2:00PM Water Cooler 9/15/2016

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.


“September 15, 2016 Publication” [Wikileaks]. Hub page for a TISA document dump.

“Analysis TiSA Core Text” [Professor Jane Kelsey, Wikileaks] . Kelsey has been a leader of the fight against TPP in New Zealand.

Governments cannot restrict cross-border movements of capital that are essential to a service, or inflows of capital that relate to foreign investment, where they have made commitments in those services. There are very limited options for governments to impose capital controls, even in situations of an actual or threatened balance of payments emergency. If they manage to meet those circumstances, the kinds of controls they can adopt are severely limited and would face a high risk of being challenged.

“TiSA Annex on Movement of Natural Persons” [Wikileaks]. Pertains mostly to immigration, but this caught my eye:


That reads to me like an international blacklist of labor organizers is fine, but I’m not an expert in tradespeak. Readers?

“Canada’s Parliament reconvenes next week and the trade committee’s formal study will continue its fact-finding mission [on TPP] that includes travel around the country to meet with people and groups on the issue” [Politico].

“U.S. Agricultural Exports Lag under Past Trade Deals, Belying Empty Promises Now Being Recycled for the TPP” (PDF) [Public Citizen].

“The outlook for finishing negotiations this year on a free-trade agreement between the United States and European Union appears increasingly bleak ahead of a key meeting in Brussels today” [Politico]. “”Personally, I have no hope,’ said Robert Vastine, a senior industry fellow at the Center for Business and Public Policy at Georgetown University. ‘The distances are too wide. The political will is flagging on both sides.'”

“A gathering in Germany of SPD members next week at a special congress could force the left-of-centre party’s leadership to reverse its support for CETA, and trigger widespread revolt across the continent against the deal and its cousin TTIP” [Guardian].

“The Congressional Budget Office is working on an analysis of the TPP that will include a dynamic scoring evaluation, CBO Director Keith Hall said Wednesday. Under dynamic scoring, the economic effects of a proposal are included as the non-partisan agency tallies up the costs or savings to the federal government” [Politico].

“More Details On How Corporate Sovereignty Provisions, Like Those In TPP & TTIP, Are Dangerous” [TechDirt]. Excellent summary of Buzzfeeds TPP series, well worth a read. This jumped out: “Part III of Hamby’s report goes on to detail how some giant Wall St banks basically bled Sri Lanka dry, selling it complicated derivatives, and then going ballistic — via ISDS corporate sovereignty provisions — when the government stepped in to investigate the deals and whether they were legit or just a scam.”




I imagine the Democrats have run testing on their mailing, so this must work, but it’s not a good look.


“State Department Delays Records Request About Clinton-Linked Firm Until After The 2016 Election” [International Business Times]. “Beacon Global Strategies is a shadowy consulting firm that’s stacked with former Obama administration officials, high profile Republicans and a number of Hillary Clinton’s closest foreign policy advisers. But beyond its billing as a firm that works with the defense industry, it is unclear for whom specifically the company works, exactly what it does, and if Beacon employees have tried to influence national security policy since the firm’s founding in 2013.

UPDATE “New York-based Teneo, with 575 employees, markets itself as a one-stop shop for CEOs to get advice on a wide range of issues, including mergers and acquisitions, handling crises and managing public relations. For its services, it generally charges clients monthly retainer fees of $100,000 to $300,000.” [Wall Street Journal, “Teneo, Consulting Firm with Clinton Ties, Eyes $1 Billion IPO”]. Founder Douglas Band was Bill Clinton’s body man. One can only wonder what a body man does to become worth $1 billion to, well, the people who made him worth a billion.

“[I]n many of these [Clinton Foundation] episodes you can see expectations operating like an electrical circuit. The donors expect that their support of the Clinton Foundation will help them get access to the State Department, [Doug] Band see above] expects that he can count on [Huma] Abedin to help, and Abedin seems to understand that she needs to be responsive to Band. This would be a lot of effort for powerful people to expend, if it led to nothing at all. There are two obvious possibilities. One is that the State Department actually was granting important favors to Clinton Foundation donors that the many sustained investigations have somehow failed to detect. The other, which is more likely, is that someone, somewhere along the line, was getting played” [The New Yorker]. Surely those two possiblities are not mutually exclusive? And public office is being used for private gain in either case?

UPDATE “Even as the Clintons are touting plans to distance themselves from their foundation and limit its fundraising if Hillary Clinton is elected president, they’re planning one last glitzy fundraising bash on Friday to belatedly celebrate Bill Clinton’s 70th birthday” [Politico]. “Plans called for performances by Wynton Marsalis, Jon Bon Jovi and Barbra Streisand, according to people briefed on the planning. They said that major donors are being asked to give $250,000 to be listed as a chair for the party, $100,000 to be listed a co-chair and $50,000 to be listed as a vice-chair.” Sounds lovely! How I wish I could go…


UPDATE I hate it when Trump’s right:

And I don’t see many other figures on the national stage calling out those responsible for the WMDs debacle, most especially not Clinton, or the foreign policy “blob” that likes her so much. (Of course, this is Trump instantly punching back at Powell for various anti-Trump commments in his leaked email, but so what?

“Inside Hillary Clinton’s Stump Speech, Annotated” [NPR]. Not the level of granularity that NC readers are used to in annotation [lambert blushes modestly] but interesting nonetheless. “In a way you could see her stump speech as a series of lists tied together by anecdotes.” And I’ve gotta say: Everytime I hear “love trumps hate” I throw up a little in my mouth. A politician–any politician–running on love? Really? One might also add that Clinton’s concept of “irredeemables” is utterly incompatible with, well, the teachings of Christ, who said “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Luke 10:27). From Democrats, of course, we get the lawyerly parsing: “Who then is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29).

“Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren on Thursday requested a formal investigation into why the Obama administration did not bring criminal charges individuals and corporation involved in the 2007-2008 financial crisis” [International Business Times]. Why now? Liz edging her hat toward the ring if Clinton comes up lame?

The Voters

“You can adjust the demographic vote shares on the FiveThirtyEight interactive map to see various speculative scenarios. In order to create a Trump victory, the smallest voter shift required is moving Republican support among “non-college educated white people” from 62% to 69%” [Business Insider].

“[T]his race feels like one of those movies where escaping prisoners desperately try to stay in the shadows as a huge spotlight arcs across the yard” [Cook Political Report]. “As we’ve seen throughout this year, the spotlight has not been [Trump or Clinton’s] friend. When it hits them it exposes their flaws instead of highlighting their strengths. Their poll numbers and their favorability numbers sink. The question going forward is where the spotlight will be shining in October and early November. The more it lingers on Trump, the better for Clinton. The more it shines on Clinton, the better opportunity for Trump to close the gap.”

“Something very interesting has happened over the past two weeks in the presidential campaign: Donald Trump has seized the momentum from Hillary Clinton and is climbing back into contention in both national and key swing state polling” [Chris Cilizza, WaPo]. “New polls released over the past 24 hours confirm this momentum.” Cilizza, at least on my Twitter feed, was the first to call the turn. Of course, the press loves a horse race, and Trump was never as bad a candidate as he seemed, post-Convention. Republican voters are coming home. It remains to be seen if Democrats will. But: “The electoral map still heavily favors Clinton unless Trump can find a way to make Pennsylvania competitive, a task that has so far proved elusive. Trump still must win states like Ohio, Florida and North Carolina, which, even with his recent surge factored in, remain no better than toss-ups today.” IMNSHO, Trump “appealing to black voters” wasn’t that, at all; the Democrat ridicule was both easy and misplaced. It was about giving suburban voters — most especially suburban Philadelphia voters — permission to vote for Trump by showing he wasn’t a bigot.

“How did the proud trade consensus crumble so quickly?” [Thomas Frank, Politico]. “But part of the answer lies in something Americans have a hard time talking about: class. Trade is a class issue. The trade agreements we have entered into over the past few decades have consistently harmed some Americans (manufacturing workers) while just as consistently benefiting others (owners and professionals). … To understand “free trade” in such a way has made it difficult for people in the bubble of the consensus to acknowledge the actual consequences of the agreements we have negotiated over the years.” Incidentally, I have yet to see the “Always racism, never economics” crowd give an account of trade.

“For decades conservatives have castigated liberals for abandoning the language of personal responsibility and turning their constituents into helpless victims. Now, led by Donald Trump, populist conservatives are doing just that” [Wall Steet Journal, “Hard Truths for Trump’s America”]. And now conservatives have a book, Hillbilly Elegy, to help them fight back! “Real economic recovery in Appalachia—the heart of Red America—requires facing some hard truths.” The time for the “hard truths” was when the Rust Belt was sold off for parts twenty, thirty, and forty years ago, very much as part of industrial policy, led by both parties with a big assist from private equity. WSJ very much in “Beat my teeth out, then kick me in the stomach for mumbling” mode here.

About Democrats coming home:

“[E]ven though roughly three-fourths of all battleground-state Millennials expressed these disparaging views of Trump, the survey found Clinton drawing just 43 percent against him in a four-way race that included libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein. While Trump attracted only 24 percent, nearly as many picked Johnson or Stein, and the rest said they were either undecided or wouldn’t vote. By comparison, Obama carried two-thirds of Millennials in 2008 and three-fifths in 2012” [Ron Brownstein, The Atlantic].

