September 19, 2017


News and Views


NATURE IS TRULY VERY DANGEROUS. THERE IS A GOOD TV COMMERCIAL ABOUT A BRAND OF MARGARINE THAT CLAIMS TO TASTE “JUST LIKE BUTTER.” IN THIS COMMERCIAL A LARGE WOMAN WITH A FLORAL HEADDRESS AND FLOWING GARMENT LIKE THOSE WORN BY THE ANCIENT GREEK WOMEN IS STANDING BEFORE THE CAMERA. SUDDENLY THERE IS A HUGE THUNDERCLAP WITH LIGHTNING AND THE WOMAN SAYS IN HIGHLY DRAMATIC, DEEP TONES, “IT’S NOT NICE TO FOOL MOTHER NATURE!” IN THE REAL WORLD, THERE IS NO HUMOR ABOUT IT, OF COURSE.

THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE TRAGEDY THAT IT CAUSES WHEN HUMANS ARE FACED WITH OVERWHELMING SITUATIONS, LOSING EVERYTHING THAT IS PRECIOUS TO THEM. IT IS ESPECIALLY SAD WHEN PEOPLE ARE DRIVEN FROM THEIR HOMES AND OR KILLED, AS IN THIS CASE. I’M GLAD I LIVE ON THE EAST COAST WHICH IS NOWHERE NEAR THE DEADLIEST MODERN EARTHQUAKE ZONES. OF COURSE, THERE IS ONE: THE NEW MADRID FAULT IN THE MISSOURI AREA, AND ONE UP AT CHARLESTON, SC WHICH HAD A DEVASTATING QUAKE IN THE 1800S. THAT QUAKE WAS FELT FOR MANY MILES AROUND, AMAZINGLY IN BOSTON, CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE AND NEW ORLEANS, AND WAS THE ONLY ONE WITHIN HISTORICAL RECORD FOR THE SITE. SO, WE AREN’T REALLY SAFE ANYWHERE. TO READ ABOUT THAT, GO TO HTTPS://EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/1886_CHARLESTON_EARTHQUAKE.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mexico-city-earthquake-09-19-2017/
CBS/AP September 19, 2017, 2:31 PM
Major earthquake jolts central Mexico

Do watch the live news video with this article.

MEXICO CITY -- A powerful earthquake jolted central Mexico on Tuesday, cracking building facades and scattering rubble on streets in the capital on the anniversary of a devastating 1985 quake.

The quake caused buildings to sway sickeningly in Mexico City and sent panicked office workers streaming into the streets, but the full extent of the damage was not yet clear.

The U.S. Geological Survey said the quake had a magnitude of 7.1 and was centered near the Puebla state town of Raboso, about 76 miles southeast of Mexico City.

Puebla Gov. Tony Galil tweeted that there had been damaged buildings in the city of Cholula including collapsed church steeples.

In Mexico City, thousands of people fled office buildings and hugged to calm each other along the central Reforma Avenue as alarms blared, and traffic stopped around the Angel of Independence monument.

MEXICO-QUAKE
People remove debris of a damaged building after a real quake rattled Mexico City on September 19, 2017 while an earthquake drill was being held in the capital. ALFREDO ESTRELLA/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

In the Roma neighborhood, which was struck hard by the 1985 quake, piles of stucco and brick fallen from building facades littered the streets. Two men calmed a woman seated on a stool in the street, blood trickling form a small wound on her knee.

At a nearby market, a worker in a hardhat walked around the outside warning people not to smoke as a smell of gas filled the air.

Market stall vendor Edith Lopez, 25, said she was in a taxi a few blocks away when the quake struck. She said she saw glass bursting out of the windows of some buildings. She was anxiously trying to locate her children, whom she had left in the care of her disabled mother.

Pictures fell from office building walls, objects were shaken off of flat surfaces and computer monitors toppled over. Some people dove for cover under desks. Local media broadcast video of whitecap waves churning the city's normally placid canals of Xochimilco as boats bobbed up and down.

