March 25, 2016


News Clips For The Day


FUN WITH GUNS

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/25/471726704/nra-rewrites-fairy-tales-with-more-firearms-less-bloodshed

NRA Rewrites Fairy Tales With More Firearms, Less Bloodshed
CAMILA DOMONOSKE
Updated March 25, 20168:48 AM ET
Published March 25, 20167:00 AM ET

Photograph -- In "Little Red Riding Hood," a young girl and her grandmother are attacked by a wolf, seen in this 1870s illustration by Alfred L. Sewell. In the NRA version, Red wards off the wolf with a rifle. Buyenlarge via Getty Images


Adding guns to the world of the Brothers Grimm drastically reduces death rates, according to a study — well, OK, according to a couple of stories published by the NRA.

So far, there are only two data points. And they're imaginary. But the trendline is clear: In the NRA's reimagined fairy tales, putting rifles in the hands of children creates a safer world.

The NRA Family site published its first reimagined fairy tale — "Little Red Riding Hood (Has A Gun)" in January, and followed up with "Hansel and Gretel (Have Guns)" last week.

On Twitter, inspired by the series, a few people have been inventing their own #NRAfairytales, imagining tales that begin with "once upon a time" and end with a bang.

"Prince traveling kingdom 2 find owner of glass slipper shot dead by gun wielding evil stepmother," @SarahFMcD wrote.

"The porridge was too cold, the bed was too hard, but this AK47 is just right," @Scott_Craven2 offered. "Who's up for some bearskln rugs?"

But the NRA's own stories — written by Amelia Hamilton — are noteworthy for their nearly complete lack of violence.

Fairy tales, of course, were notoriously gory and grim in their original incarnations. But the NRA's versions take place in a utopia filled with empowered and unharmed children.

Take Little Red Riding Hood. In the original, a young girl and her grandmother are both devoured. A woodcutter with an ax kills the wolf and rips him open, saving the two women.

In the NRA's rewrite, Red walks through the woods with a rifle in her hands, warding off the wolf along the path. And at her grandmother's house, the situation was defused without a single bullet being fired:

"The wolf leaned in, jaws open wide, then stopped suddenly. Those big ears heard the unmistakable sound of a shotgun's safety being clicked off. Those big eyes looked down and saw that grandma had a scattergun aimed right at him. He realized that Grandmother hadn't been backing away from him; she had been moving towards her shotgun to protect herself and her home.

" 'I don't think I'll be eaten today,' said Grandma, 'and you won't be eating anyone again.' Grandma kept her gun trained on the wolf, who was too scared to move. Before long, he heard a familiar voice call 'Grandmother, I'm here!' Red peeked her head in the door. The wolf couldn't believe his luck—he had come across two capable ladies in the same day, and they were related! Oh, how he hated when families learned how to protect themselves."

The wolf is carried away by the hunter, to an undefined but unpleasant end.

Or the classic Hansel and Gretel, where two children are abandoned in the woods to die, then imprisoned as food and slave labor, until a witch is killed by, um, forcible cremation.

In Hamilton's version, the family's hunger prompts not the abandonment of the children, but a hunting trip. The two kids set out into the woods to feed the family. Gretel takes down a 10-point buck before they head home and, as in the original, get lost in the woods.

When they see the gingerbread house, they aren't tempted to eat it — they're fully loaded with meat, after all — but they do save two boys who were trapped by the witch. The scene features a rifle, but it proves to be unnecessary:

" 'We're going to get you out of here,' Hansel told the boy, hoisting himself up and climbing into the window, helping Gretel in after him, for he was stronger than his sister.

"The boys directed Hansel to the key that would unlock their cage while Gretel stood at the ready with her firearm just in case, for she was a better shot than her brother. Hansel unlocked the cage and opened the door. The hinges gave a groan and the sound of the witch's snoring stopped, the silence filling the room as they looked at each other in panic. Gretel got her rifle ready, but lowered it again when the snoring resumed. They helped the boys back out the window and hurried into the forest, breathing a sigh of relief when the cottage was out of sight."

Guns reappear when the well-armed local populace march on the witch's cottage. The villainess is imprisoned by the local sheriff, "to be taken away so she could never harm another child."

Maybe they'll inspire some other advocacy and lobbying groups to defang disturbing fairy tales.

Will the pharmaceutical industry take the bite out of Snow White's poisoned apple? Will PETA soothe the angst of the Boy Who Cried Wolf, when the townspeople realize the joys of an animal-free life and set loose their sheep? Will agribusiness harness Jack's beanstalk?

