Profile cover photo
Profile photo
David Erdman II
655 followers
655 followers
About
David's posts

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Photo

Post has attachment
Whatever "the market" (i.e. the collection of exploited individuals along with their exploiters) can bare.


"When you look at these numbers and how college has increased from an inflation standpoint historically, it is staggering," said Maria Bruno, a senior investment strategist at Vanguard.

Post has shared content

Post has attachment
Climate change might be inevitable, but delaying action can be lucrative!

FTA ...

The HONEST Act is essentially a re-brand of Smith’s notorious Secret Science Reform Act, a bill that would have required the EPA to only use scientific studies for which all data is publicly available and the results are easily reproducible. The SAB Reform Act would change the makeup of the board that reviews the “quality and relevance” of the science that EPA uses: Scientists who receive EPA grants would be forbidden from serving, while allowing the appointment of industry-sponsored experts who have a direct interest in being regulated—so long as they disclose that interest.

But several scientists, science advocates, and former EPA officials told me this week that these bills are a solution in search of a problem. The bills, while couched in good intention, will add significant expense and delay to the scientific process, effectively preventing the EPA from using the best available science to protect the public from pollution. Worse, they said, the bills would embolden polluters and discourage good scientists from working in government.

Burke and others said the HONEST Act would delay or stymie the approval of scientific data at EPA because it requires that the disclosure of private data and that study results be “reproducible,” meaning an outside source must be able to replicate the entire study on their own and get the same results. Scientists say that’s just not possible for many public health studies. Consider a 10-year study of lead exposure in pregnant women and children: How would scientists swiftly replicate the results? Or a study on the BP oil spill’s impact on public health in coastal Gulf communities: How can one reproduce that event?

Post has attachment

Post has shared content

Post has shared content
This is an extremely thoughtful article about the underlying political dynamics which shape the debates over health care in the US, and it's helping me understand many things going on in our country today; as the author says, "When it seems like people are voting against their interests, I have probably failed to understand their interests."

His key point is this: "[T]he bulk of needy white voters are not interested in the public safety net. They want to restore their access to an older safety net, one much more generous, dignified, and stable than the public system – the one most well-employed voters still enjoy."

That is, the US has had a social safety net for a very long time, a very generous one, publicly funded through various tax subsidies, and giving people a sense of having earned those things as well, through individual work. But unlike most countries' safety nets, the American net was never intended to cover everybody – a fact which is ultimately tied to the fact that America never viewed itself as a single polity, but rather as a collection of racial polities whose natural relationship was hierarchical. That is, what we had in the US was "white socialism" – and this is what many people want back, although they don't realize exactly what it was.

Very worth reading and thinking about.


Post has shared content
PhotoPhotoPhotoPhotoPhoto
18/03/2017
8 Photos - View album

Post has attachment
Nearly 14 percent of the city’s portfolio, or about $1.2 billion, is currently invested with issuers that provide financing to the project, according to Fewer.

Fewer said the resolution paves the way for San Francisco to become the first city to actually withdraw funds from companies financing the pipeline.

“Let’s hope that our action today in passing this resolution adds volume to the voices across the country condemning the Dakota Access Pipeline,” Fewer said.
Wait while more posts are being loaded