Video on social media showed a home shaking as objects were tossed around inside.

Follow
Keitaro @ Mexico @KeitaroTime
MEXICO HOW MANY EARTHQUAKES WE HAVING WHEN I VISIT IN OMG
2:17 PM - Sep 19, 2017 · Puebla, México
24 24 Replies 80 80 Retweets 326 326 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Another video showed debris falling from Mexico City's National Employment Service building. Residents can be heard screaming and crying as some ran away from the building.

Follow
pıʌɐp @Lobillo_feroz
#TenemosSismo @AristeguiOnline #RT COMPARTAN #SISMO esto es en metro Etiopía @STCMetroGDF
2:27 PM - Sep 19, 2017
183 183 Replies 7,866 7,866 Retweets 4,204 4,204 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Earlier in the day, workplaces across the city held preparation drills on the anniversary of the 1985 quake, a magnitude 8.1 shake, which killed thousands of people and devastated large parts of Mexico City.

Much of Mexico City is built on former lakebed, and the soil is known to amplify the effects of earthquakes even hundreds of miles away.

Earlier this month, dozens were killed after another earthquake struck, off Mexico's southern coast. It toppled hundreds of buildings, triggering tsunami evacuations and sending panicked people fleeing into the streets in the middle of the night.

Don Blakeman, a seismologist with the United States Geological Survey, said on CBSN that Mexico is very seismically active and the two earthquakes aren't necessarily related.

This is a developing story and will be updated.



AN EMERGENCY REQUEST HAS BEEN ISSUED TO DEMS TO FIGHT THIS NEW OBAMACARE REPEAL EFFORT. THE SECOND ARTICLE ON THE CONCERNS VOICED BY STATE GOVERNMENT IS ALSO IMPORTANT. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT AMERICANS READ BOTH OF THESE, BECAUSE IT’S YOUR PERSONAL HEALTHCARE THAT WILL BE AFFECTED.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nancy-pelosi-issues-emergency-request-to-house-dems-on-obamacare-repeal-effort/
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS September 19, 2017, 12:28 PM
Nancy Pelosi issues "emergency request" to House Dems on Obamacare repeal effort
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS September 19, 2017, 12:28 PM

Photograph -- Nancy Pelosi issues "emergency request" to House Dems on Obamacare repeal effort

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday called on her Democratic colleagues to mount an urgent messaging campaign against an Obamacare repeal proposal that could receive a vote in the Senate.

"It is all hands on deck to defeat the latest version of Trumpcare, Graham-Cassidy," the California Democrat said in a letter to House Democrats, calling it an "emergency request."

The bill, proposed by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina and Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, would need 51 votes to pass under the budget reconciliation process. Due to a ruling by the Senate parliamentarian, Senate Republicans have only until the end of the month -- the end of next week -- to use the obscure procedure.

"Members are strongly urged to schedule press events, roundtables or town hall meetings between now and when we return to Washington on Monday," Pelosi said. "We are hoping to have as many events as possible across the nation on Saturday, for our Day of Action."

She said that facts about the measure, compiled by former Acting Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Andy Slavitt, were attached to the letter.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has said it will release a preliminary analysis of the bill next week and the Senate Finance Committee will hold a hearing on the measure on Monday. It already faces likely opposition from at least Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, and potentially from moderates like Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.

Pelosi encouraged her caucus to participate in a "tweet storm" on Tuesday afternoon against what she dubbed "Trumpcare."

The House is currently on recess this week to mark Rosh Hashanah and will return to Capitol Hill next week. Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, has signaled that the House would take up the legislation should the Senate pass it. Under reconciliation rules, the House would not be able to amend the legislation before voting on it.


