Scientists model universe using Einstein’s full theory Science Daily
Do scales, feathers, and hairs share a common ancestry? Christian Science Monitor
Flower Mound man faces billions in fines for storing wood Dallas Morning News
Associated Press Complains About Politicians Lack of Action on Global Warming Beat the Press
When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers NYT
The $100 Trillion Bond Market’s Got Bigger Concerns Than Brexit Bloomberg
Brexit
Parliament must decide what Brexit means in the interests of the whole Kingdom Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Telegraph
Few quick thoughts on Brexit Chris Arnade, Medium
Attributions of causality Interfluidity
I don’t mean to pick on Kevin Drum, whom I’ve read for more than a decade, and whom I really like a great deal. But it seems to me that the alleged “good guys” — the liberal, cosmopolitan class of which I myself am a part — have fallen into habits of ridiculing, demonizing, writing off, or, in our best moments, merely patronizing huge swathes of the polities to which we belong. They may do the same to us, but we are not toddlers, that is no excuse. In the United States, in Europe, we are allowing ourselves to disintegrate and arguing about who is to blame. Let’s all be better than that.
It’s very human to hate those one has most injured. Hence, credentialed liberals and the working class.
Mapped: Brexit’s Aftermath Foreign Policy. I have never understood this “markets like certainty” talking point. I thought heroic entrepreneurs were all about risk?
Brexit’s Impact on Global Economy Depends on Leaders WSJ. So we’re doomed, then?
Britain is sailing into a storm with no one at the wheel The Economist. Nice subhead.
I cannot stress too much that Britain is part of Europe – and always will be Boris Johnson, Telegraph
Free movement of labour might not end after Brexit, admits Tory Leave campaigner Daniel Hannan Independent
The best Brexit Britishisms: How a gormless crapspatula Cameron left the UK in omnishambles Quartz
UK Labour leader defies revolt over Brexit strategy AFP. Could it be the real problem the golpistas have is that Corbyn might actually win a general election?
In defence of Corbyn Stumbling and Mumbling
It’s Still the Iraq War, Stupid. Craig Murray
The Imminent Dodging Of Brexit – A Gift For The Fascist Right Moon of Alabama
A U.K. Revolution With No End in Sight WSJ
Britain faces up to waning influence on global stage FT. Pivot to China? Kidding!
Brexit won’t shield Britain from the horror of a disintegrating EU Yanis Varoufakis, Guardian
Brexit — a stern rebuke to arrogant elites Boston Globe
‘Brexit’ could mean disintegration of EU or UK, says Roubini Reuters
Nicola Sturgeon threatens to block Brexit in face of English fury Telegraph
So what does it all mean for you? How Brexit will affect your holiday money, mortgages, passports and health cover Daily Mail. This paragraph caught my eye:
There is no obvious reason why UK government debt should become a bigger risk — after all, unlike eurozone countries, our Government could, if the worst came to the worst, print money in order to redeem its bonds.
The MMT paradigmatic claim that no government sovereign in its own currency can go bankrupt has infiltrated the Daily Mail. It’s been quite a year.
Syraqistan
C.I.A. Arms for Syrian Rebels Supplied Black Market, Officials Say NYT. Shocked, shocked.
Big Brother Is Watching You Watch
Tor-Internal Log: Ex-CIA Inside Tor Discussion Cryptome. Page 3: ” I’m curious, how do you picture an ex-CIA within the Tor Project as being good for Tor’s public image?”
2016
Time indexed video highlights from DNC platform committee meeting on June 24, 2016 Reddit (MR).
Hillary Clinton offers mind-boggling tickets ranging from $2,700 to $100,000 to see special performance of Hamilton with her – but star Lin-Manuel Miranda will have QUIT just three days before Daily Mail. Well, everybody knows it’s not about the performance. I mean, that performance.
Draw the 2016 Electoral College Map WSJ. Interactive.
Donald Trump’s bad month just got worse, because Sanders backers just rallied to Clinton WaPo vs. Nearly Half of Sanders Supporters Won’t Support Clinton Bloomberg
In new poll, support for Trump has plunged, giving Clinton a double-digit lead WaPo vs. Hillary Clinton Holds 5-Point Lead Over Donald Trump, Latest Poll Finds WSJ
Primary odd couple pushes to unite Democratic party AP. Mook and Weaver have bonded; they’re both from Vermont. Everything’s going to be fine.
Trump Says Muslim Ban Plan to Focus on ‘Terrorist’ Countries Bloomberg
Keller @ Large: Dr. Jill Stein, The Green Party, And The 2016 Election CBS Boston
7 stabbed at neo-Nazi event outside Capitol in Sacramento Los Angeles Times
Black Injustice Tipping Point
The slave who taught Jack Daniels how to make whiskey: Bourbon giant finally acknowledges the truth after 150 years Daily Mail (CL).
The Politics of Hashtag Ownership and Attribution Model View Culture
Mexico’s Classroom Wars Jacobin
Class Warfare
Standing on Backs of Global Poor, Filthy Rich Getting Even Filthier Common Dreams
Property Rights, the Income Distribution and China Roger Farmer
Antidote du jour:
Bonus antidote:
See yesterday’s Links and Antidote du Jour here.
187 comments
Comments are closed.
Hillary right now, in this snap shot of time, is ahead of Trump in the polls. Will this be influenced at all by the ongoing FBI investigation? They have to complete it soon, one would think, then recommend indictments, one would hope.
The media has decided that indicting Hillary would not coincide with the story they want to tell, and have dutifully informed the FBI and Justice of their decision. That should put an end to the matter.
For myself, I am going to write in Bernie. If that mean Trump takes it so be it.
Oh No there Goes Buffalo, Go Go Trumpzilla!!
Because of the Electoral College, write in votes for President are futile. Instead:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/05/links-5716.html#comment-2592601
Mainers should vote for the ranked choice voting initiative, which would give third parties a real chance.
Thank you, Vatch. I hope lots of NC readers click on the link to your excellent comment telling them why 3rd party votes really count.
In fact, in 2009, I vowed that I would never again throw away my vote for President on anyone running as a Democrat or as a Republican. No regrets.
Here were the choices on Kansas’s 2012 presidential ballot. With choices this bad, would you still not write in?
Democratic – Obama
Republican – Romney
Libertarian – Johnson
Reform – Chuck Baldwin
According to the information God, Wiki, Jill Stein did receive 714 write-in votes or 0.06% in KS of which I was one. My new chant: “I am the 0.06%!”
Yes, if there aren’t any decent candidates on your state’s ballot, a write-in is all that you can do. Different states undoubtedly have different deadlines for submitting signtures for ballot access. You can see what your state’s ballot access looks like here:
http://www.gp.org/ballotaccess
Are they futile in the sense of not being counted towards electing the candidate written-in?
Or futile in the sense of not even being “made note of” so that totals of write-ins for a particular name are not even made and mentioned as a matter of political curiosity?
Because if write-ins are “made note of” as a matter of political curiosity and umpteen million people write Sanders in, and the Media is forced to make note of the fact that umpteen million people wrote Sanders in, then umpteen million write-ins for Sanders could be useful or even consequential in terms of shaping the time-flow downrange battlespace. Even though Sanders will not have been elected.
