his family being indicted, a crisis he mishandles exploding into a catastrophe.
The question now — the question of Wolff’s book and of our future — is whether Trump’s staff can keep governing around him, whether a dysfunctional president can nevertheless have a semi-functional White House.
No, I don't think that is the central question. I think it is whether or not the United States' governing institutions can provide the ballast and competence to withstand a dysfunctional person holding the highest elected office in the country. There must be a truly bi-partisan effort to keep our democracy together while still keeping our agencies functioning. It is a very dangerous time, with the steady erosion of governmental agencies. So far the GOP has not stepped up to the plate, using Trump's incompetence to push through their own agendas. Congress needs to realize that to get through this precarious time compromise is key.
...a federal appellate court (three judge panel) in North Carolina has thrown out the Republican designed gerrymandered district map for the sin of being too blatantly partisan.
That holds out hope that we can get back to a more balanced elected body. The whole point of that was to force compromise. It is only recently that the extremes of each party have seemed to take over the narrative. We need to get back to a more middle ground and restore proper order to our government. Something that John McCain, for one, has recognized.
"So far the GOP has not stepped up to the plate…"
I'm beginning to think that the ‛establishment’ Republicans have accepted the fate that awaits the Republican Party and are simply grabbing as much as they can get on the way out. They're not really looking to save the party from Trump anymore. They figure they've already lost the next generation, so it's about grabbing for position now, and worry about regrouping for the future in the future.
That NYT link on gerrymandering didn't work.
Here's another article regarding that.
The third branch is making its voice felt, not least because the citizens seem increasingly fed up with the recent partisan extremes.
That's putting it mildly.
I'm beginning to think that the ‛establishment’ Republicans have accepted the fate that awaits the Republican Party and are simply grabbing as much as they can get on the way out. They're not really looking to save the party from Trump anymore.
Yes, well, right now I'm so sick of Trump and those who enable him that I am likely to never vote for anyone who is running under the Republican banner.
"I'm so sick of Trump and those who enable him that…"
And therein lies the explanation for why they're not trying to restrain Trump. It's not just you who's thinking that way. They figure they've lost the next generation; time to grab what they can on the way out, ‛cause they ain't figurin’ on comin’ back.
(And they'll cover for him long as they can, hoping to stretch out the time available to grab stuff before the door closes.)
Proper link: NYT
[Lynnette]: "Yes, well, right now I'm so sick of Trump and those who enable him..."
You mean the media and the Democrats? ;-)
According to TheNewYorker, the FBI source ‘inside the Trump campaign’ (Tue Jan 09, 04:28:00 pm ↑↑) was actually an Australian diplomat to whom George Papadapoulos told too much during a joint drinking event in London. We've heard of this before, so that may not be as big a deal as it first sounded.
It would appear that Steve Bannon has hired a private attorney of supposedly limited scope, to deal exclusively with Bannon's activities as a member of the Trump campaign, but supposedly not including Bannon's tenure as a member of the Trump Transition Team nor including his tenure as an advisor to President Trump. I can only speculate on what this might mean.
Sweet lamb o' divine sufferin' jesus! America truly has lost the plot. In the same week that Wolff's book has been telling the cautionary tale of hiring a clueless TV star for preznit, Hollywood has decided it wants a clueless TV star for preznit. Turns out Trump's problem is not that he's a clueless TV star but that he's not black, female, and socially progressive.
What the hell qualification does Oprah Winfrey have for the job? Peddling junk science to America's couch potatoes for twenty-five years? At the next election, Americans will truly deserve everything they get :-/
"Hollywood has decided…"
You seem to be laboring under the mistaken belief that what ‛Hollywood has decided’ makes a difference.
I offer as rebuttal to that notion the names of President Ronald Reagan and President Donald Trump.
Headline: Africa Is Sending Us Its Best and Brightest, from Bloomberg. Marcus may wish to take note.
Lefties getting it wrong, as usual, about Trump's references to "3rd world shitholes". He's being accused of racism, but I can't for the life of me think of anything remotely racist about the term. Derogatory, yes. Undiplomatic, yes. Unbecoming of a president, definitely. True, probably ... though that's not the point. Nevertheless, the lefties should get over themselves. There's a reason it's called the 3rd world -- it's full of shitholes.
Also, has Trump been anywhere in the US outside Manhattan, other than his own hotels, the White House, and rallies in football stadiums? There are plenty of shitholes in the US. I've seen them myself. Some even with black people in them, though by no means exclusively, and I mention it for no reason other than to point out again that "shithole" carries no connotation of race.
If Trump wants to Make America Great Again, he ought to acknowledge that there are other places on the planet with room for improvement. There is no need for the president to do them down.
"He's being accused of racism, but I can't for the life of me
think of anything remotely racist…"
I think I'll let Lynnette field that one.
"Jaded Democrats agreed that the controversy would pass — and
suggested that large portions of the Trump base would hardly find
anything offensive about the “shithole” remark."
Politico.com
Coming as it does from the president of the US, the term is utterly offensive. It just ain't racist. If Lefties would cease being so determinedly outraged at the wrong stuff they might look less like ... well, like a bunch of racists.