The NRA series has inspired some criticism, as The Washington Post has noted: Gun control advocacy groups have decried it for advancing gun culture. Gun rights advocates, meanwhile, have mocked liberal objections to the stories, pointing to the sheer horror of the original tales.

But the NRA is pretty clear about its own intent: The stories are tagged "Fun Friday" and "Just for fun" on the site.



Go To Washington Post for original story about the NRAFamily website.

http://www.pressherald.com/2016/03/24/nra-rewrites-fairy-tales-to-put-guns-in-the-hands-of-characters/

NRA rewrites fairy tales to put guns in the hands of characters
BY LINDSEY BEVER THE WASHINGTON POST
March 25 -- Posted Yesterday at 8:12 PM Updated at 8:32 AM

. . . .

“REACTION IS MIXED

The idea drew mixed reactions amid the continuing battle between gun-rights advocates holding tight to their Second Amendment rights and gun-control activists concerned with incidents involving children and guns.

So far in 2016, at least 52 children under age 18 have picked up a firearm and accidentally shot themselves or someone else, according to data from the gun-control group Everytown for Gun Safety.

This month, a Florida mother who bragged on Facebook that her 4-year-old son “gets jacked up to target shoot” was wounded when the child got his hands on a gun in the back seat of her vehicle and shot her in the back. The mother now faces a misdemeanor charge for allowing a minor unsupervised access to a firearm.

Gun-rights activist Bob Owens, editor of BearingArms.com, wrote that the first installment in the NRA’s fairy tale series was “a lot less violent that the original tale with no one being murdered, drowned, or cannibalized. “But that bloodless outcome has apparently upset the delicate sensibilities of Media Matters and their audience,” he said, “because Ms. Hamilton had both Red Riding Hood and her grandmother use firearms to self-rescue themselves [sic] and capture the wolf.”

Owens further commented on a post by the liberal site Media Matters. “So you would rather have one of the more traditional endings to the tale,” he wrote, “where the grandmother is slaughtered and fed to her granddaughter by a sadistic predator, or Red is violently murdered for being allegorically promiscuous, than have both women confidently and competently save themselves with a tool?”

Still, the idea of the series upset gun-control advocates.

After the series was announced, the group Repeal the Second Amendment took to Facebook, saying: “This is how the gun lobby promotes gun culture.”

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence said it was the “degenerate culture that corrupts children and encourages them to take on significant, and unnecessary, risks.”

“The National Rifle Association is reimagining classic fairy tales as pro-gun parables in their NRA Family magazine. …” Posted by Coalition to Stop Gun Violence on Thursday, January 14, 2016

Hamilton, the author, shrugged off the criticism. “People upset that my version of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ has everyone safe,” she wrote on Twitter. “Must prefer the high levels of violence in original NRAFairytales.”

The NRA did not respond to several requests for comment.”



“Fun Friday,” makes me wonder if the audience here is the same as those who stand around watching dogs or roosters fight to the death. Fun, indeed! And as for a “classic” version in which “the grandmother is slaughtered and fed to her granddaughter,” I’ve never seen that one. I did find a reference to it in Wikipedia, however.

You can say all you want about Grimm’s Fairytales being violent, and I know they are, but they are actual folktales and therefore important in tracing cultural elements from one group of ancient peoples to another. In those a belief in magic and dangerous mythic creatures was widespread. It was an ancient religious tradition held alongside the newer Christianity. So if you think they are too violent, don’t give them to children to read if the kids are nervous and prone to nightmares, or better still, explain to them the fact that the stories are entirely fictional, and were passed down parent to child for generations; that they were usually “cautionary tales,” to convince children not to take apples from strangers or walk too deeply into the woods.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Red_Riding_Hood

Little Red Riding Hood
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The better to see you with": woodcut by Walter Crane

“ …. Tale's history[edit]

Earliest versions[edit]

The origins of the Little Red Riding Hood story can be traced to versions from various European countries and more than likely preceding the 17th century, of which several exist, some significantly different from the currently known, Grimms-inspired version. It was told by French peasants in the 10th century.[1] In Italy, the Little Red Riding Hood was told by peasants in the fourteenth century, where a number of versions exist, including La finta nonna (The False Grandmother).[9] It has also been called "The Story of Grandmother". It is also possible that this early tale has roots in very similar Oriental tales (e.g. "Grandaunt Tiger").[10]

