Monday, October 3, 2016

Sorry Dumb-asses, Climate Change is Real

"...are any on these anti-global warming points at all valid?"

Answer: No. Every single one is wrong. We can take them one at a time.

"1. Temperature records from around the world do not support the assumption that today’s temperatures are unusual."
A: Wrong. The Marcott reconstruction probably makes the point best; it also shows the extraordinary recent acceleration. Temps today are almost certainly higher than the Holocene Climate Optimum ~6-8K yrs ago, which means they're the highest since the Eemian ~120K years ago (when the Milankovitch cycles made it warmer than now).

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/09/paleoclimate-the-end-of-the-holocene/

http://www.realclimate.org/images//Marcott.png

"2. Satellite temperature data does [sic] not support the assumption that temperatures are rising rapidly..."
A: Evidently this "former professor" can't speak English. He's also dead wrong. Yes, there was a very strong El Niño in 1997-98 with a lot of warming. But the 2015-16 EN was almost as strong, & 2016 has been very warm on both main satellite datasets (UAH & RSS), significantly warmer than 1998. The RSS dataset was also adjusted upward to show more warming when orbital decay was factored in. This link even includes a vid of Carl Mears, who puts the RSS data together, where he says flat-out that the surface data are more accurate.

http://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-surface-and-satellite-temperature-records-compare?utm_content=bufferde258&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Quoting, "The trend in the satellite data is 0.11C per decade since 1979, compared to 0.16C per decade in the surface record."

Spencer's UAH dataset shows clear warming, with the recent EN causing warmer temps than the 1998 event. That's despite his HUGE v6 adjustment that subtracts almost 0.2° C of warming since 2000 (roughly 10 times the size of the Karl et al NOAA data warming adjustments that put Congress in a tizzy in the summer of 2015).

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

https://moyhu.blogspot.com/2015/12/big-uah-adjustments.html

It's also important to remember that the main two satellite datasets significantly understate warming. They can be compared to the RATPAC radiosonde data, where actual thermometers are placed on actual balloons to measure actual temperatures of actual air.

The result? The satellites understate warming.

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/04/02/new-rss-and-balloons/

"3. Current temperatures are always compared to the temperatures of the 1980’s, but for many parts of the world the 1980’s was the coldest decade of the last 100+ years..."
A: Wrong, wrong & wrong. Current temps are compared to the entire thermometer record, & thru proxies, to much earlier times. And you CAN'T SAY "MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD"!!! You can't cherry pick certain areas & say they haven't warmed.

The 1930s were warm in the US. So what? Even now, Iceland & southern Greenland are cooler than they were a century ago, but that's because of ICE MELTING & is HORRENDOUS news. You don't get to cherry-pick certain areas if you're an honest scientist; your professor is not an honest scientist.

"4. The world experienced a significant cooling trend between 1940 and 1980..."

F: Not exactly. There was a strong El Niño in 1942, & 1943 was very warm. Following that, we had slight cooling till around 1977.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

We had more pronounced cooling from ~1879-1911 (the 1879 date is uncertain give sparse data at the time). These are the only statistically significant, prolonged "pauses" in warming in the temperature record. It is UTTERLY HILARIOUS that deniers call the ~1999-2013 slowdown in warming "THE" pause!!!!! Statistically, it didn't exist; it wasn't long or pronounced enough to reach statistical significance.

https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4.png

The causes of these periods are not mysterious. When the oceanic cycles are negative, La Niñas predominate & we "normally" get cooling. When these cycles are positive, El Niños predominate & we get warming.

The PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) is probably referenced more often, but it was originally detected in patterns of salmon catches & its focus is the northern Pacific. The IPO (Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation) references the whole Pacific, so it more accurately reflects these changes.

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n10/full/nclimate2341.html

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/084002;jsessionid=C040B56251C251FB11D142FF3B602B4D.c2.iopscience.cld.iop.org

If you look at the record, these cycles used to be ~30-33 years long. The POINT is that the ~1977-1998 warming cycle was only ~22 years long, & the ~1999-2013 slowdown was only ~15 years long. The latter reflected the fact that CO2-induced warming is now SO strong that we got NO COOLING AT ALL, just slower warming. (Each cooling cycle in the record has shown slower cooling, while each warming cycle has shown faster warming.) These shorter cycles may be one of the reflections of the profound disturbance ACC is already having on our world.

"5. Urban heat island effect skews the temperature data of a significant number of weather stations..."

A: Wrong. This has been evaluated extensively by multiple independent groups. In fact, the Berkeley Earth project was formed partly to address this question. They tried very hard to find errors by NASA but ended up affirming NASA's results & extending them to the mid-1700s, not to mention saying humans were responsible for 99+% of the warming since then. All of their data & analyses are available at their website

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/converted-contrarian-argues-humans-to-blame-for-climate-change/

http://berkeleyearth.org/

"6. There is a natural inverse relationship between global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels..."

A: Once again, your "pretty smart" professor shows he can't speak English; he evidently doesn't know the difference between inverse & converse. There is NOT an inverse relationship between temps & CO2!!!!! It's a positive relationship.

The fact is that warming raises CO2, AND higher CO2 causes warming. It's a positive feedback cycle. Higher CO2 causes warming, & the CONVERSE is also true.

If CO2 rises, so do temps. This causes further CO2 rise (e.g. from the oceans; warm water holds less CO2, as with a warm soda), which causes more warming until they reach semi-equilibrium. Warming from another cause (e.g. Milankovitch cycle changes at the start of an interglacial) causes CO2 to come out of the oceans, which then causes more warming.

"7. The CO2 cannot, from a scientific perspective, be the cause of significant global temperature changes..."

A: Wrong again. CO2 has been the principal control knob on temps over the entire Phanerozoic. The vid is of the respected Penn State climatologist Richard Alley from a few years ago; he's very watchable.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/330/6002/356

http://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/14/3/pdf/i1052-5173-14-3-4.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RffPSrRpq_g

Your professor spouts a lot more nonsense about frequencies absorbed by CO2 & H2O. Water vapor is a feedback on CO2 because warm air holds more H2O, roughly doubling the effect of CO2. But it passes very quickly in & out of the atmosphere in precipitation or evaporation, while CO2 stays there for many millennia. That's why CO2 is a forcing on temps while H2O vapor is a feedback.

"8. There have been many periods during our recent history that a warmer climate was prevalent long before the industrial revolution..."

A: Nonsense. There is controversy about whether the MCA (Medieval Climate Anomaly) was warmer than the mid-20th century (~1950), but there is NO doubt that we're warmer now. This has been shown by multiple proxies, including tree rings, ice cores, sediments & speleothems. Look at my previous links, or at this:

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/the-hockey-stick

"9. Glaciers have been melting for more than 150 years..."