“Clinton’s far-reaching campaign organization, which boasts 33 offices in North Carolina, is another source of optimism for Democrats” [RealClearPolitics]. “Still, the RealClearPolitics polling average shows a tight race there, with Clinton maintaining an advantage of 0.8 percentage points over Trump,” when Trump hasn’t spent any money on advertising and has no organization. It takes immense effort to keep Clinton in contention; but the Democrats have the money to make such an effort, and control the commanding heights in the political class. “‘In a tight election with many competitive statewide races, a lot of the outcome is going to come down to suburban voters in Charlotte and Raleigh,’ [Rebecca Tippett, director of Carolina Demography at UNC-Chapel Hill’s Carolina Population Center] said. “That’s probably a college-educated professional.” And the same logic that applies to suburban voters in Philly applies here.


“Republicans currently hold a four-seat advantage, but Democrats are expected to pick up GOP-held seats in Illinois and Wisconsin, meaning they would need to flip just two other seats to gain the majority if Clinton wins the election – though they would need to win a fifth race if Clinton loses the presidency or Republicans flip the Democratic-controlled seat in Nevada” [RealClearPolitics]. Since I want gridlock and a crippled President, if a Democratic Senate win looks likely, I’ll have to vote for Trump. And conversely! Ugh. And ugh.

Stats Watch

Jobless Claims, week of September 10, 2016: “Historic lows” [Econoday]. But: “The trend of the 4 week moving average is now marginally trending down. The trend of year-over-year improvement of initial unemployment claims is moderating – and this trend historically indicates a weakening GDP” [Econintersect].

Bloomberg Consumer Comfort Index, week of September 11, 2016: Declined [Econoday]. “Readings on consumer confidence, including this one, are remain at solid levels and point to optimism over the jobs outlook. ”

Philadelphia Fed Business Outlook Survey, September 2016: “The headline and the details of the Philly Fed report continue to take their own paths, once again showing strength at the headline level, at plus 12.8 in September, and weakness elsewhere” [Econoday]. “[N]ew orders and backlog orders contracted at their steepest rate of the year in August with employment sinking to its lowest reading of the whole cycle, since July 2009.” However: “There was significant strength in this survey – and stands in stark contrast to the New York Fed’s survey which remained in contraction. But the trend in both surveys was improvement. This survey was well above expectation” [Econoday]. “This is a very noisy index which readers should be reminded is sentiment based.”

Business Inventories, July 2016: Unchanged “in lagging data for July” [Econoday]. “An outright drop in inventory investment subtracted almost 1.3 percentage points from second quarter GDP growth — the largest drag in more than two years. Inventories have weighed on GDP growth since the second quarter of 2015. Expectations are for inventory accumulation to rebound in the third quarter adding to GDP growth.” But: ” So far the expected boost to GDP from inventory building isn’t happening. Probably because, as previously discussed, sales are falling just about as fast as inventories, as the inventory to sales ratio remains elevated” [Moster Economics].

Empire State Manufacturing Survey, September 2016: “The Empire State report, like the bulk of this morning’s Philly Fed report, points to continuing trouble for a factory sector that is being held down by weakness in exports and weakness in business investment” [Econoday].

Industrial Production, August 2016: “There was some life in the factory sector during July but it proved brief” [Econoday]. Manufacturing down, motor vehicles up, mining up. “Total capacity utilization edged 4 tenths lower to 75.5 percent.” AndL “A decline was expected this month in industrial production. The manufacturing surveys have been weak – and employment growth has evaporated. This sector remains slightly in a recession” [Econintersect].

Producer Price Index Final Demand August, 2016: “Producer prices show only limited life in what is still a price-neutral economy” [Econoday]. “This report isn’t on fire to say the very least but it could hint at a marginally upward surprise for tomorrow’s CPI report but still isn’t enough to raise the odds much for a rate hike at next week’s FOMC.” And: “There remains deflation in the supply chain, but this deflation is slowly moderating” [Econintersect].

Retail Sales, August 2016: “Retail sales, after inching up a revised 0.1 percent in July, fell 0.3 percent in August and do not just reflect expected weakness in auto sales” [Retail Sales]. “Details show special weakness for building materials and garden equipment, down 1.4 percent for what is also a second straight decline. This specific reading will lower estimates for the residential investment component of the third quarter GDP report. This report puts the backs of the policy hawks at the Fed to the wall…” However: “Using the unadjusted data and the three month rolling averages – this was not a bad report with growth up 2.5 % year-over-year” [Econintersect].

Current Account, Q2 2016: “[N]arrowed in the second quarter to minus $119.9 billion vs a revised minus $131.8 billion in the first quarter” [Econoday]. “Marginal weakness in goods exports was offset by strength in service exports. The gap relative to GDP came in at 2.6 percent, noticeably lower than the prior quarter’s 2.9 percent.”

Shipping: Hanjin Shipping Co. ‘s creditors are growing more concerned that their collateral will disappear over the horizon. A group of creditors is asking a U.S. bankruptcy judge to keep the foundering South Korean carrier’s ships that are nearby from leaving U.S. waters” [Wall Street Journal]. ” Dozens of ships remain stranded at sea with billions of dollars’ worth of goods on board, and its unclear whether those shipments would be released and pushed into distribution channels if the vessels are locked down by creditors.”

Shipping: “Diana Containerships has amended its $148m loan agreement with The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), which will block the boxship company from buying new ships and paying dividends to shareholders until late 2018” [Splash247]. $148 million isn’t a big number, but RBS is an old friend. Stupid money? Stupid, corrupt money?

Shipping: “UPS Inc. said today it plans to hire about 95,000 seasonal employees to work the upcoming peak holiday shipping season—a level that, if it holds, will have kept the company’s peak staffing needs constant for the third straight year” [DC Velocity].

Shipping: “Airport cargo figures for July “inspired some cause for optimism” even though demand over the first seven months still lags behind last year” [Air Cargo News].

Agriculture: “[T]he sale of [Monsanto,] an icon of American agriculture also spotlights a sagging farm economy that shows few signs of rebounding as U.S. farmers prepare to reap another record corn and soybean crop this autumn. Declining prices have roiled the agriculture market, from farm-equipment makers to grocery stores, even as the strong production provides a boon to transport companies feeding off the heavy volume” [Wall Street Journal].

The Bezzle: “It isn’t clear when [Uber’s] fully autonomous vehicles will roam city streets, though Ford has a five-year goal and is trying not to be left behind” [Wall Street Journal]. Now, it’s not clear, is it? It’s almost like the current rash of stories on self-driving cars is the result of a public relations push by Silicon Valley, isn’t it?

Honey for the Bears: “The slow motion train wreck that began in late 2014 with the collapse of oil capex continues unabated, with no sign of reversal that I can detect, and the annual rate of growth is consistent with prior recessions” (charts) [Mosler Economics]. Mosler’s view of the day’s releases.

Honey for the Bears; “[G]rowth in world trade has slowed sharply since the 1990s and early 00s. This has nothing to do with nativists like Trump, Le Pen and Brexiters. It’s because of factors largely endogenous to capitalism” [Stumbling and Mumbling]. “Whatever the reason, the fact is that, as Michael Roberts says, globalization has “ground to a halt.” Granted, this might change: we’ve seen globalization falter and recover in history. But it might not, at least soon.” Not sure why all the investment in bigger and bigger ships, then. Did I mention stupid money?

The Fed: “Federal Reserve officials have gone out of their way to push for interest rate hikes sooner rather than later. Unfortunately, they have continued to be data dependent, and the underlying economic data is hardly strong enough to merit much on the tightening front. Stay tuned” [247 Wall Street].

” The new heavyweight macro critics” [Noahpinion]. Many more besides (the very scathing and entertaining) Paul Romer, who we looked at yesterday.

Today’s Fear & Greed Index: 39 Fear (previous close: 34, Neutral) [CNN]. One week ago: 69 (Greed). (0 is Extreme Fear; 100 is Extreme Greed).Last updated Sep 15 at 12:05pm. A bit less fear…

Class Warfare

“Variability of work hours being strongly associated with a host of physical and mental health issues as well as financial instability” [Washington Center for Equitable Growth]. “The researchers use data collected from a national sample of hourly retail workers at eight brick-and-morter companies, all of which are among the largest 15 retail employers in the United States.” Readers will remember our recent post on sleep here.

News of the Wired

“How the sugar industry has distorted health science for more than 50 years” [Vox].

“Big bad modifier order” [Language Log]. Claim (Forsyth’s template): “[A]djectives in English absolutely have to be in this order: opinion-size-age-shape-colour-origin-material-purpose Noun.” Maybe not: “Presumably Forsyth’s template would do quite a bit worse [than an alternative algorithm[, though of course people like that don’t actually check their predictions.” Ouch.

* * *

Readers, feel free to contact me with (a) links, and even better (b) sources I should curate regularly, and (c) to find out how to send me images of plants. Vegetables are fine! Fungi are deemed to be honorary plants! See the previous Water Cooler (with plant) here. And here’s today’s plant (AM):

AM writes: “My mother in law says that Sedum is also called “Autumn Joy” – it isn’t quite Autumn yet, but this color is a joy to behold!”


* * *

Readers, if you can, please use the dropdown to choose your contribution, and then click the hat! Your tip will be welcome today, and indeed any day. Water Cooler will not exist without your continued help.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Water Cooler on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.


      1. Jim Haygood

        brick-and-morter companies‘ [sic – Washington Center for Equitable Groaf]

        Moar brick, less morter! :-)

  1. L

    “Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren on Thursday requested a formal investigation into why the Obama administration did not bring criminal charges individuals and corporation involved in the 2007-2008 financial crisis” [International Business Times]. Why now? Liz edging her hat toward the ring if Clinton comes up lame?

    I can see two possible interpretations for this.