These early variations of the tale differ from the currently known version in several ways. The antagonist is not always a wolf, but sometimes an ogre or a 'bzou' (werewolf), making these tales relevant to the werewolf-trials (similar to witch trials) of the time (e.g. the trial of Peter Stumpp).[11] The wolf usually leaves the grandmother’s blood and meat for the girl to eat, who then unwittingly cannibalizes her own grandmother. Furthermore, the wolf was also known to ask her to remove her clothing and toss it into the fire.[12] In some versions, the wolf eats the girl after she gets into bed with him, and the story ends there.[13] In others, she sees through his disguise and tries to escape, complaining to her "grandmother" that she needs to defecate and would not wish to do so in the bed. The wolf reluctantly lets her go, tied to a piece of string so she does not get away. However, the girl slips the string over something else and runs off.

In these stories she escapes with no help from any male or older female figure, instead using her own cunning. Sometimes, though more rarely, the red hood is even non-existent.[13]

In other tellings of the story, the wolf chases after Little Red Ridinghood. She escapes with the help of some laundresses, who spread a sheet taut over a river so she may escape. When the wolf follows Red over the bridge of cloth, the sheet is released and the wolf drowns in the river.[14]

In 2013 it was revealed from scientific research that the tale originated in the 1st century in the Middle East and not, as previously assumed, in China. The scientists analysed the storylines and characters from 58 versions of the tale from different areas. By means of a computer model they then determined how the different versions of Little Red Riding Hood are related.[15]

Charles Perrault[edit]

The earliest known printed version[16] was known as Le Petit Chaperon Rouge and may have had its origins in 17th-century French folklore. It was included in the collection Tales and Stories of the Past with Morals. Tales of Mother Goose (Histoires et contes du temps passé, avec des moralités. Contes de ma mère l'Oye), in 1697, by Charles Perrault. As the title implies, this version[17] is both more sinister and more overtly moralized than the later ones. The redness of the hood, which has been given symbolic significance in many interpretations of the tale, was a detail introduced by Perrault.[18]

French images, like this 19th-century painting, show the much shorter red chaperon being worn

The story had as its subject an "attractive, well-bred young lady", a village girl of the country being deceived into giving a wolf she encountered the information he needed to find her grandmother's house successfully and eat the old woman while at the same time avoiding being noticed by woodcutters working in the nearby forest. Then he proceeded to lay a trap for the Red Riding Hood. Little Red Riding Hood ends up being asked to climb into the bed before being eaten by the wolf, where the story ends. The wolf emerges the victor of the encounter and there is no happy ending.

Charles Perrault explained the 'moral' at the end of the tale:[19] so that no doubt is left to his intended meaning:

From this story one learns that children, especially young lasses, pretty, courteous and well-bred, do very wrong to listen to strangers, And it is not an unheard thing if the Wolf is thereby provided with his dinner. I say Wolf, for all wolves are not of the same sort; there is one kind with an amenable disposition – neither noisy, nor hateful, nor angry, but tame, obliging and gentle, following the young maids in the streets, even into their homes. Alas! Who does not know that these gentle wolves are of all such creatures the most dangerous!

This, the presumed original, version of the tale was written for late seventeenth-century French court of King Louis XIV. This audience, whom the King entertained with extravagant parties, presumably would take from the story the intended meaning.”


My favorite version of the story mentioned above in Wikipedia is about the laundresses who stretch a sheet across a river and then drop it into the water when the wolf is on it. That’s the strangest of them all. Clearly some tellers got tired of the old stock stories and made up their own.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/isis-abd-al-rahman-mustafa-al-qaduli-aka-abou-ala-al-aafri-killed-syria/

ISIS has likely lost another key leader in Syria, Pentagon says
By TUCKER REALS CBS NEWS March 25, 2016, 10:33 AM

Play VIDEO -- The growing threat from ISIS
Photograph -- An image of senior ISIS figure Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli is seen on the Rewards for Justice website, affiliated with the U.S. State Department, offering a monetary reward for information leading to his capture. U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT/REWARDS FOR JUSTICE
Play VIDEO -- Brussels investigation reveals links to Paris attacks


U.S. officials believe a senior Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) commander has been killed in an airstrike in Syria.

"The U.S. military killed several key [ISIS] terrorists this week, including, we believe, Haji Imam," Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Friday, identifying Imam as a "well-known terrorist" high in the ranks of the extremist group.

Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli, also known as Abou Ala al-Aafri and Haji Imam, was a senior member of ISIS from the start. He came from the group's predecessor, al Qaeda in Iraq, which he helped found more than a decade ago.