A: More nonsense. Look no further than Glacier National Park, where they're vanishing virtually before our eyes.

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/news/151021-glacier-national-park-melting-vin

There is no doubt that we had cooling during the LIA (Little Ice Age). In fact, we were cooling for some 6K yrs before the Industrial Revolution (as my previous links have shown).

Consider Ötzi the Iceman, who was murdered & buried in snow ~5300 years ago. He thawed out in 1991. Why then? Because it was warmer in 1991 than it had been for ~5300 years! (OK, that's an over-simplification, but it makes some sense, doesn't it?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi

"10. 'Data adjustment' is used to continue the perception of global warming..."

A: Wrong yet again. In any dataset that includes sea surface temps (>70% of the Earth's surface; more than 90% of warming goes into the ocean, so global warming IS ocean warming), the biggest adjustment is ALWAYS to SSTs before 1940. That's when thermometers were moved to engine water intakes; before that, temps were taken by dropping buckets over the sides of ships, which were ~0.5-0.7° C cooler.

The biggest adjustment to these temps is to adjust pre-1940 water temps upward, & this ALWAYS shows less warming. Always.

If you want to understand it, watch this vid from Phil Jones of HadCRU. He's a bit soporific, but he's very, very knowledgeable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuRU10ocuds

Your professor is lying thru his teeth. To be generous, he's probably lying to himself. But in any case, he's profoundly, desperately wrong, on every single point.
No comments:
Labels: ,

Trump Not Paying Taxes - Our Cost of Him Being a Tax Deadbeat

Here's a fun exercise. Some back of the napkin math based on some assumptions.
Let's assume:
  • Trump's income in 2015 was the $557M that he reported on his financial disclosure.
  • Trump paid 0% effective income tax in 2015.
What if Trump had paid Clinton's effective tax rate of 34.2%?
Well... he would have paid $190.5M in taxes. Which would have gone to the below:
  • $48.4M to Defense
  • $54.7M to Healthcare
  • $26.1M to Federal Debt Service
  • $15.2M to Unemployment & Labor
  • $11.2M to Veterans Benefits
  • $8.8M to Food & Agriculture
  • $6.9M to Education
  • $5.5M to Government
  • $3.6M to Housing
  • $3.0M to Energy & Environment
  • $2.9M to International
  • $2.3M to Transportation
  • $2.1M to Science
That's what he kept out of those programs in a single year.
$11.2M to Veteran Benefits is more than Trump has donated to veterans in his entire life.
That's what it means to be a tax deadbeat.
No comments:
Labels: ,