She’ll never be indicted. Just not gonna happen.
But she may come to wish for some sort of “legitimate” forum in which to definitively defend herself and end the speculation once and for all, a forum which will necessarily be denied as long as the issue is covered up by the highest “law enforcement” agencies in the country.
Both Trump and Sanders do not hesitate to use the word “rigged,” and many voters are already convinced. How many times does Trump have to mention Pagliano’s 125 claims of the Fifth before doubters become converts?
clinton and her surrogates have fallen back many times on her 11 hours of congressional “testimony” as exoneration for Benghazi. No such absolution here.
Innuendo will continue to swirl and grow and she’ll have very little recourse but to laugh it off. Anything else would just call for more intense scrutiny. Meanwhile, the “integrity” of the “justice department” and the fbi in enforcing the “law” equitably continues to be eroded.
She may manage to eke out a “win” with this “strategy,” but any “moral authority” to “govern” will have gone right out the window. Along with whatever “credibility” the “justice” department and fbi still have.
I hate to give her any unsolicited advice, but HRC could use a professional laughing coach
That isn’t a joke. Any acting coach worth his or her salt would be working with Clinton on changing that laugh.
It just exposes that the whole thing is rigged. Sanders, Trump, Brexit all reveal that a majority is coming to understand that laws are nothing more than a way for the government to get you when they want, and to let the plutocracy do whatever it wants when your rich/powerful. The idea that everyone is “equal” before the law is up there with Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and tooth fairy…
Hillary Clintoon is just the preeminent example.
Adam Smith (of all people!) showed his understanding of this when he said:
[Lectures on Jurisprudence]
Yes, the neoliberals and hedge fund managers really don’t want you to read Adam Smith (who was a Professor of Moral Philosophy before Economics was invented). What they want is to tell you he claimed the Invisible Hand was Awesome, and leave it at that (that really wasn’t what he said, but they want you to ignore that, too).
Once an idea is in someone’s head, it’s there forever.
“Hillary Clinton Is Corrupt”
Trump seems to have lots of adjectives tacked on him but only one nick name: “Drumpf”
What interests me linguistically, is how many names there are for Clinton, in no particular order:
Hilldebeast, Hitlery, Canckles, (calves and ankles), Hilarity Corruption etc.
A poster on another forum came up with Clump as a combination of the two.
But a President Clinton without any legitimacy or moral authority would still control all the instruments of violent force, and she would use them. So lack of moral authority would mean little to her designated targets. It might mean something to her overweening self regard.
I do not believe that the people who support her now will be changed by the results of an FBI investigation, or anything else for that matter. The truth about Clinton is already widely known, or at least easily accessible. Spend a minute (no more is necessary) at Daily Kos, Huffington Post, TPM, etc. and it is sickeningly obvious that the “left” has fallen into the trap of self-delusion, and is quite happy there. After all, it is where all the best people are now congregating.
The media are nearly completely in her favor; even Fox seems to back Clinton. I’ve had to stop my e-mails to friends who cannot understand why I do not support Clinton. “She’ll be wonderful, especially for minorities and women! She’s got what’s most needed right now: experience”. I can’t argue against the experience claim, but that is the best argument against her: it is her experience, or history, that disqualifies her.
When HRC announced her candidacy, I suspect the perponderance of people that intend on voting for her had made their hive minds. She is all about identity politics not facts or objective reasoning.For them, her record either doesnt matter or they are in a deep state of denial.
On the lame “experience” bromide, that subject has all the potential to be a ringside seat to a shooting ducks in a barrel contest for anyone with an open mind.
Geo Wallace and Curtis LeMay had alot of experince as well. Most of it was an outstanding justification to not vote for them!
Same for Petraeus, and Douglas MacArthur. Each was touted as Presidential material because of their war experience.
Which left? Not the NaCap left, surely . . .
Actually, the sites and followers you referrence seem to represent Thomas Franks’s Liberals . . . limousine liberals, latte’ liberals, call them what one will. They really aren’t a “left”, are they?
She has points when it’s Clinton versus Trump. Add in Stein and Johnson and the number gap closes.
Associated Press Complains About Politicians Lack of Action on Global Warming [Beat the Press]
Maybe they could stage a sit in to force a vote for a proposal that would block anyone on the terrorist watchlist from owning and operating oil refineries, lumber services, fracking companies, coal factories, and natural gas plants?
Never mind, they are on ‘vacay’.
Time indexed video highlights from DNC platform committee meeting on June 24, 2016
@nycTerrierist The very last time code is the video. However I heard no moaning and groaning this time around so I am not sure what I was hearing when I first watched the clip.
ah, thx. i googled the timeline and found brother West explaining why he abstains from
voting for a platform that punts on TPP, single payer healthcare, occupation (by Israel), climate change, etc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R713OylyhIg&t=9h25m29s
sound quality not great: at one point he turned around – maybe responding to noise in the room? – but hard to discern…
Donald Trump’s bad month just got worse, because Sanders backers just rallied to Clinton WaPo vs. Nearly Half of Sanders Supporters Won’t Support Clinton Bloomberg
In new poll, support for Trump has plunged, giving Clinton a double-digit lead WaPo vs. Hillary Clinton Holds 5-Point Lead Over Donald Trump, Latest Poll Finds WSJ
I don’t know what’s what with these particular polls but one thing I do know: the Washington Post is now an utterly shameless propoganda organ for neolberalism and Hillary Clinton. This is yet another example of the decay that sets in when our famously free press (h/t Lambert) is owned by the oligarchs it is designed to check. Neoliberalism is a cancer on the body politic. William Randolph Hearst would be very jealous of what Jeff Bezos is doing with the Post.
I am a Sanders backer. Am not about to unite behind Clinton. And most of my fellow backers feel the same way.
+ at least 2
Make that 3.
Correction – it’s at least 4.
$27!
…and sanders will endorse Her.
But he will not ask any of his supporters to support her, and he will not chide them for not doing so.
People make too much in advance out of what could end up being a non-endorsement endorsement.
I find myself wondering how many more “endorsements” like paulson’s and kagan’s Bernie will be able to take before he admits that the democrat party is too far gone to “save,” and just cuts his supporters loose.
I’d imagine hillary has told lloyd blankfein to just STFU until after he pulls the lever.
I tend to believe he already cut us loose when he told the Democratic Party that he couldn’t deliver his voters to Clinton that she’d have to earn those votes.
Bernie may have had to pledge his support to the party in order to run on the ticket, his supporters are an entirely other story(and most of us aren’t going to vote for the party based on pretty promises of unity ponies for all.)
There have been pretty promises of unity ponies. Damn I miss all the good stuff.
I’ve seen a lot of indentured voter you thought you would escape but take your beating and watch us piss on everything you hold dear actions with promises of more. And a lot of press ‘Supreme Court this is why you must vote Clinton hidden reporting’, and more of she’s smarter than you AND Barack Obama put together, she’ll get things done in Congress (with little mention of how much I’m thankful he didn’t get things done.) No pretty ponies and unicorns in my experience.
Really if there were promises of imaginary ponies, the Sanders folks wouldn’t be losing the battle over the party platform so badly when the platform is fairly meaningless and ENTIRELY unbinding as is. But still they make clear their support for TPP even there. There are no promises. They are signaling what they really are loud and clear. They just hope you don’t follow any of that news. News that people like Liz Warren have to be entirely aware of.