At the Pentagon news conference, Carter identified him as an acting "finance minister" for the group who had been responsible for some "external affairs and plots." He was a senior member of the ISIS leadership board, and there had been talk that he could have been named a successor to the top figure, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, if he was ever killed.

There was a $7 million reward for information leader to al-Qaduli's capture or killing.

U.S. officials told CBS News senior national security correspondent David Martin they believe there was not yet 100-percent confirmation that al-Qaduli was killed in the strike, but they described him as "a senior religious leader of the group -- an inspirational figure but also one who worked with their finances."

The defense secretary on Friday declined to comment on the specifics of where and how al-Qaduli was killed, though he indicated that "it is consistent with our strategy" in the region.

In spite of ISIS' demonstrated ability to carry out, or at least inspire and claim credit for, attacks in Western Europe in recent months, it has lost significant ground -- and a number of senior members -- in Iraq and Syria during the same timeframe.

In December, the Pentagon said the extremist group's finance minister and two other senior leaders were killed in an airstrike.

"Leaders can be replaced. However, these leaders have been around for a long time. They are senior, they are experienced," Carter said Friday. He also called for the U.S. to "hasten the defeat" of ISIS, as currently "the momentum of this campaign is clearly on our side."

Appearing beside Carter at the news conference, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford, added that "there are a lot of reasons to remain optimistic" about the campaign. He cautioned, however, that "by no means " is the U.S. "about to break the back of ISIL."

Speaking Friday to CBSN correspondent Vlad Duthiers in Brussels, Secretary of State John Kerry said the brutal attacks in Belgium this week were in fact a reaction by the group to its losses in the two countries it swept across in a summer 2014 blitz.

"Forty percent of the territory that Daesh held has been taken back," Kerry told CBSN, using an Arabic acronym for ISIS. "Their leadership is being taken apart, their revenue is being cut... What you're seeing (in Europe) are desperation, lash-out events."

CBS News' Reena Flores contributed to this report.



http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/man-involved-in-advanced-attack-plot-arrested-in-france/

Man involved in "advanced attack plot" arrested in France
-Video Report Only:

MARCH 24, 2016, 6:30 PM|French police launched a raid late Thursday that one official said disrupted a planned terror attack in an advanced stage. There's been at least one arrest. So far, they have found no link between this new plot and the November attacks in Paris, or the Brussels bombings. Elaine Cobbe reports.


CBS -- "The U.S. military killed several key [ISIS] terrorists this week, including, we believe, Haji Imam," Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Friday, identifying Imam as a "well-known terrorist" high in the ranks of the extremist group. Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli, also known as Abou Ala al-Aafri and Haji Imam, was a senior member of ISIS from the start. He came from the group's predecessor, al Qaeda in Iraq, which he helped found more than a decade ago. …. The defense secretary on Friday declined to comment on the specifics of where and how al-Qaduli was killed, though he indicated that "it is consistent with our strategy" in the region. …. Appearing beside Carter at the news conference, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford, added that "there are a lot of reasons to remain optimistic" about the campaign. He cautioned, however, that "by no means " is the U.S. "about to break the back of ISIL." …. "Forty percent of the territory that Daesh held has been taken back," Kerry told CBSN, using an Arabic acronym for ISIS. "Their leadership is being taken apart, their revenue is being cut... What you're seeing (in Europe) are desperation, lash-out events."


I’m glad to get a bit of news about an important success by US backed forces, and that 40% of captured territory had been regained. I think it is true that a war of attrition can succeed over time, and that it will be more manageable than an invasion.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/east-carolina-university-investigates-after-white-officer-handcuffs-black-assault-victim/

College launches probe after white officer handcuffs black assault victim
CBS/AP
March 25, 2016, 10:12 AM

Photographs -- Three people were arrested and charged in connection with the two assaults on Patrick Myrick. They are: Theresa Marie Lee, 25, of Greenville, Mack Humbles, 26, of Greenville, and Mark Privette, 33, of Greenville. A fourth suspect was being sought. WNCT


GREENVILLE, N.C. -- A North Carolina university is conducting an internal review after one of its white police officers handcuffed a black man who had just been brutally beaten by four white people.

East Carolina University officials were appalled by the incident, which began off campus, but spilled onto the university when the man running from a beating was caught and beaten again near a dining hall, Chancellor Steve Ballard said Thursday in a statement to students.

"We understand the investigation thus far provides no confirmation that race played a role. We hope that to be the case, and we urge our campus and community to let the process work," Ballard said in his statement.