All yours Lynnette. (Or, at the very least, you're up first on this one.)
NewYorkMagazine makes a case for the idea that Trump can be induced to pay too much for his wall, and so that's what the Democrats ought to do. I don't agree, but it's not a totally insane notion. So, I figured to post the link and invite folks to consider it.
So, he's at it again, is he? I haven't had a chance to read the news for a day or so and when I finally take a peek I see Trump has stuck his foot, and mouth, in the gutter again. *sigh*
Was his remark racist? Well, if it wasn't he was giving a good imitation of it. He was apparently in some kind of meeting regarding immigration reform and made the comment suggesting that we should have more immigrants from Norway rather than countries in Africa or Haiti. He is arguing for some kind of merit based immigration policy. So why would he assume that those from Norway would be more acceptable to allow in? Is he suggesting that because someone is from Norway, a stable country that hasn't seen a war in decades, that person is somehow smarter or more valuable?
Coming as it does from the president of the US, the term is utterly offensive.
Of course it is. And the very fact that he doesn't get that just shows his incompetence for the job. Racist or not the whole situation was not well handled. It shows a complete lack of understanding for the US position in the world. His boorishness and lack of compassion is not the face that most Americans want to present to the world. It is not who we are at heart.
Had to correct a typo.
[Lynnette]: "He is arguing for some kind of merit based immigration policy. So why would he assume that those from Norway would be more acceptable to allow in? Is he suggesting that because someone is from Norway, a stable country that hasn't seen a war in decades, that person is somehow smarter or more valuable?"
Yes, that's exactly what he's arguing. And he's right. Someone from a stable country is likely to be smarter and more valuable on the average than someone from a shithole. If that wasn't true why the hell would anyone spend money on education? You'd be mad to spend money on health, education and welfare, if you could churn out smart valuable people without them.
Now, you are going to find a bunch of news articles written in the last 24 hours about how immigrants from African shitholes are smarter on the average than other immigrants. That, of course, is because of their low numbers and the high barrier to entry. The same was true in the 1990s and 2000s of Indian expatriates working in the US, in my experience. It doesn't mean Indians are cleverer on average (although plenty do excel in certain academic disciplines). If you look at Indian tech graduates in India who have been hired in their droves by multinational tech companies, they are often of highly dubious qualification.
It's supply and demand. There is more supply in non-shithole countries. Of course, the US could tacitly acknowledge this in its visa policy, without the preznit having to mouth off about it. As you say, Trump's lack of understanding on this score is lamentable.
There's an excellent article in the FT "Fire, Fury and the real trouble with Trump" (it's paywalled but you can read it by linking via Google).
It mentions a couple of books that are probably more enlightening than Wolff's about the real issues with the Trump presidency. It also tells you why Trump may well win again. One eye-opener was this, about the liberal media's bias against Trump's base (remember, this is the Financial Times, not some alt-right screed): "white working-class America’s collapsing morale has been downplayed by mainstream society. In the year leading up to Trump’s election victory, the word “transgender” appeared in The New York Times 1,169 times. The word “opioid” appeared just 284 times".
"It also tells you why Trump may well win again."
Let's be clear here. That's the Petes interpretation of what the article tells us. Edward Luce, who wrote the piece, makes no such claim.
When Trump wants to send 250K salvadorans back to El Salvador libs be all like "u cant send people back to that shithole, you racist". When Trump says he doesn't want even more migrants from shithole countries libs be all like "u cant say shithole, thats racist!!!"
Definition of shithole:
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/shithole
Seems right.
Some fascinating data on Africa. It is well on its way to becoming less of a shithole, with extraordinary strides made in the last few decades. Literacy rates are among the shining examples. As long as lefties stop trying to dictate how we are allowed to refer to places with "room for improvement", things might continue to improve.
Someone from a stable country is likely to be smarter and more valuable on the average than someone from a shithole.
Of course those from countries where education is readily available and of a high quality will have a leg up, so to speak. But to discount the value of people just because they have not had the same opportunity is wrong. And to assume that those who have had the opportunity of a good education will take advantage of that and go on to have successful lives is also wrong. I can certainly understand the need to look for specialized talent wherever you can find it, but there is also value in looking at the raw talent that hasn't been developed.
: "white working-class America’s collapsing morale has been downplayed by mainstream society. In the year leading up to Trump’s election victory, the word “transgender” appeared in The New York Times 1,169 times. The word “opioid” appeared just 284 times".
How valuable is a worker that is hooked on drugs? Obviously this is a health issue that needs to be addressed. Yet the current administration is intent on cutting medical safety nets. If these are the people who form part of Trump's base because they have been forgotten then how is that going to help them?
"As long as lefties stop trying to dictate how we are
allowed to refer to places with ‘room for improvement’,
things might continue to improve."
You gonna let that one pass?
They are speculating on CNN this morning that this latest Trumpian dust up has a lot to do with Trump appealing to his base. This in the assumption, I suppose, that they think there will be more money for them if immigration is cut. Never mind that the administration is just shifting money to the wealthier segments of society.