    First, as much as I hate to draw the analogy, she could be positioning herself to take the reigns after a loss in the way that Richard Nixon, Paul Ryan, and later Bill Clinton did. Richard Nixon sat back and concentrated on building up credibility as Barry Goldwater melted down and then quietly stepped in to take over the party after the loss to set up his eventual run. Paul Ryan quietly permitted or perhaps aided the coup against Boehner. And Bill Clinton, through the DLC teed up his control of the party after Dukakis lost.

    Second, with Wells-Fargo and bank fraud once again in the news she could be working to keep prior decisions current both to force better action this time or to nudge the Clinton and Trump into making promises of stronger action in the future.

    1. Lambert Strether Post author

      It seems to me that both those objectives would be served by continuing to hammer on Wells Fargo, so the question “Why now?” isn’t really answered in your comment.

      But if you wanted to take out an option on running a full-throated populist campaign — and throwing bankers in jail would be wildly popular across the entire political spectrum (except Clinton’s 10%-ers on up) — in the unhappy event that the party’s candidate came up lame, then calling for an account of regulatory decision making in 2009 would be one way to signal that. Note also that would call Obama’s “legacy” into question, too; the whole “stand between you and the pitchforks” thing. This is a big deal.

      1. L

        I guess I see this as part and parcel of hammering on Wells Fargo. The tendency in most “mainstream” media (yes a bad term but the best I can come up with right now) is to treat these cases in isolation as if there must be no cultural issue nor any line from the lack of prosecutions to the repetition of action. By hammering on the DOJ’s failure to prosecute for prior cases she can also highlight the systemic conditions that led to it.

        Viewed from the lens of electoral politics this serves to keep her longstanding source of credibility, prosecution of Wall Street, alive. Viewed from the lens of motivating action this serves to reinforce the need to take action to change the culture rather than just letting the candidates complain about this problem in specific and move on.

        That being said, this article in The Intercept pointed out one aspect of her letters that also answers the question.

        Until recently the FBI has refused to release any documents or internal records on non-prosecutions. Until, that is, Hillary Clinton’s email became a thing. Elizabeth Warren noted that in discussing their decisionmaking the FBI upended their own rationale for keeping such decisions a secret. Thus recent events, including Jason Chaffets’ request for FBI documents relating to Clinton’s servers has opened the door to more scrutiny.

        1. JohnnyGL

          Thanks for these links.

          There’s a distinct possibility that Liz Warren just stuck a knife in the back of the Democratic Party top brass just in time to bury them in November.

          The DOJ letter looks like it’s the result of several months of work and was going to come out sooner or later. The FBI letter looks like a bonus add on after they aired out Clinton’s dirty laundry.

          “Nice records you’ve got there. while you’re digging in the crates, bring out the old files on the financial crisis so we can take a look.”

          If there’s one thing the top Dems want to talk about LESS than Clinton’s emails, it’s the financial crisis. This could get interesting. Your move FBI and DOJ! Pass the popcorn!

          1. Lambert Strether Post author

            > stuck a knife in the back of the Democratic Party top brass

            Never a bad thing, but still one wonders about the timing, and it seems to me that Warren’s ambitions should be part of the story. Especially given the candidates, and even moreso if Warren is an anti-Trump true believer, she may have started seeing a President in the mirror, like so many Senators.

            1. Procopius

              I’m neither a seer nor a mind-reader, but I haven’t seen anything that makes me believe the Senator Professor wants to be President. Don’t forget that it’s an awful job and can require you to approve the killing of civilians/women/children. I personally hope she does not want it because I believe she can do much more good where she is now.

        2. Procopius

          I haven’t read every comment on the subject, but I’ve been a little puzzled by the fact that very few people have remarked on the fact that Comey’s revelations were completely unprecedented and none that I’ve seen have noticed that he’s a Republican.

    2. NotTimothyGeithner

      Mass was fairly close, and as Hillary bumbles about, I imagine a good portion of the electorate might want to know where Warren was In the Spring. With the state of the economy, I suspect Liz isn’t receiving the reception she did a year ago.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        There is the obvious Wells Fargo situation. Having the CFPB enforce minor fines over a criminal conspiracy makes Warren look bad. Pointing out the absence of Obama’s DoJ is just fair play.

    3. Robert Hahl

      Elizabeth Warren strikes me as a Daniel Moynihan type. That is, a professor/politician posing as a populist.

      1. John k

        She’s no populist. Usefully against banks, which could lead to greater things because the population hates the banks,mexcept the elites in both parties, Msm. And of course the banks will do everything in their power to stop her, just as they did to Bernie… Her best shot in 2020 is for Clinton to lose in 2016.

      2. sd

        Moynihan was a new-conservative. But not a Clinton fan. Just after he announced he was retiring, there were credible rumors in NY that he despised the Clintons and was pissed that Clinton had not had the decency (or professionalism, take your pick) to tell him she was running for his seat.

        Warren can be frustrating, but she’s not tacky and crass like the Clintons.

  2. Carolinian

    No point in quoting the New Testament at Hillary as she is strictly Old Testament. Those who don’t get with the program are smitten. Seeing herself as one of the elect–the goodthinkers–she probably doesn’t even think of her enthusiasm for war and money as sinning. When you are making an R2P omelet eggs get broken.

    1. JTMcPhee

      …and she likes to hang with the Israelites, who are straight Pentateuch (plus Joshua, http://biblehub.com/summary/joshua/1.htm, and Judges, http://biblehub.com/summary/judges/1.htm) from the git-go [$38 billion, added to the much larger number from past years of spying on us, shooting up and trying hard to sink US Navy ships, intermediating the sale of “ISIS oil,” using Palestinians as target dummies and slave labor, and being one of the most corrupt places on the planet}.

      She knows how to pick ’em… Not that she is any kind of outlier in that realm…

    2. Lambert Strether Post author

      I don’t expect to change Clinton’s behavior, but I do intent to contextualize them. There are deep problems with vulgar identity politics as practiced by Democrats, and this approach highlights them.

    3. Lambert Strether Post author

      I don’t expect to change Clinton’s behavior, but I do intent to contextualize it. There are deep problems with vulgar identity politics as practiced by Democrats, and this approach highlights them.

  3. allan

    This time is different:

    Ecological selectivity of the emerging mass extinction in the oceans [Science, subscr. req. for full access]

    To better predict the ecological and evolutionary effects of the emerging biodiversity crisis in the modern oceans, we compared the association between extinction threat and ecological traits in modern marine animals to associations observed during past extinction events using a database of 2497 marine vertebrate and mollusc genera. We find that extinction threat in the modern oceans is strongly associated with large body size, whereas past extinction events were either nonselective or preferentially removed smaller-bodied taxa. Pelagic animals were victimized more than benthic animals during previous mass extinctions but are not preferentially threatened in the modern ocean. The differential importance of large-bodied animals to ecosystem function portends greater future ecological disruption than that caused by similar levels of taxonomic loss in past mass extinction events.

    File under Class Genera Warfare.

    1. polecat

      Maybe octopus, with their physical flexibility, uncanny problem solving abilities, & alien-like intelligence …. will inherit the future Terra !

      I would hope, however, that they never evolve to develop destructive technologies …..

  4. Foppe

    That reads to me like an international blacklist of labor organizers is fine, but I’m not an expert in tradespeak. Readers?

    OTOH, it could also be used to keep out corporate/anti-union types. ;)

    1. hemeantwell

      perhaps. I was wondering about strikebreakers. At first thought, though, I can’t think of an example where foreign labor has been used to actually break a strike, as opposed to a more long-term undermining of local labor by bringing in relatively helpless, socially-disconnected and deportable foreigners. (almost typed “deplorable”)

      1. Paid Minion

        Several strikes by meatpackers back in the 70s-80s were broken when the meatpackers basically said: “Fine……stay on strike. We’ll just replace you with these (mostly illegal) guys.”

        (See ethnic distribution of Garden City and Dodge City, Kansas for the results)

        So you either found another job, or you worked for what they offered, which was about half of what you were making before.

        The overt threat of “Ask for too much, or go on strike, and we’ll move this factory……..” has been a big part of the management playbook since 1980.

        Of course, there are costs involved in moving factories. Usually paid by either the stockholders or taxpayers, or both.

        1. L

          One area where this would have a big play is in high-tech industries. H1B fraud is becoming a huge sticking point in places like the bay area where many companies (and even universities) are increasingly laying off domestic staff and “transitioning” to offshore labor that is either brought in under the cover of a contractor or is just on an H1B and thus gets paid less in the first place.

          If you think about it, when a company like Google wants their employees to work anywhere that sounds cool when the American employees get to spend a year in London. It sounds a lot less cool when the lower-paid Malaysian employees get to spend a career working in San Francisco.

          Looking down the road this will be a major political issue, particularly in high-tech services which TISA is all about, and this may be an attempt to unlevel the playing field at the start.

      2. hunkerdown

        A general strike resembles a mass insurrection in size and objective, and presumably the “neighborly” Bahraini option is on the table at all times under Westphalia. Yay for the G4S visa.

      3. PlutoniumKun

        I think the use of Chinese construction workers as strikebreakers was quite common on railways and in mines in the 19th Century.

  5. Jim Haygood

    From our “Thank you, 0bama” [remark to himself] department:

    Early in his remarks, the Republican nominee, who has mocked Obama and Clinton for reading speeches from teleprompter, noted that his teleprompter for his economic remarks wasn’t working.

    “Lucky I brought some notes,” Trump said.

    Minutes later, Trump praised himself for transitioning from notes back to the suddenly working teleprompter, playing off his line about how broken things can be fixed and failures turned into successes.