Russia and the Information War

This post will discuss Russia's use of black/white propaganda.
CyberBerkut
I have been researching the group that edited documents to try and make the popular anti-corruption blogger Alexei Navalny, look like a Soros/CIA puppet. The name of the group is CyberBerkut and it emerged around the annexation of Crimea in March, 2014. It purports to be a pro-Russian Ukrainian hacking group, that supports the Russian separatists in Eastern Ukraine.
However, it can be stated with high confidence that this group is actually a disinformation front for Russian intelligence. Basically, this isn't the first time CyberBerkut pretended to hack a video/document/audio but in reality, forged some stuff and then pretended to "hack" it from enemies of the Kremlin.
One of the earliest examples of disinformation by CyberBerkut was this video which it claimed it "hacked" from the laptop of one of John McCain's aides when he visited Ukraine as a show of U.S. support (McCain is demonized in Russian media for being a hardliner towards Russia). They claimed the video shows some actors pretending to be Jihadi John and James Foley, his execution being filmed in front of a green screen! But the good folks over at MetaBunk did a frame-by-frame comparison of the real execution video and the so-called "leaked" filming of the set. They found that the actor had different movements compared to the real JJ, along with several other visual mismatches. Here's the full debunking:
This "secret" video was prominently featured on sites like InfoWars and Global Research.
Now, who would have the time, money, resources, and will power (complete with actors, clothing, cameras, props, etc.,) to put so much effort into creating a fake video to spread the conspiracy theory that America is staging ISIS' videos and is controlling it? Only a state like Russia, of course.
The second example of disinformation by CyberBerkut is a video showing neo-Nazi pro-Ukrainian fighters burning the Dutch flag. Russian propaganda likes to portray Ukraine as a failed state with Nazi/fascist hordes "genociding" ethnic Russian and that the U.S. supports this, much in the way it claims the U.S. supports ISIS in Syria. Anyway, the significance of this video, in which the fighters burned a Dutch flag, is that it was released around the same time a referendum was going to take place in the Netherlands, regarding Ukraine being allowed to sign the EU Association Agreement. This video was thoroughly debunked by the goods folks over at Bellingcat. It proved the video itself was fake and that Russian trolls began a concerted campaign to spread the video on the web. Interestingly, Bellingcat's website was hacked and defaced by CyberBerkut. I wonder why? They've also been implicated in DDoS attacks on NATO, Ukrainian, and German government websites.
Another example is when CyberBerkut pretended to hack documents from Ukraine's SBU. One document was a confidential letter from Vasili Gritsak (SBU's First Deputy Chairman and the head of its Anti-Terrorism Center) to Hennadiy Kuznetsov (SBU Colonel, then head of Special Operations Center A, a unit responsible for special anti-terrorist operations), appearing to show Gritsak directing Kuznetsov to carry out "false flag" attacks in Eastern Ukraine to blame on pro-Russian separatists. The objective of forging these documents and then pretending to hack them from Ukraine's SBU was to make it look like pro-Russian separatists were being unfairly blamed for civilian deaths.
Interestingly, Russia disinformation is obsessed with making anything that puts Russia in a bad light a "false flag." Russian trolls have been caught posting conspiracy theories of MH17 being a CIA/NATO/Ukrainian false flag or that they were aiming for Putin's plane but accidentally hit MH17. A laughable theory, but one that many in Russia accept.
Here are some more examples of blatantly clear Russian disinformation:
Russian troll factory spreading disinformation about murdered opposition activist Boris Nemtsov's death being a CIA false flag to destabilize Russia:
When opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was shot dead within sight of the Kremlin in March, suspicion immediately fell on those with links to Russian president Vladimir Putin.
Ms Savchuk said the orders at the Troll Factory were handed down quickly.
"They were just told: 'Nemtsov is killed. Everyone should urgently concentrate on this job. We shall write this and that'," she said.
The above tactic of calling everything a "false flag, such as MH17, is a good example of what Russia is trying to achieve: confusion and paralysis in the minds of Westerners so they question anything critical of Russia. Critics of Russia are smeared as being "anti-Russia", "Russophobic", "neocons", "warmongers", etc. Elliot Higgins and former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, have been demonized in the Russian media and Russian trolls online.
The unofficial Russian branch of Anonymous (Shaltai Boltai) hacked the "Internet Research Agency" - a well known Russian troll farm - and leaked everything - emails, names, contact information, salaries, lists of troll accounts, assignments, you name it.
Torrent link of dump:
EDIT: Just realized the torrent link is dead and that there are actually three parts to the archive. Here are working MEGA mirrors for the 3 files:
Please make sure you scan them with an anti-virus, as it's possible Russian intelligence embedded spyware within the archives and re-upped them online to spy on the few people in the world who have an interest in these things. Sounds paranoid, but better to stay safe.
Curiously, their website is blocked in Russia - you can't access it in there.
The membership of CyberBerkut is anonymous, but reportedly includes former officers in the Crimean Berkut. That unit was part of Ukraine's Interior Ministry until Crimea's March 2014 annexation, upon which the Crimean Berkut was incorporated into Russia's Interior Ministry. CyberBerkut's "Ukrainian identity" is vigorously asserted, however, as it postures as an internal opposition group.
Cyberattacks and Leaks Though Front Groups
Snowden also blamed the recent NSA cyberweapons leaks on Russia. Snowden's tweets in full (bolded for emphasis by me):
The hack of an NSA malware staging server is not unprecedented, but the publication of the take is. Here's what you need to know: (1/x)
1) NSA traces and targets malware C2 servers in a practice called Counter Computer Network Exploitation, or CCNE. So do our rivals.
2) NSA is often lurking undetected for years on the C2 and ORBs (proxy hops) of state hackers. This is how we follow their operations.
3) This is how we steal their rivals' hacking tools and reverse-engineer them to create "fingerprints" to help us detect them in the future.
4) Here's where it gets interesting: the NSA is not made of magic. Our rivals do the same thing to us -- and occasionally succeed.
5) Knowing this, NSA's hackers (TAO) are told not to leave their hack tools ("binaries") on the server after an op. But people get lazy.
6) What's new? NSA malware staging servers getting hacked by a rival is not new. A rival publicly demonstrating they have done so is.
7) Why did they do it? No one knows, but I suspect this is more diplomacy than intelligence, related to the escalation around the DNC hack.
8) Circumstantial evidence and conventional wisdom indicates Russian responsibility. Here's why that is significant:
9) This leak is likely a warning that someone can prove US responsibility for any attacks that originated from this malware server.
10) That could have significant foreign policy consequences. Particularly if any of those operations targeted US allies.
11) Particularly if any of those operations targeted elections.
12) Accordingly, this may be an effort to influence the calculus of decision-makers wondering how sharply to respond to the DNC hacks.
13) TL;DR: This leak looks like a somebody sending a message that an escalation in the attribution game could get messy fast.
Bonus: When I came forward, NSA would have migrated offensive operations to new servers as a precaution - it's cheap and easy. So? So...
The undetected hacker squatting on this NSA server lost access in June 2013. Rare public data point on the positive results of the leak.
Only a state has the power to leak NSA's weapons left on a server. I agree with Snowden's assessment that it was Russia. His reasoning is that this is a warning to America. Before the FBI publicly announces those behind the DNC leak, Russia is warning the U.S. that they can prove the U.S. hacking into computers too.
What surprises me most is how naive the West has become. We're being bombarded with leaks on an almost weekly basis now. Most people have probably focused on the DNC leaks, but did you know that a group calling itself "DCLeaks" leaked the internal documents of liberal George Soros' Open Society Foundation AND the private emails of the NATO general? Here's a look at their Twitter account (tell me if you notice their emphasis on a certain country):
Hacked NATO general defends plotting to push Obama to escalate tensions with Russia
Breedlove’s war: Emails show ex-NATO general plotting US conflict with Russia
Dangerous Propaganda: Network Close To NATO Military Leader Fueled Ukraine Conflict