You gonna let that one pass?
Who? Me? He slipped that comment in while I was writing that first one.
Some fascinating data on Africa. It is well on its way to becoming less of a shithole, with extraordinary strides made in the last few decades. Literacy rates are among the shining examples.
Which proves my point about "raw talent". It's just that China got there first. The only way we can now compete with China in attracting some of that talent is to beat them on being an attractive place to move to. We won't do that as long as we have someone in the White House that gives the appearance of being, well, what is that word I'm looking for? Racist.
As long as lefties stop trying to dictate how we are allowed to refer to places with "room for improvement", things might continue to improve.
What?! Are you calling yourself a leftist now?
[Petes] "Of course, the US could tacitly acknowledge this in its visa policy, without the preznit having to mouth off about it. As you say, Trump's lack of understanding on this score is lamentable."
:)
Gotta run, errands to do...
[Lynnette]: "Of course those from countries where education is readily available and of a high quality will have a leg up, so to speak. But to discount the value of people just because they have not had the same opportunity is wrong."
Huh? What's wrong with it? The context we are discussing (or rather, that Trump was discussing) is not the intrinsic value of human beings, but the value of immigrants to the American economy. This goes to the heart of what Marcus has been saying about Sweden also (if only he could leave out the racist bits). In Ireland we import as many Filipino nurses as we can get our hands on. Are you saying we should consider Duterte's druggies and Moro insurgents on a level playing field because we cannot "discount the value of people just because they have not had the same opportunity". Surely you're kidding! I am 100% in favour of helping countries with their development goals through international aid. I'm 100% opposed to taking the dregs of their societies as immigrants. I don't claim the "nation state" model is the right one for humanity for all time, but right now countries have obligations to their own citizens first and foremost.
[Lynnette]: "And to assume that those who have had the opportunity of a good education will take advantage of that and go on to have successful lives is also wrong. I can certainly understand the need to look for specialized talent wherever you can find it, but there is also value in looking at the raw talent that hasn't been developed."
When discussing immigration we need to put ourselves in the mind of a prospective employer, and not an aid worker. We also need to balance the rights of our own citizens.
Well, now… That piece of sleight-of-hand is gonna get me involved. Petes has gone from arguing that education makes a person more intelligent (it doesn't, ignorance and stupidity are different things) to arguing the respective economic desirability of taking in nurses versus unemployable drug addicts.
For the first one see…
"Someone from a stable country is likely to be smarter…"
Petes @ Sat Jan 13, 01:18:00 am ↑↑
The second argument is fairly clear and recent and doesn't need me to flag it again.
This isn't an honest argument he's putting up here. This is a game to him; he's switching out the subject matter he thinks he can get away with the switch. Keep that in mind as you proceed.
So apparently we just had a false alarm of a ballistic missile launch toward Hawaii. Are we getting a little twitchy or has our alarm system gone on the fritz? Lucky for us Trump was playing golf or we might have been headed to war with...someone.
"Are we getting a little twitchy or has our alarm system gone
on the fritz?"
Appears to be ‛human error’. Somebody ‘pushed the wrong button’, although that description may be allegorical.
The context we are discussing (or rather, that Trump was discussing) is not the intrinsic value of human beings, but the value of immigrants to the American economy.
Yes, indeed. But to only value those with a higher degree is a little short sighted. There was just an article in my paper today regarding the Salvadoran immigrants or I guess you'd say those with temporary protected status because they were allowed to stay after the earthquake in 2001. The people covered in the article worked in jobs that American workers wouldn't touch because they were manual labor, driving truck, laying sod, etc.
To quote the employer interviewed:
Larson has come to see Portillo as a key player on his team of about 30 full-time workers. He holds a commercial driver's license, drives a dump truck and specializes in laying sod. Such positions are tough to fill, Larson said. Last summer, he hired a driver about to turn 70, his only applicant for a vacancy he advertised widely
"Our younger generation all want to be button-pushers and video game programmers," he said.
Minn. employers step up to keep temporary workers
Everybody who contributes to the functioning of a society has value. Sometimes those who haven't had an opportunity before are the hardest working, and ultimately the most successful transplants.
I have no problem with screening out those who have committed criminal offenses in their home countries. But others should be give a chance.
Appears to be ‛human error’.
Hmmm...could have been a fatal error.
Ahhh, I've got a free afternoon, so I think it's time for some serious book fondling.
"Yes, indeed. But to only value those with a higher degree
is a little short sighted."
You've made a concession I would not be willing to make. It is not at all clear that Trump was ‛considering the value of immigrants to American society’ rather than their intrinsic values as human beings (white Europeans being the most valuable as human beings).
In fact, Trump's history and his background, especially his avowed belief in his own genetic superiority and the genetic superiority of his family (the ‘racehorse’ theory he taught his own children) all this suggests that Trump is, in fact, an actual racist, not just somebody pretending to be racist for political advantage.
It's not proof beyond all doubt. Hard to plumb the minds of men, but it's about as close to that level of proof as one is going to find. (Certainly proof beyond a reasonable doubt.)