    “Just look at the way I just melded into the teleprompter that just went on,” he said. “Who else could have pulled that off, OK? Who else.”

    After the speech, he asked a worker: “What happened with the teleprompter, man?”


    We’ve transitioned from Ed Koch’s “How’m I doin’?” to Trump’s “I’m a freaking genius.

    Legends in our own minds! :-0

      1. optimader

        We’ve transitioned from Ed Koch’s “How’m I doin’?” to Trump’s “I’m a freaking genius.”

        The Guy is from NYC, what do you expect?

        And I tend to agree with his sentiment.. He apparently didn’t do an organic RAM meltdown and was able to move along extemporaneously

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          I linked to this from Scott Adams, but I’m not sure I quoted it:

          You know how Trump is always saying inappropriate and violent-sounding things? Most people see that type of language as offensive and even dangerous. The exception is people who grew up in New York. We see it as “talking.”

          After college, when I moved from upstate New York to California, I had to relearn how to talk. My New York style offended nearly everyone. Let me give you an example of how a Californian talks compared to a New Yorker.

          Californian: It looks like it might rain today.

          New Yorker: Oh, shit. Fucking rain. I need that like I need a goddamned bullet in my head.

          See the difference?

          When Trump talks about roughing-up protesters, or shooting someone on 5th Avenue, people from New York don’t raise an eyebrow. But Californians start wondering how to have that guy involuntarily committed to some sort of facility that can fix whatever is wrong with him.

          So there is Trump’s hyperbole and puffery, right there.

      2. Carolinian

        At an early campaign appearance in SC he invited a woman to come up on stage and pull his hair to see if it is real. He seems to be good at working a crowd and a bit of self-deprecation stands in appealing contrast to HRC’s schoolmarmish lecturing. His “I’m the greatest” schtick could be more for entertainment value.

      3. jsn

        Perfect Zaphod Beeblebrox material:
        “He was briefly the President of the Galaxy (a role that involves no power whatsoever, and merely requires the incumbent to attract attention so no one wonders who’s really in charge, a role for which Zaphod was perfectly suited).”

        apologies if this is a duplicate, it appeared to vanish into the ether

      4. ggm

        Anyone who doubts that it’s for show should watch this clip and dispel with the notion that Trump doesn’t know exactly what he’s doing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T2gSX4zdBA

        Also, listening to his prolonged rants about Romney’s arrogant donors destroying his carpets with their muddy shoes, and Romney taking a break from campaigning to apply for a 9-car garage permit was a thing of beauty back in the primaries. Trump understands why the Republican base hates their establishment politicians and he’s a natural at tearing those pols down in the most effective ways. The political and media class probably views him as somewhat of a traitor for this, abusing his access to dish dirt to the rabble. I wonder if Powell will face any of the same backlash now that his similarly dishy emails have leaked.

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          > Romney’s arrogant donors destroying his carpets with their muddy shoes

          I would love to see that video but yes, it’s been removed. Can you give an alternative link?

      1. Propertius

        I suppose the combination of a surrogate and Trumpot would be, umm, a “sTrumpot” (perhaps just a “strumpet” – it’s more euphonious anyway).

      2. jsn

        Perfect Zaphod Beeblebrox material:
        “He was briefly the President of the Galaxy (a role that involves no power whatsoever, and merely requires the incumbent to attract attention so no one wonders who’s really in charge, a role for which Zaphod was perfectly suited).”

    1. cnchal

      Trump does have a sense of humor, and the chain yanking he does is to see what’s loose.

      Whatever happened to the teleprompter tech when 0’s failed, and gibberish was spoken?

    2. John Wright

      While on the subject of teleprompters.

      I remember a letter to the editor in the LA Times about George W. Bush’s use of the teleprompter.

      As I remember, the letter writer said “He stops at the end of the telepromter lines, not at the period. Is he in over his head? Yes.”

      As I recall, this prescient remark appeared after GWB’s election (early 2000) and before 9/11 when it became unpatriotic/un-American to make fun of GWB.

      In this case at least, inability to handle the teleprompter did indicate Bush was “in over his head”.

      And the country paid a price.

  6. Vatch

    That reads to me like an international blacklist of labor organizers is fine, but I’m not an expert in tradespeak. Readers?

    Your guess is probably correct, but maybe it could also be interpreted as a prohibition against hiring foreign scabs during a strike. They’d better fix that! (sarc)

  7. fresno dan

    UPDATE “New York-based Teneo, with 575 employees, markets itself as a one-stop shop for CEOs to get advice on a wide range of issues, including mergers and acquisitions, handling crises and managing public relations. For its services, it generally charges clients monthly retainer fees of $100,000 to $300,000.” [Wall Street Journal, “Teneo, Consulting Firm with Clinton Ties, Eyes $1 Billion IPO”]. Founder Douglas Band was Bill Clinton’s body man. One can only wonder what a body man does to become worth $1 billion to, well, the people who made him worth a billion.

    “A body man or body woman is, in U.S. political jargon, a personal assistant and sometimes valet to a politician or political candidate. Such a person accompanies the politician or candidate virtually everywhere, often arranging lodging, transportation, and meals, and providing snacks, a cell phone, and any other necessary assistance.
    “….and providing snacks…”
    I’m just letting it out there – for a mere 100 million (90% off of a billion – what a deal I have for you) I am willing to provide snacks. For Trump it would be all your orange based snacks – cheetos, fritos, dorritors, etcetera. Any clue to what Hillary snacks on….

    “….one-stop shop for CEOs to get advice on a wide range of issues, including mergers and acquisitions, handling crises and managing public relations.”
    All this from a guy who was the snack dispenser. If I have said it once, I’ve said it a million times -behind every great man is the guy with the bowl of dorritos…

    1. nippersdad

      I hear that our most fashionable Vampire Squids like youth blood spiced with coumadin, infused with the souls of middle easterners and various other “deplorables”. This is why body women like Huma make the big bucks; you can’t make a goodie basket without breaking a few countries, doncha know.

  8. Romancing The Loan

    Has Clinton appeared in public since coming out to hug the little girl after her collapse on Sunday? Google seems to be failing me.

    1. lambert strether

      I believe she’s back on the trail today, but if it’s in California, maybe hasn’t been written up yet. Or try Bing. Google really does increasingly suck

      1. Carla

        Re: Google sucks. The only reason I use Google these days is to get past the paywalls of the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times. Google is evil. Therefore I use it only when I have to access media devils.

      1. Roger Smith

        And one of the plays here is to rebound from her mishaps in NC, with the back drop of the LGBT laws passed there.

        *barf* but you know, Trump exploited Flint…

    2. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

      Hilary diagnosis: subcortical vascular dementia. Analysis by a Dr. over on Mish’s site:

      Let me go over some basic things. When you have a blood clot in the brain, the biggest danger is that blood flow to that section of the brain is cut off and brain tissue dies; that is a stroke. If there is a blood clot causing symptoms and the clot gets dissolved or breaks away such that blood flow is not permanently interrupted, that is called a transient ischemic (without oxygen) attack or TIA or mini stroke.

      However, there are also very small strokes that destroy brain tissue at the microscopic level. Those are called lacunar infarctions and they often result in a type of dementia called vascular dementia. Not to get too technical, but vascular dementia also is overlapped by a process called Lewy Body dementia which is basically a mixture of Alzheimer’s dementia and Parkinson’s.

      I think people pointing to Parkinson’s don’t get what Lewy body and vascular dementia are: forms of dementia with Parkinsonian features that wax and wane depending on blood flow. If there is diminished blood flow to the dopamine producing parts of the brain: Parkinson symptoms can occur but vanish once blood flow is restored. Hilary wouldn’t have gotten through the election campaign with full blown Parkinson’s, but she could have gotten by with hiding early vascular/Lewy body dementia IMO, and that is what I suspect is going on with her.

      The thing I have told people is once you have blood clots gumming up your brain, things don’t get better. This is a progressive problem and as someone who has extensively studied coagulation, the notion put out by HRC’s staff that you put someone on blood thinners, the clot dissolves because of the blood thinner, and a person has a full recovery is complete baloney. A disruption in blood flow to the brain is going to be followed by continued disruptions in blood flow, and I know of no treatment to stop it in a case like HRC’s that involves smaller blood vessels.

      When you have a neurovascular issue causing dysphagia (difficulty swallowing which is what causes her to cough), seizures (the reason for the staff caring around the Valium or diazepam pen), and weakness, those are REALLY bad signs. IMO she is a ticking time bomb to have a major and debilitating stroke.

      With Hiliary’s “pneumonia”, a doctor saying so is completely inadequate. How was it diagnosed? Was an acid fast stain done? Were mycoplasma titers or cultures performed? What was the level of cold agglutins? Furthermore, if HRC was diagnosed with mycoplasma or walking pneumonia, why was she allowed to come in contact with a child when this disease is known to be contagious? And what did her chest x-ray look like? She should have had one to be diagnosed with pneumonia.

      Bear in mind that when you have weakness with pneumonia, it usually is due to dehydration and causes orthostasis (dizziness when getting up). If HRC were going from sitting to standing and needed support, I could buy the dehydration/pneumonia story. But she was already standing and then went limp. That is most likely a neurological problem not a hydration one.

      People should be clamoring to see the chest x-ray and lab results for HRC. To me the most damning finding would be a normal white blood cell count, a negative acid fast stain, normal tiitre ratio of cold agglutins, and an infiltrate in the middle lobe of the right lung. That would be strongly suggestive that HRC has aspiration pneumonitis due to dysphagia from an underlying neurovascular issue and that the walking pneumonia diagnosis was pure bunk. But I would be shocked if we see the lab or X-ray results.