Emails show Obama saw US involvement in Russia talks as a 'threat'
'Gen. plotted against Obama on Russia'
Check George Soros's OSF plans to counter Russian policy and traditional values
All they post are tweets relevant to Russia.
Also, Russia hates NATO and Soros, which are the only topics the leaks from DCLeaks talk about.
What's most interesting is that the Russians lost access to their hacked NSA computer June 2013 directly because of the actions of Snowden. Snowden claims that after he outed the secrets of the NSA, the NSA was forced to change the computers it uses for offensive operations, thus booting out the Russians too.
We now have proof of four leaks in mere weeks, all done by Russia, to influence Americans' opinions on the 2016 election (pro-Trump), to hate NATO, to publicly embarrass the NSA and warn the FBI of the consequences of announcing Russia was behind the DNC leaks, and disinformation about Soros to lure Trump supporters. This is unprecedented in Western history - Cold War active measures are back. They are using fake personas - "Guccifer2.0", "DCLeaks", and now "The Shadow Brokers" - the NSA weapons leakers - to destabilize the U.S.
Assange doesn't care about the truth. He only cares at getting back at Clinton. He's been handed no less than 4 separate leaks in the past few weeks (DNC emails, Soros foundation's intranet documents, NATO general's emails, and NSA cyber weapons). He's a whistleblower with a talented background in programming/hacking just like Snowden. He should be feeling suspicious about the large number of leaks regarding the U.S. But he hasn't publicly mentioned it - he knows it's Russia, but won't admit it. As an interesting aside, Guccifer2.0 claimed on Twitter that he gave Assange the DNC emails. If so, why is Assange spreading conspiracy theories about the dead DNC staffer, Seth Rich? Strange indeed.
Russian Propaganda in the West: Websites and Astroturfers
Russia is relying on naive Westerners to hate NATO and Soros. In other words, useful idiots. These people tend to be Conservative, Christian,, and conspiracy theorists to boot. They tend to be anti-establishment. Basically, much of the Republican base. Putin is popular among Republicans since he is viewed as a strongman and Conservative types are attracted to that. Furthermore, the Conservative media has portrayed Putin as a saviour of Christianity and in comparison to Obama, who they view as a secret Muslim Socialist/Communist from Kenya, he is respected much more by those on the Right. Russian Active Measure takes this into account. As an example, a well known anonymous hoaxer named "Sorcha Faal" - who claims to have access to the GRU/SVR/FSB - has since 2005 posted various hoax articles all favourable to Russia and pandering to the Right. Such examples include his/her article on "Putin declaring Black Lives Matter (BLM) a terrorist organization," something obviously false and never even confirmed. And yet, those who planted this story knew Republicans hate BLM since they are anti-cop and by extension, anti-authority, anathema to patriotic Rightists. Other examples include frequent commentary on Soros trying to reduce the birth rate and promote inter-ethnic marriage, and of course, the refugee crisis in Europe. The latter crisis is more applicable to Europe and Russian Active Measures has taken that into account. Countless viral news sites have popped up since 2014, all focused on the refugee crisis with anti-migrant commentary written by anonymous authors. These websites are extremely pro-Russian, anti-NATO, and frequently post anti-EU articles, along with conspiracy theories. These websites have popped up all over Europe in various languages. Here is a partial list of them, with analysis by a keen Russian disinformation-watcher, who analyzed the funding, founders, WHOIS, and social media links of these websites:
eadaily.com Analysis - Russian
southfront.org Analysis - Website analyzing Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts with a pro-Russian and anti-NATO/U.S. bent.
xxivek.net Analysis - Russian
geworld.ge Analysis - Greek
aeronet.cz Analysis - Czech Republic
strategic-culture.org Analysis - Created by Strategic Culture Foundation based in Moscow and aligned with the Centre for Research on Globalization in Canada, and with the Communist Party of China's 4th Media operation.
I see from reddit.com/r/The_Donald that you people already hate Soros (links often lead to Russian disinformation websites) and think NATO should turn into a protection racket, ignoring basic hegemonic theory and forward deployment strategy of the U.S. near Russia and China.
As an example, take a look at this conspiracy theory (and irrational) self post from /r/The_Donald:
And look at one of the more popular comments:
Political Control
One extremely far-right party in Hungary, called Jobbik, that is vehemently pro-Russian, was investigated by an independent Hungarian journalist, who wrote an article detailing the long-running recruitment of a Hungarian man, Béla Kovács, by Russia, after he married another KGB agent from Russia whom he met in Japan, when his father worked at the Hungarian embassy there. His new wife exposed him to the fact that he himself had been adopted and his real father was a KGB agent. Kovács then went to Russia and upon returning, had become pro-Russian and wealthy enough to fund a new Hungarian political party, called Jobbik, who he would later represent in the European Parliament. His father, who worked at the Hungarian embassy in Japan (a country thoroughly infiltrated by the Soviets due to its weak intelligence system) during the Cold War, was told by a stationed Hungarian intelligence officer that this woman his son had met was a long-running KGB agent that had previously married not only a Japanese nuclear scientist (presumably for access to nuclear technology) but also an Austrian underworld criminal (presumably for an Austrian passport to enable free travel through the EU's Schengen Zone). Most likely, she recruited Kovács to the KGB by telling him his father was a KGB agent and that he was adopted. The Jobbik party is extremely pro-Russian and borderline neo-Nazi. Russia has been accused of funding and developing it through Kovács. Both Kovács and his wife are under investigation.
Just goes to show how far back Russia has infiltrated European parties.
Read the fascinating investigation: A glorious match made in Russia
Russia is also using Alexander Dugin to cultivates ties with far-right parties in Europe:
British, French, Dutch, Spanish Hungarian, Slovakian, Serbian, and Czech far-right parties all connected to the Kremlin going back decades.
Here are some articles about Russia's usage of online trolls:
Domestic disinformation exists too:
An example of a fake Russian-created Twitter profile is this profile with 36K tweets in 6 months:https://twitter.com/FOXLADY9
Pro Pegida/ Pro Russia/ Anti Migrant Invasions/ Anti Islam/ I'm a Pinot Coloda Girl Love to Walk in the Rain/Enjoy a good Laugh/Clean Fun/Sassy/Outspoken
East Europe
Joined February 2016
Response by the West
This may sound cheesy, but the West doesn't do disinformation. Even during the Cold War, the side known for disinformation (Active Measures) was the Soviet block, not the West. Russia is an authoritarian country. It has no qualms paying thousands of people to spread pro-Kremlin propaganda online.
Europe has set up some sort of media monitoring centre, called "East StratCom Task Force", to counter Russian propaganda, that they created in March of 2015. It's one of the most pathetic and useless things I've even seen. All they do is make a weekly .pdf file of Russia's lies and conspiracy theories Russian trolls try to spread online. They thenupload said pdf file to some random corner of the web and call that their "response". Passive but not active.
The U.S. isn't doing anything to debunk the disinformation the Russian trolls are spreading. We need to create a counter-narrative to Russia's claims. Part of this means we have to be on the right side of the truth. Whether you agree or not, the people of Crimea voted to join Russia and earlier polls going back to the 90s indicate they've always supported this. Whenever Obama says "Crimea was annexed", his statements are translated/subtitled to Russian and put on YouTube for the Russians to be outraged at, because in their view, they're being punished for democracy. This benefits Putin and demonizes the West's arguments, so whenever we try and prove Putin is corrupt, the Russian populace assumes we're lying and smearing him. They've been mentally conditioned to ignore criticism of Putin. Putin's approval ratings are the highest in the world. Before the Crimea issue, they were hovering in the 60s, not much higher than where Obama is now. Afterwards, in February 2014, they skyrocketed to the 90s range. We in the West must accept that our rhetoric and message are too harsh for Russians. We should tone down the Crimea rhetoric and instead, focus on other things that irk Russia, like corruption in Putin's party, or pro-Russian rebels in E. Ukraine committing heinous crimes/torture.
For now, read some of this history regarding Soviet Active Measures (relevant to our current situation):
No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Friday, September 30, 2016