The incident began early March 17 when Patrick Myrick hit a woman in the face and she fell to the ground, Greenville Police said in news release.

Several people ran to Myrick and began beating him up, then chased him and beat him again. He suffered serious injuries and had to be taken to the hospital, police said.

Three of the white suspects have been arrested. Theresa Marie Lee, 25; Mack Humbles, 26; and Mark Privette, 33, are all charged with felony assault inflicting serious bodily injury. It wasn't known whether any had lawyers to speak on their behalf. Working phone numbers couldn't be found for the suspects.

Police are seeking the fourth suspect.

Lee was an East Carolina University student but is no longer enrolled, according to the school.

"We are appalled by the brutality of the incident. We will have zero tolerance for allowing these kind of things on our campus," Ballard said during a press conference Thursday.

The East Carolina University Police Department is also conducting an internal review of its officer who handcuffed Myrick. Officials did not name the officer but said he is on leave and not on campus.

Authorities said the officer did not use any violence against Myrick and a videotape of the incident is being reviewed.

Under North Carolina law, police officers can't charge Myrick with hitting the woman because they have to see the crime take place for a misdemeanor charge. But police said the woman has told investigators she wants to obtain an arrest warrant against him.

ECU students shared their reactions to the news with CBS affiliate WNCT.

"It makes me a littler more weary, like stay out of trouble, don't be by yourself. They should be there to help you but things could always go wrong," said ECU Freshman Barbara Garfinkle.

Another student, Nick Fullenwider, told WNCT he wants to hold off on judgment until the investigation is complete, adding that he hopes the school would be transparent.

"As long as we get more of that, I think that would go a long way to helping the situation all over the country," he said.



“A North Carolina university is conducting an internal review after one of its white police officers handcuffed a black man who had just been brutally beaten by four white people. East Carolina University officials were appalled by the incident, which began off campus, but spilled onto the university when the man running from a beating was caught and beaten again near a dining hall, Chancellor Steve Ballard said Thursday in a statement to students. …. The incident began early March 17 when Patrick Myrick hit a woman in the face and she fell to the ground, Greenville Police said in news release. Several people ran to Myrick and began beating him up, then chased him and beat him again. He suffered serious injuries and had to be taken to the hospital, police said. Three of the white suspects have been arrested. Theresa Marie Lee, 25; Mack Humbles, 26; and Mark Privette, 33, are all charged with felony assault inflicting serious bodily injury. It wasn't known whether any had lawyers to speak on their behalf. Working phone numbers couldn't be found for the suspects. Police are seeking the fourth suspect. Lee was an East Carolina University student but is no longer enrolled, according to the school. "We are appalled by the brutality of the incident. We will have zero tolerance for allowing these kind of things on our campus," Ballard said during a press conference Thursday. The East Carolina University Police Department is also conducting an internal review of its officer who handcuffed Myrick. Officials did not name the officer but said he is on leave and not on campus.…. Another student, Nick Fullenwider, told WNCT he wants to hold off on judgment until the investigation is complete, adding that he hopes the school would be transparent. "As long as we get more of that, I think that would go a long way to helping the situation all over the country," he said.”


It looks as though the university is indeed trying to be “transparent,” which I’m glad to see. So often whenever anything untoward happens in regard to a business entity, which any university is, it will hide any culpability in subterfuge. The woman whom Myrick allegedly hit is going to prefer charges, but according to the article, the officers must actually see the event take place. If that’s true, it’s not a good rule in my view. I really would like to know more about that first event, to see that those who set upon him four to one and “brutally” beat him were simply bystanders as this report implies, and were uninvolved with Myrick’s assault on the unnamed woman in any way. Whether or not they were, though, the ratio of individuals involved here is grossly unfair. Even if they did do that out of understandable outrage, they shouldn’t have done more than to capture him and then call the police to arrest Myrick. Instead they chased him down and beat him again. The white police officer did handcuff Myrick and apparently didn’t arrest the assailants. That, at least potentially, did show a racial bias.

Setting that aside, however, anyone who assaults another, especially someone who is weaker, can expect reprisals. I have never believed in letting a bully get away with his actions. This is a case with blame against all parties. I hope to hear more about it in later stories.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-would-beat-donald-trump-ted-cruz-but-would-lose-to-john-kasich/

Hillary Clinton would beat Trump, Cruz but would lose to Kasich
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS
March 24, 2016, 12:37 PM


Hillary Clinton would defeat Donald Trump and Ted Cruz in general election match-ups, but would lose to John Kasich, according to a Monmouth University survey released Thursday.