STATE GOVERNORS SPEAK OUT ON PROPOSED BILL

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/renewed-obamacare-repeal-effort-dealt-a-blow-as-governors-come-out-in-opposition/2017/09/19/499478fe-9d51-11e7-9083-fbfddf6804c2_story.html
PowerPost
New health-care plan stumbles under opposition from governors
By Sean Sullivan, Kelsey Snell and Juliet Eilperin September 19 at 5:51 PM

Senate Republicans and the White House pressed ahead Tuesday with their suddenly resurgent effort to undo the Affordable Care, even as their attempt was dealt a setback when a bipartisan group of governors came out against their proposal.

The collective criticism from 10 governors arrived as Vice President Pence and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell tried to rally support for the bill, which is sponsored by GOP Sens. Bill Cassidy (La.), Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), Dean Heller (Nev.) and Ron Johnson (Wis.).

But it was unclear whether the opposition would ultimately derail the attempt, as key Republican senators including Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said they had yet to make up their minds.

“We ask you not to consider the Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson amendment and renew support for bipartisan efforts to make health care more available and affordable for all Americans,” the governors said in their letter.

They added that they prefer a bipartisan push to stabilize the insurance marketplaces that Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) had been negotiating before talks stalled on Tuesday evening.

The governors who signed the bill are particularly notable, since some are from states represented by Republican senators who are weighing whether to back the bill. Among them: Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I), who holds some sway over Murkowski, a potentially decisive vote who opposed a previous Republican effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

Nevertheless, Murkowski said Tuesday afternoon that she was still weighing her options and explained how her position on the bill might ultimately differ from her opposition to an earlier repeal bill that failed dramatically in July.

“If it can be shown that Alaska is not going to be disadvantaged, you gain additional flexibility. Then I can go back to Alaskans, and I can say, ‘Okay, let’s walk through this together.’ That’s where it could be different,” she said.

But Murkowski, who has been in close touch with Walker, said she did not yet have the data to make such a determination.

Alaska’s other Republican senator, Dan Sullivan, said he was still mulling whether to support the bill.

[Reminder: It’s very unusual to vote on a health-care bill before Congress knows what it will do]

On Tuesday, Pence traveled from New York, where he was attending the annual U.N. General Assembly, to Washington with Graham in a sign of the White House’s support for the proposal.

“My message today is I want to make sure that members of the Senate know the president and our entire administration supports Graham-Cassidy,” Pence told reporters on the flight down. “We think the American people need this.”

Graham added that President Trump called him at 10:30 p.m. Monday.

“He says, ‘If we can pull this off, it’ll be a real accomplishment for the country,’ ” he recalled.

Pence attended the weekly Senate Republican policy luncheon, where he said the current health-care system is collapsing and the bill fulfills key GOP promises to return control to states and rein in federal entitlement programs, according to several GOP senators.

Afterward, McConnell declined to ensure a vote on the bill but said his team is working to secure sufficient support.

“We’re in the process of discussing all of this. Everybody knows that the opportunity expires at the end of the month,” said McConnell, referring to the limited window Republicans have to take advantage of a procedural tactic to pass a broad health-care bill without any Democratic support.

The current bill would give states control over billions in federal health-care spending and enact deep cuts to Medicaid. The Medicaid cuts are a major source of concern to the governors, both in terms of imposing a per capita cap on what states would receive as well as putting restrictions on how they could spend any federal aid on their expanded Medicaid populations.

The fact that the bill also would bar states from taxing health-care providers to fund their Medicaid programs posed a problem for several governors, as well.

In a sign of how alarmed state officials are about the prospect of the possible funding cuts, the Louisiana Health Secretary sent a letter to Cassidy on Monday saying the bill “singles-out Louisiana for disproportional cuts to our Federal funding” and “introduces the specter” of a state waiver process that could eliminate protections “affecting those with pre-existing conditions or complex and costly conditions.”

“This would be a detrimental step backwards for Louisiana,” wrote [Dr. Rebekah] Gee, who posted her letter on Twitter Tuesday.