Being fooled by promises of ponies is largely a justification people use in their own heads to justify voting for the horrible. Because I no longer believe they ARE fooled unless they are completely ignorant. It’s like with Obama: he signaled very well in the debates that he would continue the war in Afghanistan etc.. after that I voted Green in the general. Clinton is even more obvious and signaling very well she’ll vote for the TPP etc.. If they wanted to pretend they were something other than they were then they would AT LEAST pretend (i.e. pass a dishonest platform full of promises etc.). They don’t even pretend.
I had someone tell me that Clinton was clear about her objection to TPP, and that the refusal to include it in the platform was meaningless yesterday. Of course they also seem to be ignoring all the noise from the Obama administration that there is going to be a vote in the lame duck session because they say confidently it won’t happen. But even as they were trying to tell me that doing anything but voting for Clinton was throwing away my vote they could never answer why even a meaningless platform clause was too much to give to Sanders supporters if Clinton was absolutely opposed to TPP especially if all the smart money is on there not being a lame duck vote.
Mind you this was also after they complained that all these interviews with Trump never had interviewers pressing him on how he was going to do the things he was promising just them nodding their heads and going ummm, and I pointed out that Clinton also got lots of head nodding with no follow up on particulars and unlike Trump the intros and exit talking head sections didn’t savage her. Neither candidate is having their policies and plans being questioned for details it is all general and meaningless, both of them. And Clinton has got no chance of a Democratic House so there is no chance of her doing diddly regarding anything that is not illegally bombing another country and failing to uphold what laws we have on the financial industry, just like Obama.
Clinton voters can’t be bothered with facts, much less logical consistency. If they were capable of (or at least willing to engage in) rational thought based on accurate information, most of them wouldn’t be supporting Clinton. (There are, of course, a small percentage of Clinton voters who belong to the MIC and the highest echelon of the oligarchy who are completely aware of what Clinton represents and whole-heartedly endorse it; the people who are running the game.)
Hillary’s against TPP the way Nancy Pelosi is. She says she opposes it but in the end will make sure that just enough Democrats vote for it for it to pass.
Sounds like a girl I used to date (and many guys women date – the opposite perspective, for balance) – No means yes.
e.g., “It’s not you, it’s me.”
There is nothing for the two parties (as in, two sides…not political parties) to talk about at all at this stage of their relationship.
The silent treatment stage.
They stay together for the kids, or the voters.
Progressive platform – what progressive platform?
List of donors – you can find $27 donors in phone books, basically.
Endorsement – “I endorse my ex-wife?”
I wonder: does Bernie even have a dealbreaker?
I’m with you on that one. His good intentions are embarrassing at this point and a source of discouragement really. There is nothing left to say now but fuck the democrat party, let’s go do it on our own.
I am confused as to what is being exchanged in such a deal. The only thing the Clinton camp could possibly have to offer are non-binding flexian promises that are as worthless as $3 bills. Meanwhile, the only thing the Clinton camp wants from the Sanders camp is for the left to STFU.
There are no fungibles, no negotiations, no exhangeable goods, and neither side will be bound. You cannot cut supporters loose who were never bound in the first place, or at least who are bound to policies and not to a specific candidate (as I hope you all are).
That said, Sanders and his supporters still have a yuge agenda of projects to implement, and they should make every effort to hammer those policies into the public discourse and force them into concrete legislative changes. That is now and always has been the goal. If the best way to achieve this goal is to give a lukewarm nod to HRC and campaign ostensibly against Trump, so be it.
Lastly, there’s alot of talk about how Sanders was dumb to believe the Democrat Party could be redeemed. I see no evidence of him ever placing faith in the Brand D. Rather I see him as having his policy agenda, and correctly realising that the best way to move his agenda forward was to run in the DNC primary. Purely utilitarian.
Points well taken, all.
Noone could have anticipated his amazing success with everything rigged against him. Sanders’ vigorous following at this point was unimaginable a year ago. Since he has this tidal wave of support, and Crooked Hillary is so unpopular, I don’t see why he should make it easy for the DNC to sideline him.
I’m hoping he holds his lukewarm nod until Hill releases her speeches to Wall Street, for example. Why let her stonewall?
Agreed, their promises are worthless and brand D, unredeemable.
Can anyone become a Democrat and run (we know anyone can become a Democrat and vote)?
Looking the 10+ Republican candidates early on, I assume anyone can run, in either party.
Did he have to make any promise in order to run and push his agenda?
I see him as having three options… push to change an existing party, run third or start a new party. He was never willing to do option 2 or 3. It is not possible to move an agenda forward within a political party that is very public that it rejects those positions. He has repeatedly demonstrated his faith in the Ds by caucusing with them for years just as he will continue to do.
I don’t believe he ever thought he would get the D nomination. I believe he wanted to get people to register. He did. I think he wanted to discuss his issues. He did.
Futilitarian… that’s all we were saying. Unfortunately we have been correct all along.
In 4 years why can’t a Sanders-like person run in the Republican primary? Especially if Hillary should win this year.
Utterly disagree. Sanders has gotten issues onto the general public’s lips that no one on the left has been able to even get whispered outside of small corners of society, and which would have been completely swept under the MSM rug in an otherwise uneventful campaign season. He has gotten people out of their houses to support congressional candidates who drive the DNC to a tizzy. He has exposed versailles-on-the-potomac for what it is.
That is what winning looks like: it’s not about getting to sit in the oval office, but rather about having a prominent bullhorn to promote the policies most people actually want.
For those only interested in electing the “right person” and playing Nintendo for the other 4 years, yes Sanders is an abysmal failure. For those interested in organising and building a solid grassroots movements, he is (thus far) a shinning success.
It’s kind of at a turning point now, though. The Sanders agenda may continue be advanced in some way other than a presidential campaign led by a grandfatherly/curmudgeonly figure. There’s a present danger now, though, of it sputtering out again as OWS did several years back. The problem is other avenues need to be tried now, but what are they and how to organize for them? This is where things can simply fall apart.
Since his long range goal is to begin the process of conquest, occupation and disinfection/decontamination of the Democratic Party over the next several decades; support from Kagan and such for the current Democrapparatchiks wouldn’t put him off. It would merely re-confirm to him the accuracy of his diagnosis and the suitability of his prospective treatment plan.
WaPo was already bad enough before the Bezos purchase, what with its neocon editorial policy and warmongering. Do the WaPo and NY Times staffs have any sense how isolated their lives are from those of most people?
The Brexit vote should be a huge wake-up call to all the elites… I suspect they are getting the message but they won’t change their behaviour.
The elites will not change their behavior until they see the guillotines being built in their front yards.
Crowd-funded public art project!
no wonder public squares are getting scarce…
The elites got the result they wanted. The proof is that it would have been so easy to rig the vote, a la the Scottish referendum which was quite blatantly “fixed”. All you need to know is that Soros went long gold, and short the pound one month ago. What did he know? Do the elites need a cover for the pending global economic implosion? Brexit certainly has created financial chaos.