The poll found Clinton would beat Trump by 10 percentage points, 48 to 38 percent, though the race between them would be closer in swing states. The Democratic frontrunner only holds a 5-percentage-point edge in states where the margin of victory in 2012 was less than 7 percentage points.

Clinton would also beat Cruz by 5 percentage points, 45 to 40 percent. Kasich, on the other hand, would defeat Clinton by 6 percentage points, 45 to 39 percent.

A CBS News/New York Times poll released this week also found that Clinton holds a 10-point advantage over Trump in a general election matchup, with a 3-point lead in a head-to-head with Cruz. Kasich, that poll found, would beat her by four points.

More than two-thirds of Ted Cruz supporters said they would vote for Trump in November while 13 percent would vote for Clinton. Among supporters for Kasich, half would be willing to vote for Trump while 19 percent would support Clinton and nearly a quarter would not vote at all.

Among voters who back Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination, more than three-quarters said they would vote for Clinton instead of Trump in November, 12 percentage said they would vote for Trump and 7 percent said they would sit out the election.

The poll found 89 percent of Democratic voters support Clinton and nearly three-quarters of GOP voters support Trump for their party nominations.

In a hypothetical three-way race between Clinton, Trump and Libertarian Gary Johnson, Clinton would win with 42 percent of the vote, Trump would get 34 percent and Johnson would receive 11 percent.

A poll released on Wednesday found Kasich and Sanders would perform the best in the general election.

The poll surveyed 1,008 adults, 848 of which were registered voters, between March 17 and 20 with a 3.4 percentage point margin of error.



“A poll released on Wednesday found Kasich and Sanders would perform the best in the general election.” I do believe that of all the Republican contenders, Kasich is the best man in his intelligence, honesty and humanity, (despite his recent gaff about the women “coming out of their kitchens,”) so if he were – by some unfortunate chance – to beat Hillary Clinton I would be less frightened for our country than if any of the others did.

The really good news is that, though the early part of the article didn’t even mention Sanders, in the end they acknowledge that Sanders is more likely than Clinton to end up on top in a general election. I did notice that half a dozen or so poll results have come up with different results, and I remember that on the day when Obama was elected, the number of voters waiting in line was startling. A big turnout can mean a victory. I think Sanders could get such an outpouring of votes. Of course Hillary could, too. It’s a matter of feminism vs. policy.



http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/sanders-wall-st-speculation-tax-would-raise-300-billion-and-create-millions-jobs

ELECTION 2016
Sanders' Wall St. Speculation Tax Would Raise $300 Billion and Create Millions of Jobs
Economists estimate revenues from those most able to pay.
By Rose Ann DeMoro / Huffington Post March 22, 2016


New research findings from a team of progressive economists provides documentary evidence that the financial footing for Sen. Bernie Sanders visionary social change agenda is not only plausible, but would create far more socially productive jobs, as well as moving us down the road to the more humane society that is at the heart of the Sanders campaign.

In their push to vilify Sanders, Democratic Party acolytes from the media to academia have fallen in line attacking the economic foundations of his campaign for free public college tuition, Medicare for all, job creation through infrastructure repair, and other critical needs.

But a new report from the University of Massachusetts Amherst Political Economy Research Institute documents how a key Sanders proposal - a tax on Wall Street speculation -would bring at least $300 billion a year in new revenues from those who can most afford to pay it for the critical reforms the country so desperately needs.

Further, the report by Robert Pollin, lead author, and his colleagues James Heintz and Thomas Herndon, breaks new ground in documenting that the tax would be a huge boon to the economy in creating millions of new jobs in education beyond what the same spending creates on Wall Street.

And contrary to the critics would not dampen productive investment, which has fallen sharply under the reckless Wall Street behavior of recent decades.

Taxing Wall Street speculation to finance free public college tuition, as Sanders talks about on the campaign trail, and has introduced in legislation, S 1373, the College for All Act, could create a net expansion of 4.2 million jobs. Not to mention securing equal educational opportunity for everyone, regardless of background or ability to pay.

Investing in education produces more than 8 times the number of jobs created by the same spending in financial services, the authors explain.

This finding parallels a 2009 National Nurses United study that found conversion to a Medicare for all health care system, as Sanders also proposes, would create millions of new, good paying jobs, as would a green economy as Pollin documented in his 2012 book “Back to Full Employment.”

Simply put, a socially productive economy, from education to healthcare to renewable energy is also a job creation engine.

The report’s second ground breaking finding is that taxing Wall Street speculation would not harm productive investment in the economy, as the Wall Street shills constantly allege.