Trump the Slumlord and Ego-maniac

No one has mentioned it at all that I've noticed during the race- maybe because it's so ridiculously moustache twirlingly awful that it barely seems real- but everyone I knew growing up in NYC thought of Trump as a fucking slumlord because of how he acted upon the acquisition of 100 Central Park South.

So he bought this building in 1981 with the intention of tearing it down and building a luxury condo tower. Just one problem- the building was filled with rent stabilized tenants.

In 1982 IN THE MIDDLE OF JANUARY he sent tenants, many of whom were older to elderly, immediate eviction notices- out in one week or their stuff was getting thrown out into the street. These were tenants in good standing who hadn't broken their leases. One woman was charged that the building wasn't her primary residence so she was being tossed out even though the only other residence she had ever had had burned down years before. She refused to leave so her water and gas was shut off. He then filed fake non-payment charges against another, which were thrown out when they were able produce documentation of Trump's management company canceling his rent checks.

So after that failed he filled the halls with garbage that attracted rats and roaches, which he then refused to have exterminated and told tenants they and their guests had to use the trash elevators to get into the building, including patients in a dentists office. He told the super to make absolutely no repairs. By the end it got so bad that tenants were able to provide pictures to the court of mushrooms growing out of the carpet in hallways.

He then told the city and tenants that he was going to house de-institutionalized homeless in all the empty units in the building, which the city refused, on grounds of danger to tenants and his intention to tear the building down. He tried to do it anyway- in typical Trump fashion he said it was because he cared so much about the plight of the homeless.

Suzanne Blackmer one of the tenants said in 1987:

“He has such an ego, he wants to be Jesus. He wants to be Hitler. He wants to be the most powerful thing in the world.”

When nothing would budge them Trump tried to sue the hold outs for extortion and his suit was dismissed with prejudice. They counter sued for harassment. The case was finally settled in 1998, when an appellate court ruled that Trump could turn the vacant apartments into condos and sell them, but the 51 remaining rent-regulated tenants could stay.

And just because it's a fun, unrelated little tidbit I stumbled across when fact checking this with sources from the 80's here's a quote from the NYT March 9, 1985:
A recent profile in The Washington Post quoted him as saying he was ready to take on new, world-sized tasks - referring to his heretofore unrevealed wish to become the nation's negotiator on arms limitation with the Soviet Union. He says he's a master negotiator, and could do a better job on arms talks than ''the kind of representatives that I have seen in the past.'' Becoming an expert on nuclear weaponry would be easy, he said. ''It would take an hour and a half to learn everything there is to learn about missiles,'' he explained. ''I think I know most of it anyway. You're talking about just getting updated on a situation.'' Maybe Mr. Trump should take the afternoon off to study up on missiles and leave the tenants of 100 Central Park South alone.

No comments:
Labels:

401K, Retirement, and why Americans are Fucked



I was born in 1977, it's not just millenials. And for people who are teenagers now I can say at least in my experience that YES things are worse for everyone now than they were 20 years ago.

Even my parents who grew up in the 60s say that things are quantifiably worse for working Americans.
  • In the last 30 years we have witnessed (among other things):
  • The largest economic downturn since the depression
  • Skyrocketing housing prices that lock most families out of home ownership in major urban areas.
  • Financial scandals on an unprecedented scale (Arthur Andersen, Worldcom, Tyco, Enron) and hardly anyone was punished.
  • Two major wars. We fought in Iraq for 8 years and in Afghanistan for 13 years. We lost a combined 6,000+ soldiers with tens of thousands more wounded and spent 1.7 trillion dollars with 400 billion more that will be spent in the future.
  • The cost of education is becoming all but unobtainable. Rising education costs mean that millions are locked out of home and car ownership because of student loan payments.
  • The cost of medical care is unsustainable and out of reach for most families. A single illness even with insurance could bankrupt your family and decades worth of labor.
  • The loss of both unions and pensions. You can track the decline in unions and the decline in real wages across the decades along with the loss of benefits. If you want to chime in with "well I'm ok... have..." well good for you. Most people don't. Most young Americans today simply will never retire even in their final years. A lack of social security, a lack of pensions, and a lack of viable options for saving (no 401k is not sustainable but that is a whole other rant) means that we will be able to save very little in our working lives.
For people that are curious, this didn't just come about. This is a process that has been underway for 40 years. The top 1% of the country (and really its more like the top 1% of the 1%) have actively funded lobbyists and campaigns and laws at the local level all the way to DC to fundamentally strip workers of their rights, roll back protections for working families, undermine social safety nets, reduce their tax burden at the expense of everyone else, eliminate the ability for the elderly to retire in security, and have squandered trillions of dollars to "protect American interests" which basically means the interests of a few connected corporations.

So yeah.... it's no wonder people don't trust major institutions. Especially now that we're witnessing a presidential campaign that consists of an almost Machiavellian woman running against a man who is almost literally insane.

So to start I have to tell you a bit of my background. I worked in finance which among other things included working as a pension and defined contribution auditor along with working in a bank for a time.

I'll start with my anecdotes and a bit of history. The piece of legislation that allowed the 401(k) was created in the 1970s as a way to offer more benefits to high-wage executives in lieu of additional payments. The intent was originally to create an additional way for high-earning executives to put more money aside for retirement as a BONUS to what they were already getting from their companies and from social security. It was never intended even from the start to be a replacement for pensions or social security. We have to make that very very clear from the outset.

It was designed to offer extra compensation to already well-off employees as a way to spruce up fringe benefit packages.

You can read a bit about the history of the plan here.

And you can check out the wiki here#History)

Obviously by the 80s it didn't stay that way and it soon became the norm to offer defined contribution plans to office workers.

Cut to today.

I worked as an auditor and saw the insides of plans for hundreds of companies and in my experience what I saw made me begin to question the viability and the sanctity of people always pushing the 401(k) as a way to retire. My anecdotal experience was that in a company of roughly 100 people you would have 1, maybe 2 employees who were maxing out their contributions. Those were always the higher earners, senior engineers, CFOs, assistant controllers, presidents, those types. The average account balance that I saw for employees was usually between 5 and $10,000 even after years of contributions. The average balance for executives (those 1 or 2 people) was around $100,000. My anecdotal experience seems to be a bit low according to stats because the average balance is actually all over the map.

Some figures that I've read say people have as little as $19,000 in their 401(k).

Investopedia has a decent breakdown of balances by age but point to the fact that it is always too low to sustain people in retirement.

The Economic Policy Institute says the average balance is around $34,000 but this varies widely by race, income, and age so you have to dig a big, but again the takeaway is that Americans have almost nothing saved in their 401(k) plans.

Zerohedge (which I don't consider a good source most of the time) has a fairly accurate stat in this case saying that the average contribution is a very low $2,700 a year, which is certainly not enough to retire on even with growth and dividends.

The GAO (which is a fantastic source) has a great read that is fairly dry. The tldr is that we don't have enough saved for retirement and aren't contributing enough This talks about income from all sources not just 401(k)

So we're contributing... not that much to our 401(k) plans so how will that affect us in retirement?

Well it won't give us income.

Motley fool has a decent writeup saying that at current and average saving rates, the 401(k) will provide only around $4,000 a year.

That is supplemental income that might help you pay your electric bill or buy some extra groceries, but you certainly can't live on that.

But that applies to everyone right? Everyone will at least have something in retirement right?

Not even close.

Around 50% of households in the US aren't even eligible for a 401(k) and of the people that are eligible only a portion of them contribute. So you have close to 70% of Americans NOT contributing to a plan.

This is a structural crisis that needs to be addressed at the national level because more than 2/3rds of Americans aren't putting money away for their retirement and of the ones that are, most will not have enough to do anything beyond supplement a very meager existence.