Yes, Trump IS a friggin’ racist.
What Trump is proposing, as sketched in his own tweets, is not a merit-based system. A merit-based system would accept or reject applicants based their own merits. Trump is saying that applicants should be accepted or rejected based on country of origin. He’s saying that the individual should be judged by the group. If you’re Haitian, you’re out.
That’s bigotry. It’s not some left-wing activist’s definition of bigotry. It’s the textbook definition. And while quotas by nationality are common in immigration policy, it’s hard to explain why Trump thinks and talks this way on so many other issues, not just about foreigners but about Americans. He has been doing it for years to every group with whom he doesn’t identify: blacks, Latinos, Muslims, Seventh-day Adventists, Cuban Americans, Mexican Americans, Arab Americans, Korean Americans, and women.
Indeed so.
A very good letter to the Editor in my paper today:
"Why do we want people from places like Haiti and Africa in the United States, President Donald Trump asks, using the vulgar word "shithole" to describe those places? Why can't we get more people from Norway, he wonders?
My great-grandfather, abandoned by his father and orphaned by the death of his mother when he was 3, left his home country in the 1860's because Norway was a shithole that could not feed its own people and had laws of primogeniture giving him no hope for his future. His hope was the 160 acres outside Starbuck, Minn. A wife and 11 kids to share the work was the fulfillment of the promise of the American dream.
My Irish ancestors suffered great hunger as they waited for the ships to carry them away from their shithole country, which exported food as people starved during the 1840's.
The American dream has been successfully exported to many countries like Norway and Ireland and around the world. Our hope should be that it not die in the land of its birth.
Hmm...forgot that last " mark after "birth".
[Lynnette]: "A very good letter to the Editor in my paper today: 'My great-grandfather, abandoned by his father and orphaned by the death of his mother when he was 3, left his home country in the 1860's because Norway was a shithole that could not feed its own people and had laws of primogeniture giving him no hope for his future... My Irish ancestors suffered great hunger as they waited for the ships to carry them away from their shithole country, which exported food as people starved during the 1840's. The American dream has been successfully exported to many countries like Norway and Ireland and around the world. Our hope should be that it not die in the land of its birth.'"
I don't get the letter-writer's point. Good for them and their forbears, that the US became the land of opportunity for them. That in no way establishes the case that US is -- or should be -- obliged to do so. The US isn't trying to settle virgin territory nowadays. Homesteading is over. (A quick Google tells me Minnesota had a revival of it in the more recent past, though not for immigrants afaik).
Even when homesteading was a thing, immigration was a mixed blessing. Not everyone had the pioneering spirit. The famine Irish were reputedly shy of venturing beyond the big cities, with a horror of the rural living which had killed their compatriots. Some of their ghettos in the east coast cities were shitholes too (there were more Irish language speakers in New York in the 1890s than there are in Ireland today).
Immigration will always be popular with immigrants. My own generation came of age in a shitty recessionary period in Ireland. 1980s Ireland was a shithole. (Actually, most of Ireland was a shithole for most of the time since the 1700s, at least as far as economic opportunity was concerned). But by the 1980s it was starting to be a very well educated shithole. A third of all college graduates emigrated to the UK, the US and Europe. The brightest place at Christmas was the airport, which was thronged with emigrants returning to visit, if they could afford to and were lucky enough to not be illegals in the US.
Emigration is a double-edged sword. The US was a very important release valve for my generation (and for previous ones -- when I was born in the 60s, the population had fallen almost to 18th century levels). But it was also a huge brain-drain on a country that was trying to get on its own feet. That was a loss to Ireland and a gain to the US. Nevertheless, it was great that the opportunity was there. But nobody was ever bold enough to suggest that the US was duty-bound to take immigrants beyond the number and type that were in its own strategic interest.
[Lynnette]: "Everybody who contributes to the functioning of a society has value. Sometimes those who haven't had an opportunity before are the hardest working, and ultimately the most successful transplants."
I would go further and say that everyone has value, including those who cannot contribute. That doesn't mean another country has to take them in.
"I don't get the letter-writer's point."
That would be the central question then, wouldn't it?
14 January 2018. Trump declares for public consumption: "I am not a racist."
OMG! I had totally given up and put on my boots to go out and shovel the driveway thinking the Vikes had lost for sure. But Keenum and Diggs came through in the end.
What a play!
We are on our way to Philly! :))))
"We are on our way…"
I can only offer congratulations, but I can't be happy. My team blew their shot this year (no, not the Saints).
But it was also a huge brain-drain on a country that was trying to get on its own feet. That was a loss to Ireland and a gain to the US.
Exactly. One of our greatest strengths was being able to attract talented, hard working, determined people. They helped build my country. Doesn't matter where they came from.
As for that letter writer, perhaps his point was simply that even currently well off countries have had hard times. That doesn't mean that their people couldn't contribute to the country to which they may immigrate to.
I would go further and say that everyone has value, including those who cannot contribute. That doesn't mean another country has to take them in.
No, it doesn't. But the question was whether or not people from countries characterized by Trump as "shit hole countries" would be of merit to the US. My argument is that they can.