Since the 1970s, with the escalation of a neoliberal program of decimation of our manufacturing sector with outsourcing, globalization, and the domination of the financial sector of the economy, there has been an 18-fold increase in Wall Street trading over productive investment in the economy, Pollin, Heintz and Herndon reveal.

As the authors note Wall Street speculation “has not delivered” in “investments in physical plants and machinery that can deliver technical innovations (that) raise overall productivity.”

In other words, the idea that the speculation tax would harm productive investments in a corporate dominated economy through outsourcing, unfair trade pacts from NAFTA to the Trans Pacific Partnership proposal, and domination by Wall Street, that has long abandoned manufacturing jobs at home and harmed millions of working class families is nonsense.

For those new to the idea of a speculation tax, or as nurses call it, the Robin Hood tax, is explained by Pollin, Heintz and Herndon.

A simple tax of $5 in every $1,000 of stock trades, $1 on the trading of a $1,000 bond, and a mere 5 cents on the trades of derivatives, “such as a stock option, in which the value of the underlying asset, i.e. the stock itself, is worth $1,000.”

Compare that to the average sales tax in the U.S. of 8.4 percent, or $84 on every $1,000 most Americans pay on nearly every consumer item, from shoes to tooth paste.

Further, the cost falls almost entirely on trading done by the biggest Wall Street high rollers - think Lehman Brothers or Goldman Sachs - the very people who tanked our economy by reckless gambling with people’s mortgages and pensions.

And, raise at least $300 billion a year, not from regular Americans who make occasional stock trades, but from the Wolves of Wall Street who make thousands or millions of trades a day, often through computerized algorithms.

Individuals with annual incomes under $50,000 and families under $75,000 a year are exempted through the two bills Sanders has introduced, S 1371, the Inclusive Prosperity Act, which parallels a companion House measure, HR 1464, introduced by Rep. Keith Ellison.

No surprise, Wall Street moguls, and their surrogates in the media and Washington, hate it. They don’t want any restraints on their profiteering and stranglehold on the economy. But, shamefully, many in the liberal and Democratic Party elite, from Hillary Clinton to her surrogates in the Democratic National Committee and Congress have also attacked Sanders social change agenda as “pie in the sky.”

Even though a similar tax is in place in most of the world’s major financial markets, is in the process of implementation in the European Union, and actually existed in the U.S. for the first half of the last century.

Far from the fear mongering here, a Wall Street tax is achievable, it would have an enormous salutary effect on our economy, and help lead the way to a program of such critical needs as education and health care for all, good paying jobs, and forceful action on the climate crisis - just as Bernie Sanders proposes.

Rose Ann DeMoro is Executive director of National Nurses United (AFL-CIO) and the California Nurses Association.



AlterNet -- “But a new report from the University of Massachusetts Amherst Political Economy Research Institute documents how a key Sanders proposal - a tax on Wall Street speculation -would bring at least $300 billion a year in new revenues from those who can most afford to pay it for the critical reforms the country so desperately needs. …. And contrary to the critics would not dampen productive investment, which has fallen sharply under the reckless Wall Street behavior of recent decades. Taxing Wall Street speculation to finance free public college tuition, as Sanders talks about on the campaign trail, and has introduced in legislation, S 1373, the College for All Act, could create a net expansion of 4.2 million jobs. Not to mention securing equal educational opportunity for everyone, regardless of background or ability to pay. …. Since the 1970s, with the escalation of a neoliberal program of decimation of our manufacturing sector with outsourcing, globalization, and the domination of the financial sector of the economy, there has been an 18-fold increase in Wall Street trading over productive investment in the economy, Pollin, Heintz and Herndon reveal. As the authors note Wall Street speculation “has not delivered” in “investments in physical plants and machinery that can deliver technical innovations (that) raise overall productivity.” …. Further, the cost falls almost entirely on trading done by the biggest Wall Street high rollers - think Lehman Brothers or Goldman Sachs - the very people who tanked our economy by reckless gambling with people’s mortgages and pensions. And, raise at least $300 billion a year, not from regular Americans who make occasional stock trades, but from the Wolves of Wall Street who make thousands or millions of trades a day, often through computerized algorithms. Individuals with annual incomes under $50,000 and families under $75,000 a year are exempted through the two bills Sanders has introduced …. But, shamefully, many in the liberal and Democratic Party elite, from Hillary Clinton to her surrogates in the Democratic National Committee and Congress have also attacked Sanders social change agenda as “pie in the sky.” Even though a similar tax is in place in most of the world’s major financial markets, is in the process of implementation in the European Union, and actually existed in the U.S. for the first half of the last century.”