      1. timbers

        Read that, too. Think there were 3 or 4 posts by MD’s at Mish’s when I read it. The one you post seemed the bleakest if I recall.

        Just don’t know what to believe, but this I do know:

        It’s nuts – and typical – that the MSM (for lack of better term) isn’t following up on this by clamoring for proof of Clinton’s health. She may have had pneunomia but what we see on 9/11 wasn’t caused by that, IMO.

        The media labeling legitimate questions about Clinton emails, pay-to-play at SOS, and health as “conspiracy theories” has seeped into mainstream Team Dems, judging by my friend’s reactions to any attempt to discuss facts them they don’t like or puts Hillary in a bad light.

        1. jgordon

          Hillary is suffering from Late Stage Lying, along with all the media. It’s entirely reasonable to just assume the worst since getting the truth out of them is impossible.

      2. hreik

        Srsly? You think a negative acid fast stain is damning? Really. Smh. An acid fast stain is for Species Mycobacterium and (more rarely) Nocardia. The first (Mycobacteria) is usually TB (Tuberculosis, which I do not expect that she has). The second is Nocardia, which can be very dangerous and is often found in immuno-compromised patients (like patients post transplants and post cancer treatments).

        Oh and she was leaning against that security bollard.

        I think arm-chair diagnoses are dangerous, no matter whether done by Bill Frist or anyone else.

        1. Beniamino

          I too am averse to arm-chair diagnoses. The appropriate way to handle this is for Hillary Clinton to submit for examination by a panel of unbiased physicians so that we can put all this rank, misogynistic scaremongering to rest. Their conclusions, with any and all supporting documentation (x-rays, lab results, the works) should be made public and ideally they would livestream the examination on CSpan. Everybody involved (Hillary, the doctors, and the viewing public) should be cautioned not to ingest any solids for at least 12 hours before the examination.

          1. Anonymous

            I despise what HRC is and represents, and would never vote for her. That said, I myself once had walking pneumonia about 10 yrs ago. It was diagnosed solely by chest X ray, and cured by antibiotics. I was not told to stay home from teaching my classes.

            HRC probably does have some more serious underlying illness and the public has a right to know pre-election. But the main negatives with her are her war profiteering, NeoCon regime change, support for rigged trade deals, massive corruption, fraud, sociopathic lying, and fascist control over the FBI, DOJ, and MSM.

          2. JerseyJeffersonian

            Rank, misogynistic scaremongering is it? Just couldn’t help yourself, could you.

            No, Ace, that won’t cut it. We are making a judgment as a nation about who will be in control of the Federal Executive Branch, and the military and other security forces of the United States here. If Hillary and her clique are shining us on as to her health when she is asking for our assent to her assuming those powers, well then, a need to know the truth has fuck all to do with misogyny and a whole lot to do with her suitability for that role, period, full stop.

            So, no, sorry, no lollipop for you just because you trot out that old line of crap. Or maybe you really just think that we should all vote for her so as to score another “first” for identity politics regardless of other considerations that citizens might legitimately have? Following in the footsteps of Obama, Mr. Bait-and-Switch-Until-the-Cows-Come-Home, beneficiary of just that sort of shallow justification, I don’t think too many of us are buying that now shopworn rationale.

          3. Lambert Strether Post author

            > The appropriate way to handle this

            The other way to approach this would be to report on Clinton’s campaign entourage and infrastructure (or attempt to report, and see what pushback there is).

            Any problems Clinton has are situations that the campaign must be prepared to handle. Therefore, there will be infrastructure set up to handle it. And since a campaign is like a traveling circus, striking the tent in one town each morning, and setting it up again each night in a new town, the infrastructure will be portable and (to some extent) visible. Think of it as the equivalent of a President’s “nuclear football.”

            Things I can think of, off the top of my head:

            1) Do medical personnel travel with her at all times? Or are they on call at campaign destinations?

            2) Clinton’s body man or woman: What do they carry?

            3) Preparation and scripts: In Clinton’s minutes-long coughing fit, a woman on the stage, and Kaine, both seemed prepared for it. Kaine fumbled for something in his pockets, and the woman walked up to Clinton and handed her something, which Clinton placed on the podium. And then Clinton made the joke about being allergic to Trump; clearly the situation was anticipated and prepared for. So what was the something? Possibly cough drops, but are we sure?

            4) The creepy black vans: Is there medical equipment in them?

            5) The campaign plane: Medical equipment? Note that until very recently, the press has been kept off the campaign plane.

            I don’t like armchair diagnoses either, but it ought to be possible to dolly back from the medical detail and at least determine the scope of the problem from campaign body language. And if the reporters can’t or won’t do this, presumably the Republican oppo operation has a camera trained on Clinton’s team at all times….

        2. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

          Here’s the only diagnosis that matters, and Mish references it:

          – Advanced Late-Stage Lying Disease. Patient exhibits repeated and chronic inability to tell the truth. Symptoms often manifest early, with fabrications around minor items like impossible commodities trading gains. If not diagnosed and treated early disease becomes self-reinforcing, with lack of consequences for fabrications of greater size and importance progressively impairing the patient’s ability to distinguish between truth and untruth. If present in persons of prominence or power disease can be highly destructive due to patient actions based on a lack of real-world input. Caregivers to the patient often exacerbate the condition by excusing or hiding destructive outcomes of patient’s impaired cognitive and decision-making capabilities. No known cure or treatment when disease is in advanced stages, best clinical course is to limit scope of patient’s actions to trivial activities and recommend bed rest. Harmless pursuits like care of grandchildren can be successfully substituted for prior activities with good result.

          1. polecat

            Mish forgot to mention a critical dematologcal rash that is the physical hallmark of AL-SLD ….

            It’s referred to as ‘the burning of the ears’…….

        3. Robert Hahl

          I knew a person who eventually died of Lewy Body dementia. Twenty years before that he seemed a bit slow talking, and I was not surprised to learn he developed a neurological problem. Billary does not remind me of that condition at all.

      3. Bob

        WaPo (and others) have her physician’s letter posted today.
        As a retired physician, I also wondered how the dx of pneumonia was made. The letter says she had a chest CT that showed a right middle lobe pneumonia.
        Actually, aspiration pneumonia is more typical in the right lower lobe. Not the RML.
        If you are looking for TB, start with the PPD skin test. (But it’s not likely TB.)
        Any way, read the link and prepare to be shocked.
        PS not a Hillary fan but as a doc I think the internet diagnoses should be looked at with extreme skepticism.
        PPS she didn’t have a clot on her brain. She suffered from a rare problem, cavernous sinus thrombosis, which is a clot outside of the brain, which developed after a fall. With this condition, the clot is outside the brain altho complications can lead to brain damage if not treated. It should be noted that Hillary’s doctor’s letter said “she is in excellent mental condition.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_venous_sinus_thrombosis

        1. crittermom

          “she is in excellent mental condition.”

          Yes, that jumped out at me, as well.
          Why did the Dr feel it necessary to state that? Was it a purposeful play on words, hoping most wouldn’t notice? Was it just a Freudian typo?

          I remain suspicious of both her medical and mental health. Especially the latter.

          I’d like to know how her heart is doing, as well.
          Meaning, I’d like to know if they found one in her.

  9. RabidGandhi

    Siemens to Invest in €5 bn Project in Argentina* (*with strings attached)

    Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri held a “Mini-Davos” forum this week where he told potential investors “this government is here to help you”. The grovelling comes as Macri’s promise that it would “rain dollars” after Argentina paid off the vulture funds has yielded bupkis.

    Fortunately for Macri, Siemens has boldly stepped up to the plate and offered to invest in a €5 bn infrastructure project, but with one catch: Argentina must pass a “Public-Private Investment Law”. Just a minor formality, right? Not so much. Here’s the law’s main provisions:

    1) Argentina’s law that contract disputes must be resolved in Argentine jurisdiction shall not apply, so the state may be sued in international courts.

    2) The terms of the tender-bid shall no longer be published in the Official State Gazette, so contractual terms can be kept hidden.

    3) Contractors may now subcontract to a subcontractor of their choosing once the contract is 20% completed.

    4) The contractor may stop work if the state is in breach.

    According to InfoBAE, “the draft law seems to have been custom-made for foreign construction firms”.

    But there’s more. There is a reason why Siemens in particular is demanding this legislative change, as Siemens has, shall we say, a history with Argentina. During the privatisation rage of the 1990s, Siemens was awarded the contract to issue Argentina’s national ID cards. This contract was awarded under very suspicious circumstances, as Siemens submitted the most expensive bid and had the lowest score from the tender-bid committee. But they got the contract nonetheless, and indeed they did not have the means to do the job. For example, thousands of IDs had to be replaced because Siemens put the fingerprints backwards, and all of the project milestones were far past deadline. Siemens was so far in breach of the terms that when an audit was conducted in 2000, the state commission determined that it was costing more to produce IDs from Siemens (USD $30 per ID) than it would to just rescind the contract, so the government cancelled the contract with only 30% of it delivered.

    So Siemens, like any self-respecting Ayn Randian, immediately ran to mummy for help and sued Argentina in the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. The ICSID case– which completely omitted the irregularities in the tender-bid and Siemens’ piss-poor performance, ruled against Argentina and ordered the (by this point in default) country to pay USD $218M for the “expropriation”. Argentina appealed, however, and whilst the appeal was being heard, the Siemens bribery scandal broke, where the US SEC fined the company USD $450M for paying bribes to public officials for public works contracts. At that point, Siemens desisted from its suit against Argentina in the ICSID.