A full 30% of workers have literally zero dollars saved for retirement.

So at this point you could say, well why don't people simply contribute more or get into a plan... there are Roth IRAs there are 403(b) plans there are ways to save right? And it's because we simply don't have the money. Families cannot afford to put aside even more money because real wages aren't rising at the same time that housing, education, food, and healthcare are eating what we have left.

Most households don't even have $1,000 in savings.

Most households can't even cover an unexpected $500 bill

So how does that last part relate to my talk about 401(k) plans?

We as a nation are prioritizing the wrong way to save. The 401(k) is an addendum policy for wealthy workers that spread and became the "norm" but it simply doesn't work when implemented as a main way to save. That is why I say that it is unsustainable. Of the people that do save (and you can watch the John Oliver on this) fees are a hugely contentious issue that can destroy people's contributions.

It's a broken policy for savings that needs to be scrapped.

So what is the solution? Well... as a former financial insider, banker, analyst, and auditor my take is this... we need a legally protected, quasi-independent nationalized system that everyone contributes to.

One of the biggest issues with social security is that it IS solvent but congress keeps borrowing from the trust with limited assurances that they can pay the money back. Social security DOES work if you don't spend the money you collect for it on other things.

We need something held in trust that legally cannot be touched by Congress held in an entity similar to the Fed (quasi independent) that will hold individually numbered accounts for all of us. When we're born you get something like $1,000 put into that fund and as long as your parents are working, from birth you get another $500 or $1,000 a year put into that fund until your 18th birthday. Then it's on you and there would be 3 components. Your contributions, your employers contributions and the government's contribution.

You could use actuaries to create a pension that has money coming from tax revenues (the government portion) you could include contributions you make to the plan (your side of the contributions) and your employer would contribute to your account at a rate that they could set (so this could be part of how they compete with other employers). You have a 3 legged stool basically. Three sources of money in and one source of money out.

That quasi independent agency would then have a fiduciary responsibility to oversee all of those assets (again just like a pension) and invest in AAA rated bonds, safe municipal projects, and a broad base of blue chip stocks and an index of all the funds on the market.

You could even offer a limited range of options like "low, medium, and high" for risk tolerance where the low would invest only in things like low interest treasury bills, municipal bonds, and AAA rated projects that pay a low but dependable amount of interest, medium risk could be a blend of index funds and bonds, and the high risk could all be stocks in an index fund. This would provide for growth and investment, ensure all Americans get a fair go at retirement, and ensure that Congress can't purloin the proceeds with a promise to simply pay it back at an unforseen date.

We need to try something new and the private market is not the solution because when you try to separate people from their money you create perverse incentives. The government should ABSOLUTELY be involved in securing people's retirements and ability to provide for themselves in their old age.

I know this is a long answer but I hope this was a well-thought out response to your question and I hope it encourages you to do further reading. This is only my opinion based on my experience in industry but I feel it is a valid opinion backed by economic data and experience.

No comments:
Labels: , ,

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

BoJack Horseman has Adult ADHD

I firmly believe Bojack suffers from adult ADHD. I have it myself, as well as my dad and boyfriend having it, so I am very familiar with the symptoms and presentation, but I will explain for those less familiar. What I'm gonna do is copy the info about adult ADHD from the Mayo Clinic website and explain, point by point, why I see it in Bojack.
Adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a mental health disorder that includes a combination of persistent problems, such as difficulty paying attention, hyperactivity and impulsive behavior. Adult ADHD can lead to unstable relationships, poor work or school performance, low self-esteem, and other problems.
So obviously we have some commonalities already, but that's far from damning; alcoholism, depression, anxiety, etc all have similar effects.
Adult ADHD symptoms may not be as clear as ADHD symptoms in children. In adults, hyperactivity may decrease, but struggles with impulsiveness, restlessness and difficulty paying attention may continue.
I think a big reason this isn't often discussed is because few people even know about adult ADHD and would think of someone like Andy Dwyer from Parks and Rec as adult ADHD (when I would say he's just goofy!) and think of Bojack as purely depressed, when really adult ADHD can bring a lot of darkness into your life.
Many adults with ADHD aren't aware they have it — they just know that everyday tasks can be a challenge.
When Diane says "We're responsible for our own happiness" Bojack responds "That's depressing" because he "can't even be responsible for [his] own breakfast." Cut to Bojack calling out to Todd when he spills the cereal.

I know this is a silly joke and I laughed at it, but it is kinda reality for me. When you have ADHD, especiallyunmedicated, everything feels so overwhelming. I've literally cried over spilled milk because of the way everything piles up on each other in my mind. Some days when I have a lot to do I end up paralyzed by anxiety and my body just says "nope, go to sleep."
Adults with ADHD may find it difficult to focus and prioritize, leading to missed deadlines and forgotten meetings or social plans.
Remember when Bojack spent 6 hours playing with fonts? That's the most quintessential ADHD shit ever. I had to explain it to my mom like this, since my mom does not have ADHD and has trouble relating to my dad and I sometimes.

For most people, you'll come up against a task and if it's hard or unpleasant or boring, you'll be tempted to do something else, but if you remove the distractions you can will yourself into focusing on it. I literally can't will myself into focusing sometimes. Sure, sometimes I can, but even then it will be for short bursts. Sometimes I could be in an empty room, with nothing but white walls, no doors and windows, with just my homework and I would sit and stare at a wall rather than do my work. My mind just refuses to devote any energy to the task at hand. I can't "will myself" to focus anymore than you can "will yourself" to run a 4 minute mile. You might be able to do it with lots of training and practice and help and support, but you won't learn to do it in a day. And if you try, your legs will just give out.
The inability to control impulses can range from impatience waiting in line or driving in traffic to mood swings and outbursts of anger.
This one we see a lot. Bojack is very moody and, believe it or not, that is very typical of people with ADHD. He lashes out at people all the time, and he's extremely impulsive, like when he fired Princess Caroline so they could be together only to abandon that fantasy hours later.
Adult ADHD symptoms may include:
Impulsiveness
Another example is Bojack's competition with Mr. Peanutbutter, up to and including stealing the D from the Hollywoo sign. Also, almost sleeping with Penny and trying to sleep with Charlotte when her husband was literally right there.
Disorganization and problems prioritizing, poor time management skills, problems focusing on a task
The first time I thought I saw ADHD in Bojack is when he is trying to write his memoirs and yells at Todd for being loud, then decides he needs to vacuum right now, then has to go buy more vacuums to clean out his other vacuums... That's all ADHD and I find myself doing it all the time. "Well I can't start my homework with a slow computer, lemme just defrag the disk real quick... Oh and I was gonna shower, I should do that... Ooh, I need to eat too... Better go to the market...