See the excerpt from the New Democrats article below. Like the Republicans at this time, the Democratic Party is split, with the previously powerful New Democrats/Clinton Democrats in a fierce struggle to strip Bernie Sanders of his considerable plausibility and therefore his popularity. He is not insane, vulgar or stupid, however, and he cannot be dealt with as Trump is. I am delighted to see this AlterNet article on Sanders’ likelihood of a successful set of policies, especially economically. Unfortunately, he is a relative unknown to the average Democrat, and is having trouble beating Hillary’s familiarity, though many in these polls say they don’t trust her. I’m of the same opinion, and in addition I remember the deregulation of the financial world and the results of NAFTA which killed jobs at home so people in the Philippines could take over our production jobs. I am also disappointed in Obama for supporting the new TPP plan because it is just like NAFTA.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats

New Democrats
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Democrats, also called Centrist Democrats, Clinton Democrats or Moderate Democrats, is an ideologically centrist faction within the Democratic Party that emerged after the victory of Republican George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. They are an economically conservative and "Third Way" faction which dominated the party for around 20 years starting in the late 1980s after the US populace turned much further to the political right. They are represented by organizations such as the New Democrat Network and the New Democrat Coalition.

History[edit]

Origins[edit]

After the landslide electoral losses to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, a group of prominent Democrats began to believe their party was out of touch and in need of a radical shift in economic policy and ideas of governance.[1][2] The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985 by Al From and a group of like-minded politicians and strategists.[3] They advocated a political "Third Way" as an antidote to the electoral successes of Reaganism.[1][2]

. . . .




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mark-kirk-will-become-first-gop-senator-to-meet-with-merrick-garland/

Mark Kirk will become first GOP senator to meet with Merrick Garland
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS
March 25, 2016, 3:44 PM

Play VIDEO -- John Kasich: Senate GOP "probably ought" to meet with Merrick Garland


Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois will become the first GOP senator to meet with President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland, a White House official confirmed Friday.

Kirk will meet with Garland on Tuesday, which was first reported by The Chicago Sun-Times. Other Republicans have expressed a willingness to meet with him, but have not yet scheduled anything.

Garland, 63, is also scheduled to meet with Democratic Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Ben Cardin of Maryland on Monday, and Al Franken of Minnesota and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York on Wednesday.

Since President Obama nominated Garland last week, the nominee has met with five Democratic senators including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy of Vermont as well as Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

A week ago, Kirk, who faces a tough reelection fight, became the first Republican senator to break with the rest of his conference to call for an up-or-down vote on Garland, according to reports. Kirk told a Chicago radio station that his colleagues should "just man up and cast a vote."

Earlier this week, another GOP senator, Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, said his colleagues should consider Garland's nomination.

"I can't imagine the president has or will nominate somebody that meets my criteria, but I have my job to do," Moran told The Garden City Telegram. "I think the process ought to go forward."

On Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden slammed Republicans for refusing to consider Garland and give him a confirmation hearing and vote. He warned that Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent.

"What Republicans senators say they will do, in my view, can lead to a genuine constitutional crisis, born out of the dysfunction of Washington," Biden said at Georgetown University's law school.

A CBS poll released Tuesday found that 53 percent of Americans want the Senate to hold confirmation hearings for Garland.



“Since President Obama nominated Garland last week, the nominee has met with five Democratic senators including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy of Vermont as well as Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. A week ago, Kirk, who faces a tough reelection fight, became the first Republican senator to break with the rest of his conference to call for an up-or-down vote on Garland, according to reports. Kirk told a Chicago radio station that his colleagues should "just man up and cast a vote." Earlier this week, another GOP senator, Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, said his colleagues should consider Garland's nomination. "I can't imagine the president has or will nominate somebody that meets my criteria, but I have my job to do," Moran told The Garden City Telegram. "I think the process ought to go forward."…. He warned that Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent. "What Republicans senators say they will do, in my view, can lead to a genuine constitutional crisis, born out of the dysfunction of Washington," Biden said at Georgetown University's law school. A CBS poll released Tuesday found that 53 percent of Americans want the Senate to hold confirmation hearings for Garland.”


It looks to me as though the GOP has shot itself in the foot on this. It’s like the business of actually considering Trump as their nominee. They will find that all the supporters they have left will be the most ignorant and the most socially Rightist. They will lose members, I think, rather than gaining them.