    So that brings us full circle, and now it should be crystal clear why Siemens would condition its latest investment on an ISDS-style law being passed that allows it to (1) hide its contracts from public scrutiny, (2) resort to international jurisdictions, and (3) have extraordinarily favourable terms in the event of breach.

    Lastly my personal takeaway here is:

    1. Corporations are now imposing their own ISDS-like terms in the absence of TTP/TTIP agreements.

    2. Argentina used to be blackmailed by the IMF and World Bank for investments, now we are blackmailed by giant multi-nationals, but the effect is the same: weaken our laws, decrease our sovereignty.

    3. Macri et co. are negotiating from weakness even though they inherited an economy with fairly strong fundamentals. They are doing this on purpose because a crisis suits their true constituents: concentrated capital.

      1. RabidGandhi

        It already has somewhat. There were two nights of protest with at least tens of thousands protesting nationwide, but they got very little coverage in the monopoly-controlled media.

        A lot is riding on the three major unions, many of whose directors were in bed with Macri. But the popular pressure below them is getting to a boiling point, and now they have re-united and are calling for a general strike, perhaps as soon as the end of this month.

    1. Carla

      RabidGandhi, thanks very much for the heads’ up about Corps imposing their own ISDS terms in the absence of TTP/TTIP/TISA. We the People need to know!!!!

  10. rich

    Bridgewater Plans Job Cuts as Some Areas ‘Bloated, Inefficient’


    but in May……………..

    Bridgewater Associates LP, the world’s largest hedge fund, will receive $22 million in aid from Connecticut, which has been working to keep businesses from leaving the state.

    The firm, led by billionaire Ray Dalio, was approved for a $5 million grant and a $17 million loan to expand in Westport, Wilton and Norwalk, according to minutes of the state bond commission’s meeting on Friday. The loan may be forgiven if Bridgewater, which manages about $150 billion, retains some 1,400 jobs and creates 750 new ones through 2021.

    hmmm…I’m confused.

  11. craazyman

    well i”m not braggiin babe so don’t put me down
    cause I think I got the fastest set of wheels in town
    I can”t be certain, cause i don’t really drive
    and when Google’s at the wheel it don’t go more than 65
    It’s my little deuce coop, I don’t know what I got

    Just a little deuce coop cruisn up the hill
    it’ll pass a grazing herd like they’re standin still
    when someone revs up at me I don’t even try
    If I wanta go fast, well, I probbly should fly
    It’s my little deuce coop, I don’t know what I got

    and stallin off the line when the light turns green
    made the biggest traffic jam that you ever seen
    the wheel locked up and then it won’t even steer
    rebooted 4 times and it seemed like a year
    It’s my little deuce coop, I don’t know what I got

    1. fresno dan

      September 15, 2016 at 3:13 pm

      missed you – where have you been? – – O yeah, your little deuce coupe stalled…..

  12. dcblogger

    there is NO excuse to vote for Trump. Don’t like Hillary? Then vote Green or some other emergent party candidate. If Trump wins all the haters will feel empowered and we will have more people setting Muslim women on fire and the like. The wave of hate crimes will be hideous. The US will be a failed state w/in 6 months.

    1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

      We already have HATE enshrined in the institutions of the state: The Fed hates savers and pensioners. The DNC hates voters who want to register or select a candidate of their choice in the primaries. The Justice Department hates people with the temerity to want redress from bank crimes. The government hates people who use health care systems so they empower insurers who hate their customers. The government also hates whistleblowers who simply want facts available in a free society so we can make informed choices. The State Department hates all vassal states (read: sovereign nations) that do not lick the jackboot. The prison system hates poor people. And we’re all told we’re supposed to hate the Russians (the reasons are hazy).
      And you’re surprised that hate is becoming a popular state of mind among the populace? Our institutions are telling us it’s the way to focus and get what you want.

    2. hunkerdown

      Really, dcblogger? Children know better than to project today forward into forever. You’re starting to sound like Daniel Yergin and you need to hang your evangelism up.

      1. EmilianoZ

        There has been a wave of xenophobic attacks after the Brexit vote. One Polish guy died of his injuries I think.

        1. hunkerdown

          Really, this is exactly the logical extreme of the slippery slope argument as the anti-drug campaigners of the 1970s and 1980s deployed. And the Temperance busybodies during Prohibition. Except that this has nothing to do with the USA and its “democratic” (always qualified modulo helots, for some reason) “republic”.

          After the 21st Amendment, there was a spike in alcoholism. Whiny pathos-queens extrapolated single events to ubiquity and the death of civilization (good! f’in parasites) then, too. And now it’s a roughly stable function of economic disadvantage.

          Liberal drama no longer moves people who are not invested in it. Will or can the Greek chorus STFU without a grenade in their midst?

        2. flora

          Brexit vote is also seen as the impetus towards fiscal policy stimulus instead of continued austerity.

          “The near-term catalyst for the fiscal turn was Britain’s vote to leave the European Union on June 23. Not only did the resulting uncertainty threaten global economic growth, it also alerted centrist political parties to how unhappy voters are with the economic status quo.”


    3. Mo's Bike Shop

      This country won’t enact free health care because scapegoat minority X will get free healthcare.

      Empowerment accomplished. Tell me how three strikes made us better citizens.

    4. uncle tungsten

      The US is a failed state and those are vultures picking on its carcass. A revolution is needed to turn it back to people’s state and that revolution seems to have started.

    5. kimsarah

      there may be NO excuse to vote for Trump, but there is a good reason to do so. It keeps Hillary out of the WH.

    6. Anonymous

      Hillary is responsible for the deaths of 1000s of innocent Muslims in Libya and Syria.

      She is not even president, yet already controls the MSM, DOJ, FBI. If she were elected, we’d have
      full blown fascist tyranny. It would enshrine her massive corruption and fraud, and usher in WW3. Trump is a buffoon but he’d be gridlocked and feckless. Gives progressives 4 years to organize and find a viable candidate.

  13. charles leseau

    “[E]ven though roughly three-fourths of all battleground-state Millennials expressed these disparaging views of Trump, the survey found Clinton drawing just 43 percent against him in a four-way race that included libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein.”

    Oh, to be a fly on the wall watching the Democratic Party focus groups and marketers working out strategies to appeal to those pesky, disgruntled Millennials. They should hire the Mountain Dew guys.

    1. fresno dan

      charles leseau
      September 15, 2016 at 3:49 pm

      43% – that sure sounds familiar…wasn’t that what Clinton (Bill) got in his first election – against Bush and Perot??? I think it was pretty much agreed that Perot hurt Bush more than Clinton.
      I would think that the Libertarian would hurt Trump more than Hillary, but you never know if the Green will be the margin…

  14. Braden

    This one just crossed my screen. It salaciously combines Wells Fargo, Clinton, and ripping off poor people (although I think most small donors aren’t “poor” but middle class, I’m not aware of too many working middle class families that will donate over $100 to a campaign). The article claims that the Clinton campaign appears to be systematically ripping off its low-dollar donors using unauthorized charges.

    It’s the Observer, so note the bias, but fairly well researched and sourced:

    Exclusive: Hillary Clinton Campaign Systematically Overcharging Poorest Donors

    1. Roger Smith

      Hey! They have a disclosure right after the article. Incredible. I didn’t think anyone used those anymore.

    2. Goyo Marquez

      Better to ask forgiveness than permission?

      But… truth be told this happened to us when we donated to Bernie, with Blue something or other website, they charged us twice for one donation. It was Bernie so we figured, oh well.

        1. Liberal Mole

          That ActBlue site has buttons that are damn easy to click just by accident and then you’ve given more than you were planning. I’ll say this, I did just that, emailed them and they refunded the donation in a few days.

    3. diptherio

      I followed some of the links and it does seem to check out. Not surprising at all. Gotta beef up them small-donor numbers, dontchaknow?

  15. DJG

    “This would be a lot of effort for powerful people to expend, if it led to nothing at all. There are two obvious possibilities. One is that the State Department actually was granting important favors to Clinton Foundation donors that the many sustained investigations have somehow failed to detect. The other, which is more likely, is that someone, somewhere along the line, was getting played”

    This is the elegant writing and thinking of The New Yorker? The magazine that still spells ‘cooperate’ with a dieresis in a display of fussy superiority? So the way The New Yorker understands it, one either is successful at bribing, which is a success, or one is unsuccessful at bribing, in which case, one is a loser.

    I’m wondering what happened to ethics and probity at The New Yorker? But then I’m a fossil, even though I was expecting Obama to appoint me as ambassador to Andorra (on my merits, ahemmm). But you can see why much of the Democratic Club is now wallowing in “But Powell Did It.” But it’s not a war in Iraq. But Yemen isn’t cool. The Yemenis are just getting played.

    1. DJG

      Benjamin Wallace-Wells, he of The New Yorker, invoking the Wells-Fargo Defense. (Maybe he’s linked to the bank somehow–he undoubtedly shares Wells-Fargo ethics):
      “There is something essentially illiberal about the way that Band and Abedin were behaving, and if liberals feel aggrieved by the way the Clinton Foundation stories keep making headlines, even though they contain no real violations, then the real culprit isn’t the press. It is Band and Abedin, and whoever led them to believe that the way to treat Clinton Foundation donors who wanted things from the State Department was to genuflect and scurry. The list of candidates there is short. Most of them once shared the same e-mail server.”

      The appearance of impropriety is impropriety. Sorry, but the personal often is not that pure and honest cry for community and authenticity that our self-help culture would have us believe. Sometimes, poeple just trade on their connections. Sheesh.