Suddenly it's been 8 hours and I've done nothing I needed to do.
Trouble multitasking
This one hasn't been brought up a lot, I can't think of a specific example.
Excessive activity or restlessness
Keep in mind that this doesn't just mean fidgeting or being active. Bojack is "restless" in that he requires constant superficial and materialistic change. Always needs friends and a party to go to, he can't just sit and be.
Poor planning
This should be obvious. Despite planning some things well (sabotaging the Rock Opera, for instance) he's very bad at planning other, more important things (like how he was supposed to get in shape for Secretariat but instead got a shitty audio book and ran, like, once).
Low frustration tolerance
Remember when Bojack ended up on national news because of a squabble over a box of muffins? And then decided to call into the news station because he was so frustrated that the guy didn't "properly call dibs"?
Frequent mood swings
Self explanatory really
Problems following through and completing tasks
Memoirs, Ethan Around, even Secretariat to an extent are examples of this.
Hot temper
Again, pretty self explanatory. I love the line "Clean up your shit, Todd" but it's a pretty rude thing to say to a friend in reality. He also is famous for his outbursts after Diane's book, noted by one of the girls he dats ("Is this one of your famous Bojack rants?")
Trouble coping with stress
Remember when Bojack had a panic attack because someone wanted him to make a phone call? Yeah, that was way too real to me.
Risk of ADHD may increase if:

You have blood relatives, such as a parent or sibling, with ADHD or another mental health disorder
I'd be surprised if Bojack's mom or dad didn't have at least one mental health disorder.
Your mother smoked, drank alcohol or used drugs during pregnancy
I doubt Bojack's mom, who would've given birth in the 1960's, stopped smoking and drinking during her pregnancy.
As a child, you were exposed to environmental toxins — such as lead, found mainly in paint and pipes in older buildings
I know it's a bit of a stretch but he was obviously not well supervised as a kid
You were born prematurely
Nothing relevant here.

ADHD can make life difficult for you. ADHD has been linked to:

Poor school or work performance
"What are YOU doing here??" As soon as work for Bojack became challenging at all, he almost fell apart completely.
Unemployment
No one in the industry wants to work with Bojack, as noted in the scene where Princess Caroline tried to find him work in season 1.
Trouble with the law
Thank God he's famous because God knows how many laws he's broken.
Alcohol or other substance abuse
Yeah.
Frequent car accidents or other accidents
I know most of his car accidents have been due to intoxication, but remember when he was on the phone with Princess Caroline and almost hit that Armadillo, or when he was with Wanda and hit the stag.
Unstable relationships
I mean
Poor physical and mental health
Yeah Bojack is okay right now, but he's overweight, binges on food and drugs, and was out of breath at the end of his driveway.
Poor self-image
Also self-explanatory, but worth more than a passing mention. ADHD, especially when it's undiagnosed, can make you feel shitty about yourself. It feels like you're incapable of the simplest fo tasks simply because your brain works differently and you need different strategies than most people. I constantly feel like I just need to "try harder" and I'll be better, when in reality I need to approach problems with an entirely different mindset than other people do.

Suicide attempts
I think we saw that in the last season at the Oscar party.
Although ADHD doesn't cause other psychological or developmental problems, other disorders often occur along with ADHD and make treatment more challenging. These include:

Mood disorders. Many adults with ADHD also have depression, bipolar disorder or another mood disorder. While mood problems aren't necessarily due directly to ADHD, a repeated pattern of failures and frustrations due to ADHD can worsen depression.
My therapist calls this cycling, and people with ADHD are extremely susceptible to it. You feel shitty about yourself, so you change something up. Maybe you go on a diet, or buy a new planner, or start studying more rigorously. But instead of approaching it with an ADHD mindset, you approach it with a "whip myself into shape" mindset. You inevitably fail, because you can't will away a mental illness, and then you feel worse for it, and the cycle continues.

Anxiety disorders. Anxiety disorders occur fairly often in adults with ADHD. Anxiety disorders may cause overwhelming worry, nervousness and other symptoms. Anxiety can be made worse by the challenges and setbacks caused by ADHD.
Interesting side note: I suffer from PTSD and anxiety as well as ADHD. The absolute worse my anxiety is other than literally during a panic attack is a in the morning before I take my medication, even though ADHD medication should technically make anxiety worse. ADHD medication is a stimulant. In my case, my morning anxiety is caused by my ADHD. I often wake up feeling like a gun just went off in my house, with my heart pounding and my hands shaking, and it doesn't get better until I take my meds.
Other psychiatric disorders. Adults with ADHD are at increased risk of other psychiatric disorders, such as personality disorders, intermittent explosive disorder and substance abuse.
Self-medicating for ADHD combined with impulsiveness is a ripe combination for substance abuse. We see it directly when he's trying to finish the book. He tries all kinds of strategies to motivate himself, but none of them work, so he defaults to drugs.
Learning disabilities. Adults with ADHD may score lower on academic testing than would be expected for their age, intelligence and education. Learning disabilities can include problems with understanding and communicating.
Not sure if we see this in Bojack but I will say I think he's a terrible communicator.
Diagnosis of ADHD in adults can be difficult because certain ADHD symptoms are similar to those caused by other conditions, such as anxiety or mood disorders. And many adults with ADHD also have at least one other mental health condition, such as depression or anxiety.
I know it says it above, but comorbidity with ADHD is INSANELY high. I don't have the numbers in front of me but if I'm remembering correctly you're more likely to have ADHD plus something else than you are to have ADHD alone.

Anyway, I know that was super rambly, but that's my analysis.

2 comments:
Labels: ,

Why Indianans Hate Mike Pence

There's a difference between being a representative and being a governor.

As a representative, you push for your special interests.

As a governor, you do what's best for your state.

Pence got the endorsement from the much-liked former Republican governor Mitch Daniels (now president of Purdue) basically with the promise that he wouldn't pursue a social agenda. Mitch Daniels was liked because he focused almost exclusively on the economy and government efficiency. He gave no fucks about social issues, and it was implied that Pence, as the successor of Daniels, would set aside the social dogmas that he was known for and govern a state that was on a very good path, economically, after Mitch Daniels' two terms.

He didn't do that.

From day one, Pence didn't govern--he played national GOP politics. Whatever the big firey debate of the day was among the national GOP, he grabbed ahold of it and pretended to be its conservative crusader, even if it had absolutely zero relevance to the state of Indiana. He spent time, money, and resources on championing issues that Hoosiers didn't care about or didn't support, because he wanted to pander to the National GOP's ultra conservative base for his future career. Essentially, he was using Indiana as a stepping stone. He never cared about being governor. He always had higher aspirations, and the governorship was a stepping stone to a higher federal office. Most Hoosiers, left or right on the political spectrum, espouse this opinion about him.