If the media could just get a hold of Sanders’ donors list, they could exclude those voters from the samples used in polling. This would allow the exit polls to more nearly match the actual vote counts after they get done fixing the election.
I think the real value of Sander’s list is in purging them from the democrat party database. But they’re wasting their time since most will walk away on their own. I mean, they really can’t think they are going to get money from those people, can they?
Maybe people need to vote 3rd party for an election or two, just to get the courage to understand they don’t have to vote for whatever unacceptable garbage is thrown in front of us.
bezos is a committed globalist after all…
I too am sceptical. The projections of the Brexit and Uxi vote both erred on the side of complacency; funny, that.
” … but star Lin-Manuel Miranda will have QUIT just three days before”
Proof that Clinton supporters are low information voters.
But-but-but they are going to be seeing the show with The Inevitable Woman! What could possibly matter more than that?
Obtaining a Royal Monopoly from the Inevitable Woman.
Betcha Lin-Manuel comes back for a special performance.
Because the dastardly Snidely Whiplash simply MUST be defeated by Dudley Do-Right(ette,) who is “the archetype of goodness.”
And if Lin-Manuel won’t do it, I’m certain george clooney will.
As collective members of the NC commentariot, I think we should write a new musical called, Hillary!
It can be satire of career. Song and dance of all of her wonderful and stellar accomplishments, over exaggerated and turned up to 11. Very seriously presented but tongue in cheek.
“We came, we saw, we conquereeeeed. We came, we saw, he dieeeeeed.”
The Monica Lewinsky (and whomever else) portion can be a feminist power ballad melding the dissonance between “sticking it to the man” but “loving him anyways” or something like that.
The trick to getting ahead as a feminist is who you choose as a spouse, you too can break the glass ceiling, and marry into the White House ….
“Gonna wash that man right outta my hair” …
who wants to write the lyrics to “Its My Turn”?
Original version of bluemoon wouldnt be inconsonant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3t0cBC6g5U&app=desktop
A 13 minute song about her career flip flops (ode to the Youtube video and its mainstream popularity).
The finale: “I’m With Her” (Entire Cast)
Sung to the same melody as “It’s My Turn” was earlier in the musical.
+3 acts of rock opera in the style of Fleetwood Mac and Katy Perry. I’ve been looking for an excuse to write some accompaniments.
Gotta work “We’ll Meet Again” into this somehow.
… the lolita express /
“an idea that will never, ever come to pass”
“he voted for the auto bailout…
and they called ME a sellout ”
“i will try,
i will try,
i will always try
to tell the truth”
[chorus/backup] “no not lie, no never lie”
From the archives (with apologies to Carly Simon):
not bad!
A good start. The problem is that Hillary’s failings, dishonest dealings and lies are so numerous that we’d need as many stanzas as “99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall.”
Love it. Chorus of “Vile Thing” [adapted from “Wild Thing”]:
And that the Clinton Campaign is desperate to get out the Sanders vote for sTrump.
I don’t want to vote for the lousy huckster, but this ceaseless poking in the eye with a $27,000 stick is trying my patience.
If they manage to get me angry enough I might just go vote for the golden goat.
Its just so appropriate. A musical that uses contemporary cultural signifiers of “progressivism” to portray one of the leading reactionaries and anti-democrats of American history as a swell and sympathetic character.
Oh Great!…. An Elite Bubble Opera…….
an Elite Bubba Opera.
Pretty quick-draw with those labels, pardner.
I reckon those Redcoats and Royalists weren’t reactionaries or – what did ya call him? – oh, yeah, anti-democrats, neither. You have better names for them, right?
I have been repulsed by this trick from the show’s inception, and am deeply grateful to find others willing to say it.
Miranda went on John Oliver’s show and rapped about how we should save Puerto Rico. I laughed out loud. His father is a political consultant who helped Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer in their Senate wins. Say, Lin-Manuel, why don’t you have your Dad arrange a meeting with Hillary? Wouldn’t that be a more effective way to lobby for Puerto Rico? Or is this just protection of the family brand? Publicly pretend to care about the people you left behind, while enriching yourself with neoliberal propaganda?
I’m even more cynical than that. Not only does this attach Clinton’s name to the media sensation that is Hamilton, in neoliberal fashion it legitimizes ticket prices that the brokers and scalpers have been getting for lower face valued tickets by making it face value. And all for an audience that has largely probably seen it before.
It is that Clinton, her team, and her major donors think most voters are low information voters and they are largely right.
Election results are in from Spain and the winner is… Me Importa un Bledo:
Yet everyone came out a winner: Conservative PP increased its number of seats (but not enough to form a government), Liberal PSOE managed to stave off relegation to third place (but had its worst election showing since Franco), Podemos came out with practically the same position as in 2015 (despite receiving fewer votes). And the Spanish press gets to dance on the grave of unburied Podemos.
What’s not to love?
Neolib socialists will have to line themselves behind the neolib conservatives (a la Germany, unlikely due to widespread disgust with conservative head, whom is already giggling, flirting and posing provocatively to attract the young and handsome neolib socialist leader), or insurgent Podemos will have to line themselves behind neolib socialists, this time is for real!
They didn’t ally after last election, and this election had practically the same results, so I don’t see how that happens. If PSOE allies with PP it will bleed even more of its rapidly haemorraging electorate, most of whom would flee to Podemos– a fact Sánchez knows all too well. And C’s is in nearly the same situation, since they spent the whole campaign saying Podemos=Venezuela. Not sure how they ‘splain to their voters they are allying with their Hugo Chávez antichrist.
The only difference now is that (thanks to lower turnout) PP is now closer to the finish line, and might be able to duct tape a coalition together of PP+C’s+ some of the micro-separatist parties. I don’t know the mechanics of those smaller Autonomous Community parties and if they would be ammenable to wedding themselves to the toxic PP… maybe someone else here could chime in?
From the “Jeez, who’da thunk” department… the NYT is reporting on the Bank of International Settlements (“the central bankers’ central bank”) meeting going on.
NY Times: Central Banks Worry About Engaging World Markets After ‘Brexit’
[My emphases]
There is a huge housing bubble in London, with all the rich foreigners using it to store (and launder) their wealth. When it collapses, it will get ugly. There is already a glut of luxury housing on the market, and foreign investors will find with the GBP collapse they are already underwater.
To give you a sense of how crazy things are, I was in Singapore recently and the newspapers there and in KL are full of London property adverts. It seems wealthy Singaporean and Malaysian buyers would buy 5 or 6 of the properties sight unseen (often they are still under construction).
Crazy times ahead. Hold on to your hats.
Dope antidote. That’s one chill cat.
The rider needs gloves, however.
once you get used to the noise, it’s a place in the sun with the wind in your face and a ‘thousand fingers’ massage, and I can harmonize my purring
What happens to that cat when he makes a hard left?
No worries. There is no hard left in America.
ha! the cats in a harness. The harness is likely attached to the netting.
My dog likes to ride (prefers a front pack but is relegated to ride in comfort in a carrier on the back of the bike) but one of my cats would never do this, the other would do it once just out of curiosity.
The cat appears to be strapped in and belted down.