      Can I be ambassador to Andorra now?

  16. RabidGandhi

    Look out, the injuns got the twitter!

    Evo Morales Ayma @evoespueblo

    US [Drug Cooperation] Report is ridiculous. First suspend secret banking, eliminate tax havens and stop building weapons and invading countries.


    The U.S., as the largest consumer of drugs in the world, has no moral authority to dismiss the fight against drug trafficking of other peoples


    You have to be neo-colonialist, pro-capitalist and pro-imperialist to be recognized by the U.S. in the fight against drug trafficking

  17. Pat

    Want to watch those Bernie supporters who are going to vote for Clinton get panicky, point out that if Clinton’s health is worse than she is admitting you could have President Kaine in months or years. Mull on his record as Governor NOT Senator. Imagine him picking those Supreme Court judges everyone is so concerned about. You know the guy who thinks the TPP is great, abortion is murder and there is too much bank regulation and supported Virginia’s Right to Work for nothing law. Oh and has the same corporate bribing issues that Clinton does. Let them mull on that one for a bit.

    I’m not saying that will be scarier than the idea of President Trump for them, but it sure is not going to help keep Democrats coming ‘home’ or staying ‘home’.

    1. polecat

      Imagine if Al Gore had won the top spot in 2000 … months, or a year or two later, dies as a result of downing too many hush puppies …… and then Joe Lieberman takes the helm ……..

      That could’ve been an equally scary scenario …..

      …looking on the bright side … the U.S., as an empire, would’ve likely collapsed by now !

    2. RabidGandhi

      If everyone is so concerned about supreme court justices, then why is there zero talk about Merrick Garland (in either direction)? Wasn’t this going to be the dems’ big stand, where they chose a rightwing nominee to appease the repubs and were going to resort to trench warfare to push him through?

      Clearly, no one cares about the SC; it’s just one of many excuses to scare people into voting for grossly flawed presidential candidates.

      1. Pat

        Oh it is just another means of herding the masses. Personally, I am not all that enamoured with any of Obama’s choices. I know Clinton’s will appalled me, but for those who still think their rights will be protected by good SCOTUS picks…

  18. voteforno6

    Re: How the Democrats Lost Touch on Trade

    To understand “free trade” in such a way has made it difficult for people in the bubble of the consensus to acknowledge the actual consequences of the agreements we have negotiated over the years.

    “The bubble of the consensus” is a wonderful description of the political-media elites that think that they govern discourse in this country. I hope that catches on.

  19. rich

    Corporate Executives Are Making Way More Money Than Anybody Reports

    There are two methods for measuring compensation. One appears everywhere. The other is correct.

    In a 2015 Huffington Post op-ed entitled “Gilead’s Greed That Kills,” the economist Jeffrey Sachs wrote that Martin “took home a reported $19 million in [2014] compensation—the spoils of untrammeled greed.” But that figure, which is recorded as Martin’s total 2014 pay in the Summary Compensation Table of Gilead’s SEC filings, is based on the EFV measures of his stock-based pay, not the ARG measures. In 2014, according to those same filings, Martin actually took home $192.8 million, and in 2015, when his total EFV pay was reported as $18.8 million, his actual take-home pay was $232 million. From 1996 through 2015, as Gilead’s CEO, Martin’s total EFV compensation added up to $209 million, but his total ARG pay was just over $1 billion, of which 95 percent came from stock-based compensation.

    Accurate knowledge of how much executives like Bresch and Martin got paid raises the more fundamental question of how they and other senior executives manage to realize these enormous gains. A focus on ARG compensation reveals the overwhelming importance of stock-based pay in total compensation, which, in turn, affects the way executives run companies: They can take actions that drive up stock prices, even if temporarily, simply for the sake of increasing their own realized gains.

    Throughout the American economy, senior executives have become enamored with stock buybacks as a potent means of manipulating their companies’ stock prices. Over the past decade, net corporate stock issues (that’s new shares issued minus share repurchases, plus shares retired in merger-and-acquisition deals) have drained more than $4 trillion from all U.S. non-financial corporations. The 459 companies in the S&P 500 that were publicly listed between 2006 and 2015 did $3.9 trillion in buybacks, equal to 54 percent of their net income. That’s on top of the $2.7 trillion that these companies distributed to shareholders as dividends, representing another 37 percent of net income. Through stock buybacks of this magnitude, executives effectively participate in the looting of the corporations they run. In some cases, the stock-price increases last just long enough for the executives to exercise their options, have their awards vest, and sell the acquired shares.

    Enabling all this is the SEC, the U.S. government agency that is supposed to regulate the stock market to prevent manipulation of stock prices. In fact, since 1982, under Rule 10b-18, the SEC has not only enabled but even promoted stock-price manipulation. That’s in addition to sanctioning a mismeasurement of executive compensation that obscures the ways in which senior executives benefit personally from the manipulative boosting of their companies’ stock prices.


    They need lower taxes?:)

  20. jgordon

    You are planning on voting for Trump or Clinton depending on who will produce the most gridlock? In that case I’d ask you to consider several things very carefully:

    1) when it comes to most foreign policy like war, and to an extent trade, there is no gridlock. Whatever the president says goes. Are you really willing to inflict Hillary on all the children in the middle east, South America, etc, simply because you are hoping to paralyze politics domestically?

    2) Hillary is arguably far to the right of Trump. Would a Republican congress and Hillary presidency really produce the sort of deadlock you’re hoping for? I sort of doubt that.

    3) Throughout his entire career Trump has always espoused lefty position–oddly right up until he took over the Republican Party. Meanwhile Hillary says whatever she thinks people want to hear, but her biography shows a definite love for the rightwing (not mention dumb and violent) positions.

    Hillary cements and furthers the rightward drift of Democrats. Meanwhile Trump is dragging Republicans ever so subtly and surreptitiously to the left. Depending entirely on whether Trump or Hillary wins it’s entirely probable that in January we’ll either have two very right wing major parties (With Hillary) or two somewhat less rightwing parties, maybe even slightly to the left for Republicans (with Trump).

    Think through this! Nothing good can come from Hillary being president at all.

    1. fresno dan

      September 15, 2016 at 6:16 pm

      I’m not sure who you are responding to, but I agree with your points wholeheartedly.
      And I especially get annoyed by the concept of “gridlock” – there is gridlock for things the 99% want, and 0 gridlock for things the 1% wants. Gridlock is a great McGuffin to promote pepsi (repubs) and coke (dems) while disguising that they are just the same unhealthy brown sugar water…
      I see no good reason NOT to throw a monkey wrench into this finely tuned and calibrated machinery of mass screwing…

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          Still is.

          My definition of “left” is policy that puts the working class first. I am very dubious that Trump or the Republican Party, even were its establishment to be gutted, wish to do this, no matter his rhetoric, any more than Clinton and the Democrats do. Here’s Trump’s (excellent) speech on economic policy in Detroit. If I read it with the same critical eye that I read Clinton’s speeches — which is what I should do, right? — I see populist rhetoric wrapping tired Republican policy nostrums on cutting taxes and regulations. I don’t see anything about unions, and I don’t see anything about the minimum wage. To be fair, if I cut through the bafflegab of a Clinton speech on the economy, I wouldn’t see that either, but that’s rather the point, isn’t it? “America first” is not the same as working people first!

          That’s not to say that I don’t think Trump has some good impulses; telling the truth on WMDs and Iraq certainly falls into that category!

          As far as gridlock, it’s always possible to make things worse. I think giving either party control of the executive and legislative branches will make things worse.

          Adding… On peace and war, I see Clinton as likely to start one, because she believes in it. Trump personally I read as less likely to start one (his reaction IIRC on the destruction of Baghdad was to say that he built buildings, and didn’t blow them up, and I thought that was genuine). That doens’t mean he won’t be mousetrapped into one by “the blob.” And it makes sense to have an added check of a Senate from the opposite party, to make that harder. Ditto Clinton.

          1. Jen

            Indeed. However, with Clinton, I’m trying to figure out which party will serve as the check. My other challenge is that IMO, if there is any hope at all for another faction to seize control of the Democrat party, the Clintons have to lose and lose badly.

            1. aab

              I just wrote a really long comment that’s stuck in moderation, that is basically a long proof version of this conclusion.

              I need to be more terse. But I keep waiting for someone to disprove my reasoning. (And yeah, I really, REALLY don’t want people to vote for Clinton.)

              Meanwhile — who IS the check on Clinton? She’s basically the ruler of the political class. I’d like to hope that the Turtle screws with her like he did Obama. But if I understand the machinations of the last few years correctly, the Republicans and the Democrats already conspired to deliver a whole heck of a lot of corporate/billionaire desired goodies tucked into the pockets of all that nasty gridlock.

              Our options are crummy now. It seems to me the cleanest choice is vote the Democrats out of power as much as possible. I mean, Trump could be way up in the polls on election day, you could vote for Democrats in the Congress to counter that, and then end up with President Hillary and Senate Leader Chuck, after the machines are rigged and the exit polls are adjusted. Voting against that makes it less likely. I prefer to hope that Trump’s irascible and disruptive, and that purging the Clintonians is necessary to move towards some kind of actual second, more leftist party.

      1. bdy


        Proactive War. Grand Bargain. Corporate free-for-all. Mass Incarceration. Publicly funded for-profit education. War on whistle-blowers. Free trade (for those who can afford it . . . highly expensive for those who cannot).

        All gridlock-proof.

        I’m much more attached to Lambert’s “hope for the outcome most likely to split the Democratic party” angle. I’m not sure which is which, but I’m thinking an abbreviated Clinton Dynasty would be more damaging to the brand than losing to the blow-hard. As for actually voting for either creature? Who was it that said “disrespectfully abstain?”