And while Walker has not played a visible role in the national health-care debate until now, certain aspects of the new bill pose an even bigger challenge for Alaska than previous proposals. Health-care premiums are particularly expensive in the state, given its many remote areas: premiums on the ACA market average roughly $1,000 a month for an individual, according to the most recent federal data.

Since the federal tax credits over time would be equalized and based on the number of low-income people in a given state, that new calculation would eliminate the more generous subsidies Alaska now enjoys.

“It’s a substantial amount of money, for Alaska,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president for special initiatives at the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation.

Given the complex nature of the Graham-Cassidy proposal, it is difficult for both state officials and health-care analysts to predict exactly how much money a given state would gain or lose if it were enacted. But early estimates suggest that states with expanded Medicaid programs and active participation on the ACA market could face major cuts.

An initial estimate for Colorado, according to state officials, suggests that it could lose at least $700 million in annual federal funding by 2025. Since the state has roughly 450,000 in its Medicaid expansion program and another 100,000 receiving premium tax credits on its health care exchange, that could translate into hundreds of thousands of Coloradans losing coverage.

The governors who have been most outspoken in their criticism of the bill have been negotiating behind the scenes to bring as many state executives on board as possible, according to aides, tweaking the letter’s language over the past couple of days to get maximum support.

Also among the governors signing the letter: John Kasich (R-Ohio) and Brian Sandoval (R-Nev.). Sandoval’s positioning puts him at odds with Heller, who has been touting the bill as a co-sponsor.

Pence said Trump told him to reach out to some Democrats. He spoke to Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) over the weekend. But after reviewing the bill, Manchin said, the senator told Pence’s aides he could not support the legislation.

Schumer said he’s confident no Democrat will vote for the legislation because “it hurts people in every state.”

Democrats had been working furiously in the past 24 hours to advance talks between Alexander and Murray on a deal to immediately stabilize insurance marketplaces with federal subsidies. The negotiations rapidly escalated after weeks of slow but consistent talks after it became clear that Senate GOP leaders were serious about holding a health-care vote before the end of the month, according to several Senate aides.

Alexander on Tuesday downplayed expectations of reaching an agreement this week, telling reporters that the pair had reached an impasse.

“During the last month, we have worked hard and in good faith but have not found the necessary consensus among Republicans and Democrats to put a bill in the Senate leaders’ hands that could be enacted,” Alexander said in a statement.

Several Republicans said those talks were stymied last week after a group of 15 Democrats led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced a “Medicare for all” plan to extend federal benefits to all Americans.

Graham said the decision for his colleagues on health care is stark: “Socialism or federalism.”

“If you’re a Republican, chances are you believe in federalism. . . . I believe that most Republicans like the idea of state-controlled health care as opposed to Washington-controlled health care,” Graham said.

Ed O’Keefe and Ashley Parker contributed to this report.


IN THE ARTICLE ABOVE, IT STATES: “GRAHAM SAID THE DECISION FOR HIS COLLEAGUES ON HEALTH CARE IS STARK: “SOCIALISM OR FEDERALISM.’”

FEDERALISM IS NOT THE OPPOSITE OF SOCIALISM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AND THEY SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN CONTRASTED AS BEING MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, AS GRAHAM DID ABOVE. HALF OF THE REGIONAL VARIANCES IN FAIRNESS, RACE, ECONOMICS, RELIGIOUS VIEWS ARE DUE TO “FEDERALISM” OR “STATES’ RIGHTS” ISSUES. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS A PATCHWORK OF CONFLICTING LAWS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WHENEVER THAT’S THE CASE, IT’S A FIELD DAY FOR TRIAL LAWYERS. I WOULD PREFER THAT MOST LAWS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT INVOLVE HUMAN CONDITIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS, BE NATIONAL AND NOT STATE BASED.