Brexit. ISTM that Britain will want to start negotiations on post-Brexit conditions and treaties before pulling the lever on Article 50. I could imagine that AFTER a “framework” has been negotiated, that they might be another referendum, since this time instead of “status quo” vs (fantasy or fear) it would be “status quo” vs “some actual idea of the future” How would possibility of a head-fake like this affect the negotiations? Especially if the British negotiators were not fully in favor of Brexit in the first place? I could easily imagine the results of the negotiations being REALLY awful and onerous, just so the UK government could go back to the voters and say “SEE, is this what you really want?” in an attempt to derail the whole thing. And of course if that takes a few years, the demographics would shift, with more of today’s “leave” voters dying off and new, younger potential “remain” voters becoming old enough to vote.
Steve Keen on post Brexit treaties — not as bad as mainstream economists believe:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevekeen/2016/06/27/what-next-after-brexit/#6f0c9f7546f8
Excellent link…thanks! Quite the opposite of say Simon Wren-Lewis who’s “hair-on-fire” Brexit posts are approaching Krugmanesque levels.
(sorry, double post and not sure what happened)
Three groups
1. today’s leave voters dying off.
2. new, younger potential ‘remain’ voters becoming eligible to vote
and the third
3. today’s young, already eligible voters grow older and more conservative (or lose jobs to younger voters – going from having money to not having money) and vote ‘leave.’
It’s just a possible scenario. I don’t know if the 3rd group will switch.
Good point. Although my gut feeling is that at least some of the young/old divide is that the younger cohort has no real memory of life in the pre-Common Market UK and therefore regard that as new and nervous making rather than see it in through sepia coloured nostalgia glasses. And if THAT is a significant cause of the old/young divide rather than the general fact that people tend to get more conservative as they get older, then their views won’t change that much as they age….
They’ve actually got to get out of bed and go to the polling place. Vox pops with outraged young Brits whining about Brexit would have more impact if more young people had actually voted – many didn’t.
http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2016/06/24/brexit-demographic-divide-eu-referendum-results/
(see the Turnout graph by age)
‘Our Government could, if the worst came to the worst, print money in order to redeem its bonds.’ — Daily Mail
This is a truism along the lines of “if life becomes unbearable, you can always leap off a bridge.”
Printing money on a scale big enough to make a difference means currency collapse. Venezuela is a sovereign government that can (and is) printing all the bolivars it pleases.
Pound sterling already has depreciated substantially, even without threats to print with abandon. Turning it into a “British drachma” would further depress Britain’s trade with the eurozone.
You do know that bonds track inflation, right?
That means that they’re economically neutral. You have the same purchasing power coming out as you did going in.
Even better, the only ‘new’ money being printed is the interest on those bonds. The rest is just returning money already spent into the economy by the government in the first place.
So, not only are bonds economically neutral, they don’t create nearly as much new currency as you think they do.
Monetarist…. dog meet… tail….
Disheveled Marsupial…. conversely… meth head meets…. mirror….
Bonds (other than linkers) do not track inflation. They are denominated in nominal terms.
That’s why Treasuries produced dismal returns during the great bear market of 1946-1981.
I’ve collected these returns from three independent sources (CRSP, Ibbotson’s Historical U.S. Treasury Yield Curves, and my own calculations of total returns derived from yields published in the Federal Reserve’s FRASER database).
One gathers that you have not.
When real yields are stable inflation-linked bonds track inflation almost perfectly, then there – is – a structural bias toward inflation in the long run, long boom theory…
Sustained decline in real prices that is primarily monetary where it takes less and less human effort to acquire a good or service can take place against a backdrop of rising nominal prices…. see the commodities contango…
Disheveled Marsupial…. this is not Kansas anymore Jim… not a year ago Brynjolfsson got his ass handed to him… beware the rear-view mirror… your fixation on ideological nomenclature is a weakness and not a strength imo…
PS. you might like “The Gridlock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives” – Michael Heller
Venezuela is not a good example: it tries to keep its currency fixed at absurdly high levels.
In general, “monetizing” pre-existing government debt should not lead to inflation. The private sector is merely exchanging an interest yielding asset for a non (or lower) interest yielding one (cash or bank deposits). Why should it spend more on goods and services as a consequence?
We saw that in the USA, Japan, the UK and more recently even in the eurozone: central banks monetized trillions or hundreds of billions of debt and inflation barely budged.
Increasing future government net soending (or any spending) could theoretically generate inflation once the economy gets near full capacity – unfortunately we’re very far from that point in the “developed” world.
So Bernie (I mean Corbyn) is being punished for not trying hard enough to defeat Trump (I mean Brexit).
Yes, and of course, with a shocked electorate, the elites rally around leaving the critical decisions for the next 90 days in the hands of a mean-spirited moral cretin, social-economic idiot and eager proponent of the deeply bigoted, disastrous, neocon-forged foreign policy of the 5 Anglo Eyes + Israel, i.e., under the guise of the ‘war on terror’, the serial invasion, occupation, dismemberment, or destruction of the dozen or so States whose shattered citizens are now flooding Europe – nothing, mind you, like the numbers coming absent an enormous global commitment to re-build the entire region.
Ten-year U.S. T-notes, comrades: their yield has fallen down and can’t get up.
At 1.49%, they’re just a skinny 9 basis points about the all-time record low in U.S. history, set on 25 July 2012.
If they fall through the old low, Bill Gross says 1.25% yield would be the next stop on the milk train to deflationary hell.
All aboard, toot toot!
Deutsche Bank’s ADR shares are down 7 percent this morning. Santander is off another 4 percent.
Markets look for weak links. They’ve discerned that the eurozones’s zombie banking system, propped up by ECB life support, is threatened by Leave votes.
This is happening even though Britain doesn’t use the euro currency. Imagine the turmoil if a eurozone member wants to exit: what does the ECB do with all the sovereign and corporate bonds pertaining to that member? Roll ’em out the front door in a wheelbarrow and dump them in the street?
Heh, from what I understand all the stock traders are wetting their pants and heading to “safe” investments. I would think you can’t get much safer than buying from a government entity that has control over its own currency.
Apparently not though. It’s “safer” to buy mortgage backed securities from the entities that punked you all in 2008 because imaginary higher returns forevermore.
The market is filled with idiots. At this point none of us should care what it does.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/brexit-could-drive-mortgages-to-historic-lows/ar-AAhB0mZ?li=BBnbfcN
Structured derivatives (such as CDOs) created from misrated private-label MBS were what punked people in 2008. Agency MBS (GNMA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac) didn’t default.
Agency MBS is considered highly secure. GNMA carries an explicit federal guarantee, while Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac currently are under federal conservatorship. They aren’t going to default on their mortgage guarantees while in conservatorship, since it would be regarded as a U.S. government default.
Whoa, unless I’m completely misreading your statement:
That is very misleading.
Nowhere in the Wikipedia link is it stated that Fannie and Freddie defaulted on their MBS guarantees — because they didn’t.
In fact, federal conservatorship was undertaken to avoid such a default.
Fannie and Freddie stockholders were virtually wiped out. But we are talking about the MBS, which did not default.
Under QE1, the Federal Reserve purchased $600 billion of agency MBS. Not one of them defaulted, ever.
Exactly, there was no default because default was not permitted. Thus my allegation your initial statement is very misleading.
FNM bonds clearly stated they didn’t have the backing of the US govt. Thus, FNM bondholders should have not been rescued.