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          > hope for the outcome most likely to split the Democratic party

          That is dependent on the left acting forcefully and opportunistically as independent agents. The opportunities would depend on the election results. The capabilities of the left are not.

        2. aab

          There will be no “abbreviated” Clinton dynasty. We keep trying to get rid of them, and they come back like vermin. If she’s installed, she and a compliant Congress, all frightened of actual Democracy, will work together to crush open access to information and communication via the Internet, increase surveillance, turbocharge the red scare she has already started, buy out or shut down whatever media outlets not already compromised and controlled, and make whatever changes are necessary to stop the next Bernie.

          I guess you could factor in that she clearly won’t live long enough for a second term. But Kaine, who could never have gotten elected in his own right, will probably be even MORE effective than Hillary at working with the Republicans and corporations to get things under control for them. And since the point will be to make voting completely meaningless, rewarding him with his own official term should be pretty easy, if this hasn’t all backfired in violence and chaos. Maybe he’ll just be allowed one, before Chelsea takes over. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party, which the Clintons and Clintonism has weakened electorally, financially and demographically, will be pumped full of cash from the banks and corporations and resuscitated.

          On the other hand, keep Clinton out, and you weaken the corporate hold over the Democratic party significantly. It may be impossible to push the TPP through. Regardless of Trump’s own beliefs and deserves, if he is elected on an anti-TPP, anti-free trade platform, and carries the Republicans to victory holding the majorities, there will be less turnover (those elected are the ones Obama plans to target for TPP votes) and Republican Congressmen will be even less likely to do this for Obama. There’s already more overt resistance to TPP among the Congressional Republicans than the Democrats. My own Democratic Congressman was openly opposed to the TPP. Since he endorsed Clinton, he’s been muzzled. We’d be much more likely to be able to make progress in 2018, and run somebody good in 2020. Clinton is already announcing how her focus in the first 100 days will be to reach out to Republicans. Trump is much less likely to want to do as damage, and even if he wants to, his election will be more disruptive. Yes, we probably will get a lot of terrible Reaganites installed all over the place. But looking at the profound corruption in the Democrats, are we really sure it will be worse? And again, the machine will have to restock and readjust. That takes time and energy. That, too, will be more disruptive. With Clinton, it will be plug and play. With policy, the only way we’ll get meaningful pushback is with Trump as President. The Democrats will have to oppose him, at least a bit — as well as splinter factions within the Republican caucus. With Hillary as President, the Democrats will be as docile as lambs, and there is a real possibility the Republican caucus will be easier for her to manage. All the Democrats plus the corporate controlled Republicans is probably a solid majority.

          There is literally no better outcome we can rely on by facilitating Clinton’s installation. I have no illusions about a Trump Presidency. But at least he earned his nomination with votes, and he doesn’t get off on antagonizing a nuclear power.

          My primary objective is to figure out a path to paper ballots counted by hand in public in the same place on the night of the election. It’s a necessary condition. And Trump seems like a better way to get there than Clinton, if for no other reason than he’s less entrenched, and less incentivized to stop it.

    2. relstprof

      The problem with Trump is that he’s one guy. “One swallow doesn’t a summer make.” For a functioning government, Trump will have to install zombie Reaganism. He has no choice. He’s probably made deals with Priebus about selecting good ole GOP for the executive across the board. Trump gets you Romney, effectively.

      And the GOP House will stymie Trump or appeal to his ego on whatever business is to be decided. They’re giving him “the best deal!” Trump is World-Historical! Or some such nonsense. In our system of checks and balances, putting a narcissist in charge is easily negotiated by a determined collusion. Hegel: slaves always know more than the master.

      If you want a Trumpster revolution, vote for Trumpster politics in down ballots. Crest a wave.

      Those of us not wanting this outcome are surfing elsewhere.

  21. relstprof

    Re North Carolina. The governor’s up for re-election in a tight race. With the NCAA and the ACC pulling out of state, I wonder how many suburban voters are really pleased with McCrory these days. Bathroom bills are costly!

  22. katiebird

    I saw most of Hillary’s event this afternoon and she sounded fine. …. No signs at all of any lung disorder or associated illness. And looking back, was there any sign of it Friday during the basket of deplorables speech? Or Sunday, in front of Chelsea’s apartment? And on the news tonight, they said she worked on debate prep while she was home.

    I’m just wondering…. When I get sick, my IQ drops to the ground and I don’t dare talk to anyone but family or make public -Blog- comments… I can’t imagine that I could make a speech. Not even if the coughing wheezing symptoms were under control. And they never have been for lung stuff… Not that quickly.

    How come no one asked her how she beat it so quickly? I’m really curious.

    1. Oregoncharles

      Good point. I remember trying to write a paper when I had a cold – not even that bad a cold. Stared at the blank paper for at least an hour, then gave up.

      However, it’s noteworthy that she isn’t doing press conferences. That might be just because she hates the press; but it would also require her to respond to fairly unpredictable questions on the fly. That’s why they’re useful.

    2. Roger Smith

      Her questions segment at the end was pretty horrible. She couldn’t or wouldn’t form a complete thought, completely ignored legitimate questions about whether her running mate even knew what was happening over the weekend and their communication. She then fudged the script and said she started taking meds after the incident.

      1. aab

        So she’s now asserting that her doctor saw her on Friday, prescribed no medication, she collapsed on Sunday, only started taking antibiotics late Sunday, and by Thursday, she’s peachy?

        I guess it’s possible for the antibiotics to work that fast on someone in overall good health (which I believe does not describe Clinton, for the record.) But whenever anyone in my family has had pneumonia treated with antibiotics or other medications, they have NOT recovered that quickly, and none of them had collapsed on a public street after losing control of their limbs.

        But doesn’t that make her doctor a dunce, to diagnose pneumonia in an elderly woman with a heavy schedule (of fundraisers) and not recognize that it’s serious enough for medication until she collapses in the street?


        BTW, I’m guessing the correct term above is “couldn’t,” but I didn’t and won’t watch the tape.

  23. ewmayer

    o “Inside Hillary Clinton’s Stump Speech, Annotated … In a way you could see her stump speech as a series of lists tied together by anecdotes.” — On first glance I read that latter snip as “a series of lies tied together by anecdotes”. Was I wrong?

    [The specific Language Log piece ref’ed at top is actually at http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=27890 … Lambert left off the p= article specifier]
    o “Big bad modifier order” [Language Log]. Claim (Forsyth’s template): “[A]djectives in English absolutely have to be in this order: opinion-size-age-shape-colour-origin-material-purpose Noun.” — Uh, doesn’t the title itself violate the alleged required-order, in that ‘big bad wolf’ = size-opinion Noun ? ah yes, I see that LL notes that immediately in the piece. Annoying when ugly facts get in the way of a carefully-crafted narrative.

      1. Steve H.

        I had looked into studies on adj order as a way to set up my journal spreadsheet (notes are a lot more useful if you can sort them). The studies had similar order, but alternative factoring meant some categories split, and some orders had insertions not available in other studies.

        I’d note that Shakespeare drew affect from pushing rules around: ” In particular I mentioned to him the linguistic phenomenon in Shakespeare which is known as ‘functional shift’ or ‘word class conversion’. It refers to the way that Shakespeare will often use one part of speech – a noun or an adjective, say – to serve as another, often a verb, shifting its grammatical nature with minimal alteration to its shape.”

        “Instinctively Shakespeare was right to use it as one of his dramatic tools. Second the P600 surge means the brain was thus primed to look out for more difficulty, to work at a higher level, whilst still accepting that fundamental sense was being made. In other words, while the Shakespearian functional shift was semantically integrated with ease, it triggered a syntactic re-evaluation process likely to raise attention and give more weight to the sentence as a whole.”

        The Shakespeared Brain

  24. Cry Shop

    “Why now? Liz edging her hat toward the ring if Clinton comes up lame?”

    As an academic, she likes tenured positions. Nothing more tenured that SCOUS.

  25. Daryl

    Made the mistake of listening to NPR on the way home today. I finished my podcast and didn’t feel like futzing with opening another one.

    They talked about how the Russian government controls the messaging on all media.

    On the state and corporate funded, tightly controlled media outlet NPR.

  26. cwaltz

    That poll with the previous Sanders supporters is interesting. It’s funny that Johnson gets 9% of his base. I wonder how many of that 9% know he’s pro TPP?

    1. sd

      Sanders had broad appeal and was drawing independent voters to his campaign. So the Johnson voters may well just have been Libertarians who connected with Sanders overall message. It doesn’t necessarily mean they were single issue voters who opposed TPP.

      1. crittermom

        Bernie was drawing members of both parties, as well as Independents.
        Even my diehard Republican friend said she could ‘live with’ Bernie as pres, not being all that crazy about Trump.

        Having been a Dem forever, I now find them too stupid/greedy to associate myself with. They totally blew it by ousting Bernie and my face will forever sting from the slap they gave his supporters.

        Now proudly registered Independent! (So why haven’t those damn Hellary emails stopped?)

        1. Lambert Strether Post author

          Voters overwhelmingly found Sanders trustworthy — 68% IIRC, with Clinton and Trump down in the 30s somewhere (I forget which of the two was rated less trustworthy than the other).

  27. Big River Bandido

    Wynton Marsalis, huh?

    Perfect choice for a Clinton fundraiser. He is to jazz what she is to Democratic politics: a phony curmudgeon determined to stamp out true inspiration, and an embarrassment to the true practitioners of the profession.

Comments are closed.