THAT’S WHY THE SOUTH SO OFTEN IS IN FACT MORE RACIST THAN THE NORTH, OR MORE UNFAIR TO INDIVIDUALS IN OTHER WAYS – GENDER ISSUES, ESPECIALLY. WHEN A STATE ALLOWS LAWS THAT MAKE VOTING LESS AVAILABLE OR LESS AFFORDABLE FOR ANY GROUP, BASED ON “STATES’ RIGHTS” ISSUES, IT NEEDS TO BE CURBED. THAT’S WHAT THE RACISTS DON’T WANT, SO THEY ARGUE AS GRAHAM DID ABOVE IN FAVOR OF FEDERALISM.

UNFORTUNATELY, HE, IN THE SAME CONFUSED THINKING PROCESS, HAS IT LINKED WITH A PHILOSOPHY OF SHARING THE MEANS OF SURVIVAL – FOOD, HEALTH CARE, HOUSING – WHICH IS MODIFIED SOCIALISM RATHER THAN PURE CAPITALISM. LIKEWISE, CAPITALISM ISN’T THE OPPOSITE OF TOTALITARIANISM. THE COMMUNISTS OF CHINA, RUSSIA, AND SOME OTHER PLACES, HAVE BEEN TOTALITARIAN STATES ALSO, BUT IT IS MANDATORY THAT THEY SHOULD BE. COUNTRIES THAT VOTE IN ELECTIONS CAN BE SOCIALISTIC, AND QUITE A FEW OF THEM ARE. NOT GOOD, SENATOR GRAHAM.

SEE THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS. WHAT THOSE “CONSERVATIVES” MEAN TO SAY IS THAT IT ISN’T UNMIXED OR UNQUALIFIED CAPITALISM, AND I AGREE. THAT’S A LARGE PART OF WHAT MAKES ME LIKE SOCIALISM. IT IS BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, AND CONCERNED WITH HUMAN NEEDS. AN ECONOMY DOESN’T HAVE TO BE HEARTLESS TO WORK. PS, SOCIALISM IS ALSO NOT THE OPPOSITE OF FREEDOM, AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TOTALITARIANISM. WE IN THIS COUNTRY NEED TO CLOSELY EXAMINE THE WAY WE VIEW THESE THINGS, BECAUSE IT STRONGLY AFFECTS HOW COMFORTABLE WE ARE AS A PEOPLE, AND I DO THINK THAT FEDERAL MONEY, ALL OF WHICH IS DERIVED FROM TAXES FROM THE PEOPLE, BE USED FOR THE PEOPLE AT LEAST AS OFTEN AS IT IS FOR THE MILITARY AND TO SUBSIDIZE BIG BUSINESS. SMALL BUSINESS, I AGREE, NEEDS HELP, ESPECIALLY IN THIS TIME OF CORPORATOCRACY. LOOK AT WIKIPEDIA’S COMMENT ON CORPORATISM AND CORPORATOCRACY, WHICH IS THE CONDITION IN OUR COUNTRY TODAY. BELOW ARE A NUMBER OF HELPFUL DEFINITIONS.

HTTPS://EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/FEDERALISM
FEDERALISM

Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a general government (the central or 'federal' government) with regional governments (provincial, state, cantonal, territorial or other sub-unit governments) in a single political system. Its distinctive feature, exemplified in the founding example of modern federalism of the United States of America under the Constitution of 1787, is A RELATIONSHIP OF PARITY between the two levels of government established.[1] It can thus be defined as a form of government in which there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status.[2]

Federalism differs from confederalism, in which the general level of government is subordinate to the regional level, and from devolution within a unitary state, in which the regional level of government is subordinate to the general level.[3] It represents the central form in the pathway of regional integration or separation,[4] bounded on the less integrated side by confederalism and on the more integrated side by devolution within a unitary state.[5]


SOCIALISM:

https://www.google.com/search?q=socialism+is+defined+as&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS725US725&oq=Socialism+&aqs=chrome.5.0j69i57j0l4.11518j1j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm
noun

A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; radicalism, progressivism, social democracy; communism, Marxism, labor movement

Policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
(IN MARXIST THEORY) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.