Again, we are not talking about the bondholders, either.
We are talking about agency MBS, which has never defaulted.
They never defaulted because the USG bailed the banks dumb backsides out even though the banking “experts” were completely befuddled by concepts like actually verifying whether or not people could afford to pay for the home they were hoping to buy.
Good luck getting a bailout when the next round of “we’re sorry we made bad loans” doesn’t work out.
I’m tired of the “risk takers” whining when risks don’t pan out the way they planned(and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone.)
Not true. Defaults on Fannie and Freddie mortgages were low, only 2%.
But they had modeled them at 1%. the GSEs had hardly any equity, and they invested the cash they got from the guarantees (remember they are insurers) in subprime.
It was their investing in subprime and not the mortgages they made that got them in hot water.
Note this statement from Bloomberg’s article on their poll:
‘Although Brooks indicated in the poll that he’ll support Johnson, that is not his intention. “I’d be okay voting for Johnson as a protest vote,” says Brooks. “But as a Green Party member, I’m going to vote for [Green Party candidate] Jill Stein.’
Bloomberg has in fact biased their poll by not including the Green Party. Their choices are Clinton, Trump, Johnson, Would Not Vote, Not Sure. Once again, as usual, the media are trying to orchestrate the outcome.
Well, msnbs IS including Stein in their poll. She gets about 5%. And with her included, Trump is only one percentage point behind clinton–39% to 38%. Even after his horrible, terrible, no good, very bad week.
But here’s the interesting question. If nationally publicized polls continue to include Johnson and possibly Stein, can they be kept out of the “debates” in the fall?
Maybe Donald Trump has forced another seemingly impossible change in the two-party status quo.
A crafty Trump could well support inclusion – Stein would be like a stand-in for Sanders and a smart performance from Trump would be to just let her talk whenever the issue resonates with his own criticisms while otherwise just politely disagreeing. Or does Stein subscribe to standard lesser evilism and thus would preface everything with “First, I unequivocally denounce Mr. Trump.”?
The Spanish elections seem to contradict what seems to be the general consensus, that Brexit will lead to further exits. The expected Podemos surge seems to have been stopped in its tracks as the PP party used the Brexit vote as a scare tactic against them, even though Podemos, like Syriza, have never endorsed leaving the EU.
Most economists I’ve read seem to think that Britain will have a severe slow-down in the short to medium time frame. This might pull the rug out from under all the nationalist parties that are now demanding referendums of their own, for at least a while.
This would have been true 10 years ago, but if the center can’t hold, we are discussing a system that isn’t working for the majority.
The simple truth is governments rule by the consent of governed, all governments. Governments need 40% relatively happy people (there are happy cranks) and another 20% to think they could be happy for 60% to last. Governments fail when these support levels drop. Democracy, Communism, Fascism, Republics, holistic chiropractic services, narcotics states, and so forth are attempts to keep this support high enough to last.
All over, government isn’t working right now, and if an alternative isn’t presented, no one will support the government. I blame New Rome, DC, for failing to run the empire for more than the Senatorial and super wealthy equestrian class. Too many people aren’t invested in the EU to care.
I’d take the opposite lesson. Podemos was born out of the indignados movement of people evicted from their homes in the financial crisis. They reached their peak support preaching anti-austerity and default on Spanish debt as a response to diktats from Brussles ordering further budget cuts. But last year, following the SYRIZA debacle in Greece, Podemos toned down their radical message considerably, and instead began to focus more on ‘corruption’ in the 2 traditional governing parties (PP/PSOE).
So in short, Podemos stopped echoing the message that Spaniards defrauded by austerity want expressed, and they lost support. And this can be seen in yesterday’s turnout numbers. 32% of voters (up 7% from last year) decided that none of the parties on the ballot were worth voting for. It’s only speculation, but a strong case could be made that if Podemos had taken a harsher anti-EU position, they would have had a much better result.
In the long term I realize that the current conditions in the EU can’t hold, but in the medium term Brexit might help the neoliberals hold control for a while more. The established parties in Spain did much better in the election than what you would expect from the polls while the insurgent parties did much worse. I’m guessing that was due to the unexpected Brexit vote.
Maybe the Spanish people were having second thoughts and channeling Mencken:
My expectation is as Brett Arends in Marketwatch put it:
With the end result of the deals being the banksters and industrialists keeping the status quo while the British workers taking it in the shorts to set an example.
“The established parties in Spain did much better in the election than what you would expect from the polls while the insurgent parties did much worse. I’m guessing that was due to the unexpected Brexit vote.”
Nah, it’s just that voters for insurgents had less incentive to vote this time. Many voters for insurgents need to smoke something strong to bother. They may still pull it off though: if unidos podemos concedes on the issue of Catalonya referendum, a left wing coalition of nelib socialistas plus unidos podemos plus the Basques will form an absolute majority.
That link shows percentages, not numbers of votes. PSOE lost over 100,000 votes in 1 year, and nearly got demoted to 3rd place for the first time since the return of democracy. It was their worst election ever: hardly an endorsement for “we’ll keep you safe in the EU”.
The problem with pre-election polls (as happened in the UK general election and in the US, eg Michigan) is that they ask people if they are likely to vote. There is a big leap between telling a pollster you are likely to vote and being enthused enough to schlep to the polling station. That leap is supposed to be provided by political parties, who are supposed to have a programme that makes people want to get out of bed. In Spain yesterday, the clear winner was “don’t care” which gained 1,300,000 voters over last election: far outweighing any gains the parties may have made on each other.
The Daily Mail — The Daily Mail! — telling Middle England that the government cannot, after all, “run out of money”. This really is the ideological equivalent of dogs lying down with cats. I’m pretty credulous, but I am pinching myself. Next thing will be Boris Johnson being talked about seriously as a possible future prime minister.
The Achilles Heel of money printing is shrinking or depleting sources of natural resources. As the economic pie contracts, the 1% covets more of it, leading to the political/economic upheaval we see almost everywhere. It’s easy to visualize Hillary winning in November, but difficult to see her finishing her term of office because she is fully indentured to the 1%.
The “economic pie” is a half-baked metaphor which leaves a bad taste.
Really. To save effort, the Times could just take Sy Hersh’s articles from last year and do a slow trickle plagiarization.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/06/27/elizabeth-warren-hillary-clinton-campaign-cincinnati/
Someone tell Liz Warren that she ain’t getting the Veep job. HRC loves wall street money a lot more than she loves Liz Warren and her Sandernista-vote attracting potential.
The interesting question is how does Warren handle the disappointment? Does she get ‘radicalized’ in some fashion? Or does she play ball with the Clintons no matter what happens? I suspect I know the answer, but I’d love to be wrong.
Sorry, you’re definitely right.
She will be a good sheepdog. After all Trump is scary.
My bro reports Warren spotted on tv holding hands with Hillary. The mind reels.
So how does La Liz finesse the Moyers video where she links clinton’s flip flop on the bankruptcy bill to her accepting money from wall street? Or clinton’s generously compensated, super-top-secret gs speeches?
Did she “misspeak?”
Must be mean ole’ Donald Trump’s “thin skin.”
This charade ends next month when the champion of girl power picks–da man.