My team blew their shot this year (no, not the Saints).
Well, I can understand that. The Vikings have been in that position many times. It's hard to believe they have made it this far. But I'm glad for the team. They've worked hard.
[Lynnette]: "...Keenum and Diggs came through in the end."
A pair of fine upstanding players, I see ;-)
[Lynnette]: "But the question was whether or not people from countries characterized by Trump as "shit hole countries" would be of merit to the US. My argument is that they can."
And people from non-shithole countries on the average would be of even more benefit. Of course, you probably don't get average people. The evidence is that from shithole countries you get the cream of the crop. So in reality, the argument can be made for selecting people for their talents, not by their country of origin. But if I understand it right, the program Trump was criticising did exactly the latter.
Btw, the first four items on the news just now were about Trump. I realise the BBC has probably switched over to catering for a US audience at this time of night, but still! They've even somehow managed to make the Hawaii missile blooper about him. Plus Palestinian peace talks. Oh, and of course, his "I'm the least racist person you'll ever meet" statement ;-)
Let's not forget the point that Petes is defending…
"Someone from a stable country is likely to be smarter and more valuable
on the average than someone from a shithole."
Petes @ Sat Jan 13, 01:18:00 am ↑↑
Let's don't let Petes slide quietly away from his own racist instincts just cause he wishes he'd not said that in public after all.
That's pretty much Trump's first defensive maneuver--just wish it away after it doesn't play well even amongst the Trumpkins.
He may be going but he isn't going quietly.
Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona is expected to deliver a floor speech on Wednesday in which he will compare President Donald Trump's attacks on the news media to the rhetoric of late Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
According to an excerpt of the speech, Flake will criticize the President for calling the news media the "enemy of the people," calling it "an assault as unprecedented as it is unwarranted."
"Mr. President, it is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own President uses words infamously spoken by Josef Stalin to describe his enemies," reads the excerpt. "It bears noting that so fraught with malice was the phrase 'enemy of the people,' that even Nikita Khrushchev forbade its use, telling the Soviet Communist Party that the phrase had been introduced by Stalin for the purpose of 'annihilating such individuals' who disagreed with the supreme leader."
Btw, the first four items on the news just now were about Trump.
Turn away, whatever you do, save yourself...
A pair of fine upstanding players, I see ;-)
I missed the first half so I wouldn't know. :)
But they did their jobs, which is why they were there.
"…but he isn't going quietly."
Word is Mitt Romney's gonna run for Senator from Utah, to replace the retiring Orrin Hatch. I suspect that Romney wants, as much as anything, a perch with a microphone from whence to criticize Trump.
Lynnette, I was wondering what the local buzz is on the shale industry? Are people emigrating to the Dakotas again?
It certainly sounds like shale is roaring back. I see the US is days away from breaking its all time all output record set in 1970, and surpassing the ten million barrels per day mark (Reuters). It's only 10% away from becoming the world's largest producer which some see happening by the end of next year. Efficiencies are way up compared to before the downturn -- a well can be drilled in a week instead of a month, more bores can be drilled from a single platform, and a higher proportion of hydrocarbons in place can be extracted. On the other hand, land and oil services costs are up and the supply of labour is down. Unemployment in some parts of the Texas Permian basin is down to 2.6%. But there are still thousands of "ducks" -- drilled uncompleted wells -- to be worked through, so output will certainly keep rising for some time.
It is a bit scary that nobody really knows the depletion profile of shale basins. Individual wells deplete quickly but technology continues to improve overall extraction, and the sizes of regional deposits are vast. While the big producers in the Middle East and Russia are still pumping conventional crude, the US shale contribution is now a significant portion of world supply, needed to satisfy the robustly growing demand. Interesting times ahead, as always.
Brookings Institute: It appears that the counties which voted for Hillary produced 64% of America's 2016 GDP. Those that voted for Trump produced only 36% of GDP.
Lynnette, I was wondering what the local buzz is on the shale industry? Are people emigrating to the Dakotas again?
Funny you should ask that. I have a lunch set for Feb. 2 with someone who may have an answer to that. I will make a note and ask him what he has heard.
It appears that the counties which voted for Hillary produced 64% of America's 2016 GDP. Those that voted for Trump produced only 36% of GDP.
Hmmm...I wonder what one should make of that? I will not say what comes to mind first. Perhaps most of it has to do with those are the areas with declining economic sectors, such as coal?
It notice that the Trump administration and its apologists among the Congressional Republicans are still fighting the ‘shithole’ war. No less Trumpkin friendly personages than Petes and Marcus have both prounounced it a tempest in a teapot. (Petes @ Fri Jan 12, 07:36:00 pm and subsequently; Marcus @ Sat Jan 13, 05:12:00 am and 05:14:00 am.) And yet the Trump administration has determined that they have to continue to fight this loser. I find this odd. I would have thought that they've moved on to some new outrage by now.
"Hmmm...I wonder what one should make of that?"
Basically it means that the Republican's politically inspired economic model does not work. Never has worked; doesn't work now; never gonna work.
Senator Jeff Flake's speech did not go easy on Trump.