PARDON ME FOR USING ALL CAPS ON PARTS OF THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES, BUT THAT IS TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE CONCEPTS CLEARLY AND MORE VISIBLY. THAT’S WHY I USE ALL CAPS IN MY BLOG COMMENTS OF ALL KINDS, TOO. I USUALLY DON’T WANT MY WORDS AND THE WRITER’S WORDS TO BECOME CONFUSED. IT ALSO KEEPS ME FROM CONSTANTLY HAVING TO USE THE SHIFT KEY. THAT GETS ANNOYING FAST.

SO, THE BLOGGER PROGRAM WILL ALLOW ME ONLY TWO WAYS TO MAKE DISTINCTIONS: BOLD AND ITALICS – NO UNDERLINING, AND THOSE HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE BLOGGER FILE, SINCE THEY WON’T TRANSFER OVER FROM MY GOOD OLD WORD FILE BY THE COPY AND PASTE METHOD. CAPITALIZATION, HOWEVER, IS TREATED BY BLOGGER AS BEING A BASIC PART OF THE WORD, SUCH AS WITH ACRONYMS, AND IT WILL COPY FROM MY WORD TO THE BLOGGER FILE SUCCESSFULLY. OTHER THAN THIS, I HAVE NO COMPLAINTS ABOUT BLOGGER. IT EVEN KEEPS READERSHIP STATISTICS FOR ME, WHICH I GRATEFULLY COPY OFF INTO A WORD FILE FOR MY OWN USE. ALL OF THE WORDS BELOW, CAPITALIZED OR NOT, ARE THOSE OF MR. DAVID FLOYD OR THE WRITER OF THE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES WHICH COME NEXT.


http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100214/what-difference-between-communism-and-socialism.asp
By David Floyd | Updated May 10, 2017 — 2:46 PM EDT

COMMUNISM AND SOCIALISM ARE UMBRELLA TERMS REFERRING TO LEFT-WING SCHOOLS OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT THAT OPPOSE CAPITALISM. These two ideas have inspired various social and political movements since the 19th century. Several countries have been or are currently governed by parties calling themselves communist or socialist, though these parties' policies and rhetoric vary widely.

As an ideology, COMMUNISM IS GENERALLY REGARDED AS HARD-LEFT, MAKING FEWER CONCESSIONS TO MARKET CAPITALISM AND ELECTORAL DEMOCRACY THAN DO MOST FORMS OF SOCIALISM. As a system of government, communism tends to center on A ONE-PARTY STATE THAT BANS MOST FORMS OF POLITICAL DISSENT. These two usages of the term "communism" – one referring to theory, the other to politics as they are practiced – need not overlap: China's ruling Communist Party has an explicitly pro-market capitalist orientation and pays only lip service to the Maoist ideology whose purist adherents (Peru's Shining Path in its heyday, for example) regard Chinese authorities as bourgeois counterrevolutionaries. (See also, Why Populist Leaders Are Great for Stocks.)

These two usages of the term "communism" – one referring to theory, the other to politics as they are practiced – need not overlap: China's ruling Communist Party has an explicitly pro-market capitalist orientation and pays only lip service to the Maoist ideology whose purist adherents (Peru's Shining Path in its heyday, for example) regard Chinese authorities as bourgeois counterrevolutionaries. (See also, Why Populist Leaders Are Great for Stocks.)

Socialism can refer to a vast swath of the political spectrum, in theory and in practice. Its intellectual history is more varied than that of communism: the Communist Manifesto devotes a chapter to criticizing the half-dozen forms of socialism already in existence at the time, and proponents have taken just about every left-of-center stance on the ideal (or best achievable) structure of economic and political systems.