If the idea was that Warren would deliver the Sandernistas, their strategy backfired. I don’t know any Sanders voters who have been/will be swayed to support Clinton because of Warren’s backing. I know many who have lost all respect for Warren. All Warren’s done is destroy her own credibility.
When she endorsed Clinton, she jumped the proverbial shark. Watch Lizzie get primary-ed in 2018.
I bet Clinton’s enjoying this, and doesn’t want it to end, ever.
Clinton is to Warren as Cersei is to Septon Unella
Here’s a simple yet insightful quote from the article, which will probably have zero effect on any U.S. big shots who happen to read it.
Why should the billionaire owners of the U.S. care? Barring a truly extraordinary series of events, Sanders will not become President. So the oligarchs are safe and can continue with business as usual.
I walked from Liverpool to London. Brexit was no surprise
Mike Carter
Thatcherism devastated communities throughout industrial England that have never recovered. Their pain explains why people voted to leave in the EU referendum
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/liverpool-london-brexit-leave-eu-referendum
From the Daily Mail article on Jack Daniels:
Yeah, I love those traditional-style African whiskies … oh wait, there aren’t any!
Kinda like “ancient Norwegian techniques for making salsa, passed down through the generations” — an improbable legend.
In the purported “150 year old” photograph, the black guy’s face looks strangely modern, compared to the wizened old 19th century hillbillies surrounding him.
In fact, it looks like they photoshopped Eric Holder into that picture.
What? The Daily Mail would never make stuff up.
Yes and someone should remind the Daily Mail that slavery ended 150 years ago but apparently the inheritance of guilt will never end. On a bright note maybe Jack Daniels thinks they’ll generate some additional sales by such a puff piece. Certainly given the pending increase in price for Courvoisier due to Brexit they’ll need something cheap to drink. Suntory would be happy with that since they own them both.
If one is interested in this, see the NYT article that the Mail based its story on.
The Times article has many historical indicators that slaves indeed made significant contributions to making whiskey. Here are several.
“An exhibit on George Washington and slavery opening this fall at the first president’s Northern Virginia home, Mount Vernon, documents how he relied on six slaves (and two Scottish foremen) to run his rye whiskey distillery, one of the largest on the East Coast. . . . ‘In the ledgers, the slaves are actually listed as distillers.’ ”
“Databases of ads for slave sales, as well as runaway slaves, are full of references to slaves as skilled whiskey distillers. In 1794, a Richmond, Va., man placed a $20 bounty on a slave named Will, who ‘has a large scar on his right side just below his ribs’ and ‘understands making of whiskey.’ ”
“Evidence often has to be found outside the archives. Recent archaeological work in Kentucky has uncovered material pointing to slave distilling at a number of sites . . .”
My assorted thoughts for today…
Re: Corbyn – Yes, he can win and the Blairites want this insurrection crushed, pronto. Here’s why: The Tories look like they’re about to completely discredit themselves with their Brexit bluff move. I am starting to think they’re NEVER going to pull the trigger on Article 50. Some of those voters will defect to UKIP, others will stay home.
Re: Clinton’s sparkling new polls. Is it possible we’re seeing peak Clinton? She’s gotten a big chunk of the “moderate” Sanders voters that were going to be easy-pickings, these are the ones who are open to the “crazy Trump” arguments in the media narrative. The rest of Sanders voters are much more bitter (rightfully so) at being stomped on, and more issues-focused, and won’t be so easily swayed.
With fragile markets for the next few weeks/months and a declining economy, plus ongoing FBI reports and a possible Wikileaks release of email docs, perhaps she’s got some downside risk up ahead for the next month or two?
Expect Stein and Johnson to continue their upward creep in the polls.
Re: CIA weapons being sold by Jordanians. Perhaps they’re playing both sides in the Syrian civil war just like the Pakistani ISI have done for us in Afghanistan? I suspect the CIA more or less knew what was happening, but the scale of it got out of hand or the Jordanians went too far for comfort in some way or another. The article’s worth reading for some details on the history of the relationship there.
Yes, of course the cia knows and they share in the profit as usual.
Shorter SCOTUS: quid pro quo or it didn’t happen.
Supreme Court Vacates Ex-Virginia Governor’s Graft Conviction
All that CF `corruption’ is now as clean as driven snow.
And god knows we are not going to get politicians who manage to write relatively simple laws that say that taking money or gifts from people, corporations or nations personally, through a family member or a foundation above and beyond a hundred dollars annually adjusted for inflation is corruption PERIOD. If you have had a business relationship with a person, business or country prior to working in the government you cannot have anything to do with any regulation of that business, including writing laws concerning them. This includes any you have stock in, and any that your spouse, parent or children work for. All federal level judges are required by law to recuse themselves from such cases, or they will face immediate removal from office, up to and including the Supreme Court. And employees, office holders, and appointees are barred from working for or accepting large gifts from any business or individual that they had any official interactions with while in government for a period of two years following their employment or term.
It really is not so hard to understand that people are easily influenced by even small gifts. See doctors.
“In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.” – Tacitus, 1st Century A.D.
“Corruption, the most infallible symptom of constitutional liberty.” – Edward Gibbon, 1780s
“Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow .” – Abraham Lincoln
Found here, with more:
http://www.lawnow.org/what-is-wrong-with-corruption/
In many articles, you see comments about opposition to the Master Plan by the “less educated”.
Elitist code words for “hicks”.
For the record, many of us members of the less educated classes have degrees and/or highly specialized technical training. But our degrees are in areas other than finance or political science.
All we do is try to prevent the house of cards in manufacturing and transportation, created by parasitic banksters/hedge funders/private equity leeches from imploding.
27 June 2016
Mark Blyth On Neoliberalism, Brexit, and the Global Revolt Against the One Percent and their Unelected Elites
“…a full 95% of the cash that went to Greece ran a trip through Greece and went straight back to creditors which in plain English is banks. So, public taxpayers money was pushed through Greece to basically bail out banks…So austerity becomes a side effect of a general policy of bank bailouts that nobody wants to own. That’s really what happened, ok?
Why are we peddling nonsense? Nobody wants to own up to a gigantic bailout of the entire European banking system that took six years. Austerity was a cover.
If the EU at the end of the day and the Euro is not actually improving the lives of the majority of the people, what is it for? That’s the question that they’ve brought no answer to.
…the Hamptons is not a defensible position. The Hamptons is a very rich area on Long Island that lies on low lying beaches. Very hard to defend a low lying beach. Eventually people are going to come for you.
What’s clear is that every social democratic party in Europe needs to find a new reason to exist. Because as I said earlier over the past 20 years they have sold their core constituency down the line for a bunch of floaters in the middle who don’t protect them or really don’t particularly care for them. Because the only offers on the agenda are basically austerity and tax cuts for those who already have, versus austerity, apologies, and a minimum wage.”
Mark Blyth
This was the lesson that was given by Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. There will be no lasting recovery without it; it is a sine qua non.
One cannot turn their economy around when the political and business structures are systemically corrupt, and the elites are preoccupied with looting it,
and hiding their spoils offshore.
http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2016/06/mark-blyth-on-neoliberalism-brexit-and.html
We don’t want to be called hicks.
And we, or rather, no one wants to be call low-information either.