@ Lynnette,
PBS is doing two hours on the opioid epidemic tonight. Two one hour shows, not a single two-hour special. I've heard nothing about it before, but I have set my recorder.
PBS is doing two hours on the opioid epidemic tonight.
Yes, I saw that. I'll have to tune in.
It looks like Mueller has subpoenaed Bannon. Possibly making the White houses's recent efforts to shut him up ineffectual.
Yeah, it also occurs to me that Trump's decision to burn Bannon among the dedicated Trumpkins may now prove to have been a serious mistake. Trump gave Bannon cause to strike back, and Bannon now has the opportunity as well.
Rex Tillerson said today that the United States will continue with a military presence in Syria for the foreseeable future--open ended. Couple of caveats to that…
1) Trump doesn't necessarily agree. Tillerson seems peculiarly uninformed about Trump's current notions.
2) Even if Trump does agree, that don't mean he'll still agree when the sun comes up tomorrow.
But, I thought the statement worthy of dissemination, just on the off-hand chance that Tillerson's got it right this time.
Happy Trump anniversary everyone! Doesn't seem like a whole year since those unprecedentedly huuuge crowds thronged the Washington Mall. Ok, maybe it feels like more than a year to some, in which case the next seven years is gonna feel like a lifetime! But you always have the mid-terms to look forward to. :) :) :)
I only bring this up because once again Trump dominates the BBC headlines. I see he passed his medical, including a test of cognitive ability which they're saying he insisted on himself. That'll be a blow to the people who'd convinced themselves he had advanced dementia -- they'll have to check their own cognitive dissonance. :)
Straight on the heels of this good news for the American republic, BBC HARDtalk (one of the channels best outputs) interviewed Anthony "The Mooch" Scaramucci. Worth a look if it comes up on BBC America, as I presume it will. Sackur gives The Mooch a good grilling about Trump's media profile. They usually cut the interviewee's mic at the end of the programme, but The Mooch is overheard saying in a not very jokey way "that's why we call it BBC Break Balls". He also insisted on being invited back to "pop champagne" when Trump wins his second term. :)
Back to the headlines. The Beeb cited this Irish Times article about Apple's plans to repatriate its global cash pile to the US. Hopefully Ireland gets the €15 bn it owes us first. But it means a $38 bn tax windfall to the US, plus the repatriation of a quarter of a trillion dollars with which Apple plans to create 20,000 jobs. Even the left wing Beeb is seeing it as a dramatic affirmation of Trump's tax changes.
Oh, nearly forgot. Then there was the story about North Korea's latest rapprochement with its southern neighbours. People starting to ask (yes, even on the BBC) if Trump's "little rocket man" and "bigger button" gibes are forcing NK to make an ally of the south in resisting sanctions.
South Korea's new President, Moon Jae-in, was known to be a "dove" in regards to North Korea. He was fairly explicit about that during the last election. He has written about the importance of being able to ‘say no the Americans’ and the importance for South Korea ‘to be able to take the lead on matters on the Korean Peninsula’. He is known to favor policies which he thinks will lead to the peaceful reunification of the peninsula, or at least reconciliation if reunification isn't in the cards in the foreseeable future.
So, there was some surprise expressed over here that Trump's militancy toward the North Koreans had not yet prompted pushback from Moon. I would suggest that Trump's aggression and irresponsibility have had more impact on the policies emanating from Seoul than P'yŏngyang.
"…Apple's plans to repatriate its global cash pile to the US…"
I'm gonna bet that never actually happens. Likely it'll work out just like those Carrier Air Conditioning jobs that were gonna stay in Indiana, loudly and proudly announced, but which quietly moved to Mexico soon as the echoes faded away.
Beginning to look like the Republicans are going to manage to shut down the government tomorrow. (‛essential’ employees will still be required to work; they just won't get paid--except for Congressmen/Congresswomen and, of course, also Trump will get paid).
I notice that the Republican ‛Freedom Caucus’, a collection of the extreme right-wingers and teabagger types, have given it up and voted for the Republican ‛Continuing Resolution’ to fund the government into February. The ‛establishment’ Republicans are winning again; Trump's populist supporters are just giving up ‛cause Trump says to give up. I wonder if they'll be this pliable when the mid-term elections come around.
Anyway, it's passed the House and is headed on to the Senate.
Trump gave Bannon cause to strike back, and Bannon now has the opportunity as well.
All's good. :)
I only bring this up because once again Trump dominates the BBC headlines.
His Orangeness if everywhere, everywhere. :)
Ok, maybe it feels like more than a year to some, in which case the next seven years is gonna feel like a lifetime!
But think of the fodder for Comedy Central! If for some odd reason this doesn't occur they will go into deep, deep mourning. :(
The Beeb cited this Irish Times article about Apple's plans to repatriate its global cash pile to the US. Hopefully Ireland gets the €15 bn it owes us first. But it means a $38 bn tax windfall to the US, plus the repatriation of a quarter of a trillion dollars with which Apple plans to create 20,000 jobs. Even the left wing Beeb is seeing it as a dramatic affirmation of Trump's tax changes.
