This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Testy Calibrate
Eta. Oops. I thought it was a different article. This one is pretty stupid in some ways although I don't see it as stupid because of the Russia position.
Hmm. I didn't take the Russia stance as the big takeaway. Maybe I'm tuned into the failure of neoliberalism as a philosophical lens and so pick it out as a main idea when it is really secondary. Anyway, as an opinion piece, it suffers the normal flaws of its format, but I didn't read it as remarkably stupid.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-breathtaking-surrender-to-russia/2017/07/20/bde94e10-6d6c-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.29a8953a42f9This:QuoteIf this is what Trump's version of "winning" looks like, what might further victory entail?Is how the east coast elite say #winning
That's a very stupid article though - they seem to want a return to an anti Russian stance based on the premise that Russia = communism - things have moved on considerably. Russia politically now is much closer to the same political layer that Trump represents - a bunch of ultra right thugs and gangsters. It's no surprise he has more common ground with them, as do people like Le Pen and Wilders and 'populists' (ie neofascists) the world over - this is a new world order emerging. Trying to drum up the old cold war anti Russian rhetoric is just a backwards step and if anything feeds the backwardness.
I think that can be true and the author may have made a valid point simultaneously.
The author may have a point on ideological conformity of major newspapers, though that seems like something that would also be a problem under President Clinton or President Jeb!
If this is what Trump's version of "winning" looks like, what might further victory entail?Is how the east coast elite say #winning
I feel a constitutional crisis coming onOnly now?
I'll believe it about Rubio if he actually follows through when Trump inevitably fires Mueller.Buy guns and ammo
Does this mean I have to give up La Croix and use Soda Stream?My life would be significantly poorer if I had to give up la Croix.
lol, apparently several states have already passed laws criminalizing this over the last couple years. wtfSource?
Life will find a way
Oh yeah, you have that chronic weed habit, and probably CTE from your boxing.I have often wondered about the cte thing. I didn't box pro or semi though. All my division matches were wearing headgear. I did take some hard blows to the head even so.
Speaking as a man, I totally missed that part of the story.
Lol. One thing about being old enough to remember that is that the memory card is degrading enough to forget.
That actually makes sense.no article has made me dislike basic income more than this and it is all down to how matthews frames the benefits:I get your point, but I try not to hold opinions like this too much against writers. I like to optimistically think they are just trying to point out the benefits to the oligarchs running things so we plebes can get a little more scraps.QuoteOther than that, the bulk of the decline seems attributable to longer spells of unemployment, as people used money from the negative income tax to fund longer searches for jobs. That's a good thing: Research from Stanford's Raj Chetty has found that longer job searches improve matching between candidates and jobs, increasing economic efficiency.
yes, matthews, that's what's good about not having to take the first shitty job offered because you're desperate.
it just seems obvious to me that reducing the amount of work people are made to do in order to survive is one of the primary benefits of the system, but they have to defend it by saying "oh no, if you do it 'right' people will still spend many hours enriching their capitalist overlords!" it really is true that there are different kinds of basic income, and not all of them are progressive. like he keeps going on about "losing the meaning people get from work" do you really think the work most people do to survive is "meaningful" you moron?
Driving me crazy. Who is the one on the right?
As are people
That does pretty much summarize the issue.QuoteOne of neoliberalism's more strident critics, Open Markets fellow at New America and former congressional staffer Matt Stoller, recently wrote that neoliberalism "involves moving power from public institutions to private institutions, and allowing governance to happen through concentrated financial power...
I think she could have ended the article right there. Neoliberals support traditional liberal goals but think that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the way to achieve them.
tl;dr self-labeled "neoliberals" are mostly just social democrats that fetishize global trade and want to be edgyAuthor needs to be subjected to foucault clockwork Orange style.
The way he understands it, in the United States, "the major weakness in the term 'neoliberal' is that it encompasses the majority of all sides in a political debate." In other words, it's become so broadly defined that it arguably describes both of the major political parties in America.There is another interpretation for that. Although I guess I like social justice nods as we careen into the new feudalism as opposed to bigotry and public executions of poor's, blacks and gays.
it's a straightforward wasting disease.
For more than a month, Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives has declined to consider a congressional resolution to honor the victims of a double slaying on a Portland MAX train.
One week after the May 26 MAX killings--allegedly committed by a Portland white supremacist who marched with right-wing protesters--Oregon's Democratic U.S. senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, drafted the resolution. It honors "acts of heroism and sacrifice for the safety and sake of others in the face of acts of domestic terrorism."
The resolution passed the Senate on June 8 by unanimous consent. But the House leadership has declined to bring it to the floor for a vote, or answer questions from Oregon's delegation asking why.
U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), who sponsored the resolution in the House, is furious.
"It's outrageous that the Republican leadership in the House won't take two minutes to honor these heroes," Blumenauer tells WW.
The resolution is a purely symbolic gesture, as routine as a politician offering "thoughts and prayers" to the victims of any tragedy. That makes it all the more puzzling why Congress wouldn't rubber-stamp it--especially when it has been quick to memorialize the victims of other hate crimes and terrorist attacks, both in and outside the U.S.
In June alone, the House passed resolutions honoring the police response to an attack on a GOP congressional baseball practice, commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Fla., and condemning the Islamic extremist attack on an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England. Two of those resolutions were passed the same day they were introduced, and the third--condemning the Manchester attack--was passed within two weeks.
Congressional gridlock on other, more substantive issues like health care is no explanation, either. Each week, the House gets an opportunity to vote on the resolution while approving its suspension calendar--a time when the House frequently approves so-called easy votes, like naming new post offices and passing resolutions.
But the Portland MAX stabbings were immediately polarizing--and a touchy subject for nationalist groups that have gained traction with the election of President Donald Trump. It's unclear whether calling the stabbings "terrorism" is politically unpalatable for some Republicans.
The accused killer, Jeremy Christian, is a Portland white supremacist who had latched onto an extremist movement known as the "alt-right"--and could be heard on public transit spouting the movement's complaints about antifascist protesters and the liberal suppression of free speech.
In the moments before he stabbed three men May 26, Christian harassed two black teenage girls, one of them wearing a hijab. The men intervened to stop Christian's hateful rant; Christian pulled out a knife and stabbed them in the necks. Rick Best and Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche were killed in the attack; and Micah David-Cole Fletcher survived.
Related: Friends and family remember the heroes who stood up to hate on the MAX.
Wyden, who co-sponsored the resolution, says a memorial to those three men should be as easy to approve as any other. "I am calling on the House leadership to take the same step recognizing these heroes for standing up courageously to terrorism," he tells WW in a statement.
Merkley agrees. "It is beyond unacceptable for House leadership to fail to call a vote on the resolution honoring the heroes who gave their lives on the Portland MAX train," he tells WW.
A bipartisan delegation of U.S. representatives from Oregon--including Republican Rep. Greg Walden--sent a letter to House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on July 7 demanding that he allow a vote on the resolution. McCarthy has not responded to the delegation, nor has he showed any signs of bringing the resolution to a vote.
McCarthy's office did not return WW's requests for comment on why the resolution hadn't been put to a vote yet, or whether it ever would be. He also had not responded to the letter from the Oregon delegation by press time.
Blumenauer says he won't quit pushing for a vote. "This attack was unlike anything we have seen," he says. "It shouldn't be this hard, and we're going to keep pressing."