As I said before, Mitch Daniels literally gave no fucks about social issues. Indiana is generally a conservative state, but it's never been a state particularly hung up on social issues, and it's never been a state that follows the national GOP's social platform. Indiana has, for as long as I've been alive, been a business Republican state--politicians like the Bushes, Mitt Romney, etc. We voted Obama into office, and prior to Mitch Daniels in 2005, we had 16 straight years of Democratic governorship. Indianapolis, the capital and largest city in the state, routinely switched between Republican and Democrat mayors, and it has managed to have long-term plans and continue its momentum regardless of which party is in office.

So Pence, with his national conservative GOP politics, has been an aberration that has directly harmed Indiana's image and its pocket book.

In the three years since Pence took office, he:
  • Pushed through legislation making harsher penalties for drug crimes against the protests of numerous major legal organizations including the Indiana Bar Association, as well as most Hoosiers
  • Inherited a phenomenal state balance sheet from Mitch Daniels and used it as an excuse to push tax cuts so extreme (would have caused a tremendous deficit) that the Republican-controlled Congress shut him down
  • Tried and failed to amend the Indiana constitution to ban gay marriage, despite widespread polling that showed that Hoosiers didn't support it, and despite the vociferous condemnation of virtually every major business in the state
  • Since his gay marriage amendment failed, he literally, as payback (not exaggerating, the signing ceremony was invite only, no media was allowed or invited, but someone leaked a picture that showed Pence surrounded by well-known anti-LGBT extremists), came back with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which was a genuine political circus. It humiliated Indiana on the national stage, directly harmed Indianapolis, and was met with, perhaps, the fiercest backlash by the people of any state in the Union. The extraordinary protests of Hoosiers and businesses allowed the state GOP leaders to basically coerce--to his visible chagrin--Pence to amend the law and "fix it" (this was actually the front page of the biggest newspaper in Indiana).
  • The RFRA was such a debacle that Pence ended up hiring an expensive out-of-state public relations firm to heal Indiana's national image. He couldn't answer why he chose an out-of-state firm. He couldn't answer why he chose such an expensive firm, when there are many firms in Indiana that could have done the job. It was eventually canceled, and was yet another waste of taxpayer money. To date, the RFRA has cost Indianapolis (a city that fought against it, changed the official tourism website to rainbow colors, and hung a huge rainbow banner at the airport) $60 million, and the total cost--to the economy and reputation--to the rest of the state is unknown.
  • During the gay marriage supreme court fight, he literally sent the Indiana attorney general to other states to advise them on how to craft their laws and fight gay marriage nationally. He did this on the taxpayer dollar. He continued to spend taxpayer money fighting gay marriage in the courts and with lawsuits despite, at the time, everyone knowing what the Supreme Court decision was going to be. It was basically a political stand by Pence; an expensive political stand that Hoosiers didn't support.
  • He fought to pass a law preventing cities from passing their own minimum wage statutes. Is this "small government"?
  • He has acted like a strongman (think Turkey's Erdoğan), doing everything in his power to make Glenda Ritz, the state superintendent and an elected official, quit her job, and barring that, stripping her of the power given to her by the Indiana constitute and the Hoosiers that elected her through backroom deals, conspiracy, and highly technical legal challenges. Just Google "Mike Pence Glenda Ritz." You could write a thesis on it.
  • Everyone, literally everyone, was on board for receiving a huge federal grant for preschool funding. The Indiana Department of Education was literally in the final stages of the application process--and the federal government was happy with Indiana and going to give us an especially large chunk of money--when Pence came in and shut it down for no reason because accepting money from the feds became politically untenable among the national GOP tea partier crowd. And, of course, you can't be elected president--Pence's eyes were always on the future--without support from the GOP's far right base. After shutting down the process, he has recently been opining that it would be a good idea to get federal money to fund preschools... A year after he shit all over the Dept of Education's proposal to do just that.
  • The HIV epidemic in southern Indiana is out of control and among the worst in the country. Of course, we could provide free needles for heroin addicts like has been done in many states to curb HIV problems, but that is politically repugnant to Mike Pence. He also managed to get the Planned Parenthoods in that part of the state shut down, eliminating the opportunity for poor people to get tested. The HIV epidemic, which never had to be an epidemic, continues, and Pence gets to push the problem on our future governor as he goes to join Trump on the national stage.
  • Speaking of Planned Parenthood, Pence is highly proud of his accomplishment at passing the single most restrictive abortion law since Roe vs Wade. The law, HEA 1337 is far stricter than anything even in the Deep South and is almost certainly unconstitutional. He knows that it's probably unconstitutional. Nevertheless, Indiana taxpayers will spend millions of dollars for our attorney general to fight the law all the way to the Supreme Court, just so Pence could make his political statement.
  • He literally tried to make a state-run news agency that he would then give exclusive interviews and access to. I don't even know if that's legal, but he tried to do it and was promptly crucified by the media and even his own party.
  • He asserted authority to ban Syrian refugees from being settled in Indiana. He has no authority. No governor has. He knew that, but he was planning to be a GOP presidential candidate, and he needed to show that he was strong and anti-Muslim refugee to appease the national GOP base. He took leadership role in this discriminatory crusade, appearing on national TV to preach his ignorance. This particular event managed to throw multiple refugee settlement organizations into disarray--which, by the way, actually include the Catholic Church of Indiana (the arch bishop of Indianapolis publicly criticized the governor)--and several Syrian refugees which were well into the process of moving to Indiana had to be relocated to another state. Pence didn't back down until the courts affirmed that his order was unconstitutional.
  • He shut down a highly successful energy efficiency program--one of the first in the nation, making Indiana a trailblazer--initiated by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission with the support of previous governor Mitch Daniels. He did this for no good reason, other than to signal to his far-right constituents that he was fighting against Obama's evil despotic EPA.
This is all just in his three years in office. He is reviled across the state, and especially so in Indianapolis. There is (was--now that he's the VP nominee, he can no longer be governor) a bipartisan Pence Must Go campaign to get rid of him, and there are literally billboards and yard signs plastered all over the city. 

Pence is, by virtually all objective measures, one of the worst governors in recent Indiana history, at least in terms of working for the benefit of the state. He has basically focused on far-right Christian social conservative interests to the clear detriment of all else, most importantly the current and future well-being of the state's reputation and economy.

No comments:
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)