Well, well, well, times are looking up! For some. Of course, it remains to be seen if this will come to fruition. I tend to be skeptical until I see the color of their money.
No worries about the 15 bn, just attach a lien on their assets or slap an import tax on their products, or something... All's good. :)
Trump will make the world GREAT AGAIN!
I would suggest that Trump's aggression and irresponsibility have had more impact on the policies emanating from Seoul than P'yŏngyang.
*whispers softly*
I think they call that appeasement. Oh well, it's their lives. Maybe they would like to live in more limited circumstances. Great character building thingy.
I notice that the Republican ‛Freedom Caucus’, a collection of the extreme right-wingers and teabagger types, have given it up and voted for the Republican ‛Continuing Resolution’ to fund the government into February.
I did read somewhere that, oddly enough, those who force a government shutdown get the blame. Kind of hurts ones popularity with some...
It seems that the short term spending bill is in jeopardy in the Senate. Quite a few Democrats and some Republicans are saying they will vote against it, either because it doesn't settle the DACA issue or because it is merely a stopgap measure.
It seems that a Trump appointee has resigned because of racist comments he made.
Trump administration appointee Carl Higbie resigned Thursday as chief of external affairs for the federal government's volunteer service organization after a CNN KFile review of racist, sexist, anti-Muslim and anti-LGBT comments he made on the radio.
"Effective immediately, Carl Higbie has resigned as Chief of External Affairs at CNCS," Samantha Jo Warfield, a spokesperson for CNCS, said in a statement.
Some people might call this "draining the swamp". ;)
There appears to be a major snowstorm heading our way for Sunday into Monday. Now why can't these things time it better? This is my busy season. It's hard to take time off work to shovel or snow blow all the time. *sigh* Oh well, at least I'm not down south or on the east coast where they seem to have been getting all the snow.
"I think they call that appeasement."
Trump starts an unnecessary war with North Korea and Seoul is gonna take a pounding from those thousands of artillery tubes and rocket launchers buried in the mountains just north of the DMZ.
The consensus opinion among military types appears to be that the North Koreans can destroy Seoul before anybody on ‛our’ side can silence those guns and rockets. Tens of thousands dead, minimum, more if the rest don't drop everything and run for their lives.
Could be that the South Koreans don't consider it appeasement to not get Seoul destroyed just to please Trump and lower the risk to American cities. Maybe they figure he can take his own risks, not put them at risk for his goals.
I'm watching the shutdown approach and I can't help wishing the Democrats do not resort to a filibuster to block the CR (Continuing Resolution). I didn't approve of that tactic when the Republicans were using it, and I don't approve of it now. I don't think non-budgetary items like the Dreamers ought to used as the justification for a filibuster on funding the government. I'm not sure I even approve of budgetary items being used as a basis for a filibuster (as, for instance, funding for Trump's Wall); I'll have to give the ramifications of those sorts of fights some more consideration before I'm definite in my opinion there, but I'm pretty solid that I don't approve of shutting down the government with a filibuster over non-spending matters.
But, could be no filibuster will be necessary. May be that the Republicans can't even get a majority vote in favor of taking up the House passed CR. I s'pect we shall soon see how that works out.
Interesting news. Trump called Chuck Schumer (Democratic Senate Minority Leader) to the White House. Just Schumer, nobody else except a small contingent of Schumer's aids. Schumer has left the White House now, apparently no deal is on the horizon. Schumer said they're going to have further discussions, but didn't way when.
This has gotta make the Republicans nervous as hell.
Well, the Democrats decided to go with imposing a filibuster anyway. The Republicans only had 45 Republican votes (might be 46 in the end, if and after Mitch McConnell enters a vote; he has so far refrained from voting). Forty-six votes won't win it, but the Democrats had five (5) of their Senators from Republican leaning states vote in favor of the Republican funding bill, which brought the total up to 50-48 (so far). 50-48 is a win, absent the filibuster, but the Democrats apparently wanted to make sure that those five vulnerable Democratic Senators didn't have to run against a vote to shut down the government; they get to claim they ‛voted with Trump’ on this one.
Those five Democratic Senators are: Joe Donnelly, Ind.; Heidi Heitkamp, N.D.; Doug Jones, Ala.; Joe Manchin III, W.Va.; Claire McCaskill, Mo.
Could be that the South Koreans don't consider it appeasement to not get Seoul destroyed just to please Trump and lower the risk to American cities. Maybe they figure he can take his own risks, not put them at risk for his goals.
This is true, and for that I couldn't blame them. As long as they are careful as to what they agree to with NK. All issues with the United States aside, one would hate to see them coerced into doing some things that would make their future more like that of the North. That is rather bleak.
I don't think non-budgetary items like the Dreamers ought to used as the justification for a filibuster on funding the government.
I think I tend to agree with you here. As much as I support DACA I don't think I want is used as some kind of extortion.
However, that doesn't mean I will change my mind about who I will be voting for in the next election. So far the Republican agenda, either Trump's or the legislatures, is not mine.
"…one would hate to see them coerced into doing some
things that would make their future more like that of the
North."