Socialists can be pro- or anti-market. They may consider the ultimate goal to be revolution and the abolition of social classes, or they may seek more pragmatic outcomes: universal healthcare, for example, or a universal pension scheme. Social Security is a socialist policy that has been adopted in the unabashedly capitalist U.S. (as are the eight-hour working day, free public education and arguably universal suffrage). Socialists may run for election, forming coalitions with non-socialist parties, as they do in Europe, or they may govern as authoritarians, as the Chavista regime does in Venezuela.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
Corporatism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the general social theory. FOR BUSINESS INFLUENCE IN POLITICS, SEE CORPORATOCRACY. For the process of reorganizing institutions on a corporate or business basis, see Corporatization.

Corporatism, also known as corporativism,[1] is the sociopolitical organization of a society by major interest groups, known as corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of their common interests.[2] It is theoretically based on the interpretation of a community as an organic body.[3] The term corporatism is based on the Latin root word corpus (plural corpora) meaning "body"[4] or, in the case of Fascist Italy, on the word corporazione (derived from the aforementioned Latin word, with the meaning of "embodiment", "association"), the Italian name for what was known in Germanic Europe as a Medieval guild.


Corporatocracy - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

<b>Corporatocracy /ˌkɔːrpərəˈtɒkrəsi/, is a recent term used to refer to AN ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL SYSTEM CONTROLLED BY CORPORATIONS OR CORPORATE INTERESTS.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy
Plutocracy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plutocracy (Greek: πλοῦτος, ploutos, 'wealth' + κράτος, kratos, 'rule') or plutarchy, IS A FORM OF OLIGARCHY AND DEFINES A SOCIETY RULED OR CONTROLLED BY THE SMALL MINORITY OF THE WEALTHIEST CITIZENS. THE FIRST KNOWN USE OF THE TERM WAS IN 1631.[1] Unlike systems such as democracy, capitalism, socialism or anarchism, PLUTOCRACY IS NOT ROOTED IN AN ESTABLISHED POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. THE CONCEPT OF PLUTOCRACY MAY BE ADVOCATED BY THE WEALTHY CLASSES OF A SOCIETY IN AN INDIRECT OR SURREPTITIOUS FASHION, THOUGH THE TERM ITSELF IS ALMOST ALWAYS USED IN A PEJORATIVE SENSE.[2]




SEE THE FOLLOWING SAD AND INFURIATING NEWS ARTICLE. TOO BAD THAT WELL-EDUCATED PEOPLE ARE NOT NECESSARILY MORE PRINCIPLED AS WELL. EDUCATION IS IMPORTANT, BUT NOT A CURE-ALL. SO, THIS WELL-EDUCATED COLLEGE PROFESSOR IS A SEXUAL PREDATOR AS WELL. I ALSO AM SADDENED TO SEE THAT THE UNIVERSITY, AS MANY TO MOST DO, PROTECTED HIM BECAUSE AS THE ARTICLE STATES, HE IS THEIR “STAR PROFESSOR.” USUALLY IT’S FOOTBALL PLAYERS OR FRATERNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE THE ATTACKERS THAT WILL GET AWAY WITH IT, WHILE THE WOMAN IS SHAMED AND SOMETIMES DRIVEN TO LEAVE THE UNIVERSITY.

SO, OKAY. MEN HAVE “THEIR NEEDS,” BUT SO DO WOMEN. IN BOTH CASES, IT IS A DEEPLY INSTINCTIVE THING, WHICH CAN BE DIFFICULT TO CONTROL. I DO GIVE MORE LEEWAY IN MY THINKING ON SEXUAL TRANSGRESSIONS THAN I DO IN THE CASE OF CRIMES INVOLVING MONEY, POWER, VIOLENCE AND GREED. UNFORTUNATELY, UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS ARE IN A RELATIONSHIP OF TRUST, AND SHOULD LEARN TO KEEP THEIR HANDS OFF THOSE YOUNG THINGS WITH THE MOIST SKIN AND THE NUBILE BODIES.