And how many times have you heard this?:
“Business sucks. Nobody is buying anything. No orders. Everyone is cutting back……
The problem is too much regulation.”
No dumbazz, the problem is that your customers don’t have any money.
+100
Re the war on Corbyn: Ian Welsh says that Brexit will only work if a Labour party led by Corbyn is managing it. Indeed he suggests that Corbyn was personally in favor of Brexit but had to represent the majority view of his members.
So one could theorize that the sudden coup attempt against Corbyn shows that those still largely Blairite members (as opposed to voters) are trying to make sure Brexit doesn’t work.
One can certainly see why British people are now apprehensive but perhaps it’s their politicians they should fear the most. Also, since they are forced to pay for the thing, they might demand that the BBC news division clean house.
corbyn (bernie) was personally in favor of _____ but had to represent the majority view of ______.
He was for it before he was against it.
And now he’s up against it, he’s really in for it.
Interesting developments on the geopolitical front. The psychopaths in the State Department are already reaching for their knives.
Maybe we’ll look back on the EU vote as the first step towards the end of NATO.
I feel like there’s an argument for Trump there. If you think he’d blow up NATO and wreck relations with Mexico, you might view that as a positive. After all, what have we gotten from the strong bonds with our western allies? TPP/TPIP/TISA, an aggressively expanding NATO, and NAFTA and the Merida Plan.
If you think Trump would trash those (not sure he would), then you might like to see that happen.
Where’s Lambert’s “Rome wasn’t burnt in a day” quote when you need it?
After reading the article on the justifiable grievances of the Mexican teachers, actually the justifiable grievances of the Mexican people against their own government, it seems to me that Americans who are concerned about illegal and voluminous legal immigration to the U.S., about NAFTA, CAFTA, TPP etc, should learn about and support these folks.
Perhaps the American working class should form allegiances with the Mexican working classes to help Mexicans stay in Mexico?
Edward Abbey, the great environmentalist said
“Send every Mexican back across the border with a rifle and a box of ammo. They’ll know what to do.”
He said that?
“Our special rifle-equipped, working-class friends in Mexico. They will get $5 billion in foreign aid every year.”
Environmental hero and West Virginia boy Edward Abbey didn’t like Mexicans at all but made jokes a lot. He also wrote a whole book lampooning Mormons.
Heroes die saving others.
Who did Abbey save while getting killed?
I suspect that whoever he was, he was no hero.
In fact, your use of the phrase “environmental hero” is insulting to both environmentalists and to heroes.
You mean “environmental champion”, not “hero”. For they champion the environment, otherwise unrepresented – they are definitely NOT champions to or for the people who listen to what they say, much less are they “heroes” to such people.
Contrary to what your words imply your belief to be, environmentalism is not a “cult” or “sect” with “heroes”.
Uh, whatever.
But an interesting comment on my beliefs even though you have absolutely no idea what they are.
One of the selling points they made to Americans when passing NAFTA is that it would provide “good” jobs for Mexicans and they would have less incentive to come to the US, legally or otherwise.
Fast forward to today – US corporations (and Euro and Jap corps using Mexico-NAFTA as a conduit to US markets) are threatening the Mexican government with Chinese competition and saying the minimum wage in Mexico is too high. I’ve heard enforcement is lax as a result.
So another global race to the bottom. Methinks Bangladesh or the Congo will ultimately “win”.
America has to pull in its horns, not the least reason being our huge national debt, constantly growing. Trump is merely facing reality when he acknowledges that things are going to change. This will happen no matter who gets elected. Pax Americana won’t last much longer, IMHO.
SCOTUS wallets united ruling…you-nanny-moose…direct democracy in action…virginia governor was only doing his average everyday yoemans job of hosting an event and calling his flunkies to make sure they take a meeting…routine courtesies…
Wallets United…you-nanny-moose…
The edifice of Capitalism is turning into a Tower of Babel. That it should start with England, home of the first central bank, is poetic justice. The rot at the core is spreading.
Nonsense. Pure nonsense.
Re Corbyn – I take the point about Iraq and the Chilcot inquiry.
But – there are serious accusations about his office’s behaviour during the Brexit referendum:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/labour-hq-told-activists-to-avoid-immigration-issue-in-eu-campaign
The basic charge is that Corbyn’s office deliberately blunted Labour’s remain campaign.
Then his response to the result on Friday was to urge the government to invoke Article 50 immediately.
http://labourlist.org/2016/06/corbyn-article-50-has-to-be-invoked-now/
There is no mention of immigration here either, only austerity, but the day after that he announced he would change Labour’s approach to the subject because it had been a major factor in the referendum:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jeremy-corbyn-labour-immigration-policy-change-brexit-latest-leadership-party-leader-a7102736.html
If this is true it seems pretty underhand and unlikely to endear him to pro-Remain Labour supporters. If it’s not true he looks like a poor campaigner. Plus not all those who resigned are Blairites.
This seems to have been prepared far in advance, probably since Corbyn was elected last year. If Remain had won, they would have launched the Coup because “Corbyn can’t beat Cameron” & etc.
What is incredibly obvious is that this is ideological: Labour will either radicalize and turn left, towards socialism and the working class, or it will crush its left and remain a neoliberal party interested only in winning elections (and doing rather poorly at it). This has to be emphasized in the context of what it means for the rest of social-dem parties around the world, because the old “big tent” model is clearly untenable.
In that respect I think this fight is important, because if Corbyn and his group lose they may be able to leave and take a huge chunk of Labour’s membership with them to form a new party. If they win, there’s a good chance they will lose a lot of current Labour MPs (who will resign out of the party while remaining in Parliament) with a chance to replace them in the upcoming elections.
Maybe Warren worries for Hillary’s health….
Speaking of Hillary’s health, does it seem like it’s on the decline? She doesn’t look well at all.
She apparently walked two full blocks in the NY Gay Pride parade. That’s more than I thought she was capable of. Maybe one of her interns shared their Ritalin?
She might empathize with Prince Charles.
When the time finally comes, due to one’s age or one’s health, the next generation of the dynasty takes over.
Re: Jack Daniel’s
Suggest readers check the well written and documented Wikipedia articles on Daniel and his product. The Daily Mail’s dates are significantly imprecise. The distillery photos are certainly from the turn of the 19th/20th century. Daniel died in 1911 @ age 62, and the man in the photos looks at least 50. The clothing, especially the collars and ties, also coincide with the turn of the century.
“… ideological equivalent of dogs lying down with cats.”
Perhaps so, but I suspect neither animal will get much sleep.
They get on very well when they grow up together. We had a cat that always slept happily with the neighbor dog. Many cute photos of them entwined.
This is a big part of the problem along with what I have been told from several people-delusions of grandeuer (i.e. th empire mentality that still exists in certain quarters)
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/blog/britains-eu-problem-london-problem
Britain’s EU Problem is a London Problem
Italy is looking like the eurozone’s weak link, says Ambrose E-P:
“First Brexit domino” — not a happy place to be.
One could easily imagine Belgium — another heavily-indebted, no-growth member in good standing of Eurosclerotia — breing the second.
Europe is broken. And the Brits have unkindly pointed out that the emperor lacks clothes.
TARP won’t happen here now either.