Not likely to happen I don't think. However, President Moon has now unquestionably joined President Putin and President Xi on the growing list of foreigners who've decided to not solve Trump's North Korea problem for him.
It seems as if the European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker is maintaining an offer to the British for them to remain in the EU. There is apparently another article that would allow that to happen.
In any case, though, they seem to have come to some kind of agreement that will rule out a hard border between the E.U.'s Republic of Ireland and the U.K.'s Northern Ireland. That at least sounds promising, Petes.
However, President Moon has now unquestionably joined President Putin and President Xi on the growing list of foreigners who've decided to not solve Trump's North Korea problem for him.
When you put yourself first it is likely others may also put themselves first.
"…an offer to the British for them to remain in the EU."
Notwithstanding the articles of the EU, there'd probably have to be another vote by the British population to accommodate British law. And that may well prove to be tricky.
"May be that the Republicans can't even get a majority
vote in favor of taking up the House passed CR."
Turns out the filibuster wasn't necessary; the Republicans couldn't get a majority. They just weren't as persnickety about actually doing it as I would tend to be. They decided to do the filibuster to give cover to their at-risk Senators.
This one was news to me. The FBI is investigating a possible campaign contributions to the Trump campaign by Russian ‘friends’ of Vladimir Putin, contributions laundered through the National Rifle Association. That's what I said, yes; the Russians were using the NRA to channel money to Trump. Or, so goes the theory. NYT Investigations are not proof. This investigation may not turn up the proof. But, it's a potential blockbuster. Might want to keep an eye on this one.
Trump has doubled down on the government shutdown. A White House statement has been issued to the effect that there will be no negotiations on the status of the Dreamers until the Democrats capitulate and vote in favor of the Republican ‛continuing resolution’. (However, I notice that Trump has not included this ultimatum in his Twitter for today. Perhaps he's giving himself room to back away from it, perhaps not.)
It's beginning to look like this shutdown is a real one, not something that'll be fixed by open of business day Monday.
The FBI is investigating a possible campaign contributions to the Trump campaign by Russian ‘friends’ of Vladimir Putin, contributions laundered through the National Rifle Association.
This is getting a little surreal. I wouldn't be surprised about the "friends" of Vladimir Putin thing, not at all. But the NRA thing? Seriously?
"Seriously?"
The New York Times, and McClatchy certainly seem serious about it. But, as I cautioned, suspicion and even an investigation, is not evidence. We'll have to await progress of the investigation to tell us if there's any evidence to be found.
Dang it all, one of those articles I can't copy and paste from.
The last paragraph where they say we may have been focusing too narrowly on Russian involvement reminds me of Comey's warning in his testimony. He said the Russians would be back. Perhaps they never left.
Which article, and what part? I can probably fetch it for you.
Trump has doubled down on the government shutdown.
As one commentator on a news channel said, it would appear that our domestic agenda is just as messed up as our foreign one.
Which article, and what part?
Your NYT article about the possible Russian involvement with the NRA. The last paragraph.
Last paragraph:
“In terms of what the Russians are doing in the United States, it’s far broader than just the Trump campaign,” Schiff told me. “In that sense when people think that the Russian intervention was just about tipping the scales to one of the candidates in 2016, they’re thinking far too narrowly.”
I think that's why Comey said they will be back. The Russians are thinking long term. And it would appear that their long term planning is to undermine our democracy in any way they can. Ours and Europe's.
If the conservative wing of the Republican party has used that as a means to further their own agenda they are playing a very dangerous game.
This is not a game with them. This is get while the getting's good. They do not actually expect to be in a position of power again for the foreseeable future. Grab everything ya can carry away now. That's what they're up to. (Even if Trump leaves a competitive political party behind him, it won't be their old party; it'll be Trump's party.)
Or, as one writer put it just the other day… When the conservatives do come to the conclusion that they cannot win anymore by democratic means, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.
(And, it was an old line Republican conservative who said that. Guy by the name of David Frum, for those of you who know conservative philosophers. Long time writer for the upper echelon conservative papers and magazines--Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal, those kinds of places. Also a senior speech writer for George Dubya.)
When the conservatives do come to the conclusion that they cannot win anymore by democratic means, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.
That is what kind of happens in a dictatorship.
I see that Trump is pushing again for getting rid of the filibuster in the Senate and changing the voting to a simple majority to pass legislation.
That would kind of help them down that path Mr.Frum alluded to.
Btw, I found that book "Fire and Fury" at a store I was in recently. I actually put it in my cart, and carried it with me as I finished my shopping, while I tried to decide if I wanted to buy it. I had read the introduction and just a few brief snippets inside. Ultimately it was the thought that I have heard a lot of this before and there was little to be gained from further torture. I put it back. I may yet buy it, or not. I already know that I don't like Trump or what he and his conservative friends are trying to do. I don't know that I need to read their backstory.
"Or, as one writer put it just the other day… When the conservatives do come to the conclusion that they cannot win anymore by democratic means, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy."
When the libtards realise the actual people of the land hate them, they will not replace their politics, they will attempt to replace the people.
Post a Comment