OF COURSE, OUR SEXUALITY IS LINKED TO THE DEEP AND MOST ANCIENT PORTIONS OF OUR BRAIN, AND IF WE HAVE BEEN ABUSED, WE MAY TURN INTO AN ABUSER. THAT’S MENTAL ILLNESS, THOUGH IT IS STILL TERRIBLY HARMFUL. THERE WAS A PSYCHIATRIST ON TV BEING INTERVIEWED, WHO HAD WRITTEN A BOOK ON THE PSYCHOPATHIC PERSONALITY AND WAS ASKED WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THE PROBLEM. WITHOUT A PAUSE, HE SAID, “WE SHOULD STOP TORTURING OUR CHILDREN!”

FROM SOME OF THE THINGS I’VE SEEN ABOUT THAT SUBJECT THROUGH MY LIFETIME, I HAVE ARRIVED AT THE CONCLUSION THAT PERHAPS PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE TO TAKE PSYCHOTHERAPY AND GET A LICENSE BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO CONCEIVE A CHILD; LIKEWISE, BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO JOIN THE POLICE FORCE. THAT, OF COURSE, IS A SMALL WRY JOKE, AND IT IS NOT THE AMERICAN WAY AT ALL; BUT THAT OPINION OF MINE IS BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP. ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT IT IS A POWER RELATIONSHIP FIRST, AND ONE OF CARETAKER SECOND. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SOME PEOPLE, OF COURSE, ARE GENTLE, LOGICAL, FAIR, HONEST AND WISE, AND DO MAKE GREAT PARENTS (OR POLICE OFFICERS). IT’S JUST THE FREQUENCY OF THE ONES WHO DON’T IN OUR SOCIETY THAT WORRIES ME.

REMEMBER WHAT RHETT BUTLER SAID IN A FURIOUS ARGUMENT WITH SCARLET WHEN SHE CLAIMED TO BE A GOOD MOTHER, “A MOTHER CAT IS A BETTER MOTHER THAN YOU ARE.”

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/university-of-rochester-professor-florian-jaeger-sexual-harassment-allegations/
CBS NEWS September 19, 2017, 7:51 AM
University of Rochester students accuse professor of being a "manipulative sexual predator"

The University of Rochester is responding to claims it mishandled sexual harassment allegations against one of its star professors. A complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) calls Florian Jaeger a "manipulative sexual predator." It also accuses university officials of retaliating against faculty who complained about his conduct.

University of Rochester officials say they thoroughly investigated the allegations last year and found Jaeger did not break any of its policies, reports CBS News correspondent Anna Werner. But his accusers claim that investigation was shoddy. They are now pressing their case all the way to the federal government. Some University of Rochester students say they've lost confidence in school administrators, accusing them of failing the alleged victims.

Senior Lindsay Wrobel has been on a hunger strike since midnight Thursday. She vows not to eat until Florian Jaeger is fired.

"I'm prepared to do this until I'm hospitalized. And I hope that it doesn't come to that point," Wrobel said.

According to a 111-page EEOC complaint filed in August, Jaeger hosted hot tub parties, used illegal drugs with students and sent one unwanted pictures of his genitals.

"At least eleven female students and post-docs at UR actively avoided working with Jaeger because of his constant sexual innuendos, pressure to sleep with students, power plays and other unprofessional behavior, which created a taxing, strange and unequal environment in which to pursue their education," the complaint said.

Celeste Kidd is one of them.

"Florian had a history of retaliation. He had retaliated against other students in front of me," Kidd said.

While trying to recruit her to the university, Kidd claims Jaeger sent her inappropriate Facebook messages. "Rochester used to be the place for legendary parties with lots of nudity," he allegedly wrote.

Elissa Newport, now a Georgetown University professor, once chaired Jaeger's department.

"He commented on the bodies of the women in the department. There were bets going around in the department about who he'd sleep with in the entering class," Newport said.

Jaeger did not respond to CBS News requests for comment. Last week, he emailed students to say he has supporters on campus who dispute the allegations: "I have always tried to make my classes and my lab an exciting, save [sic], and supportive place to pursue science," he wrote.

The university has said the EEOC complaint is largely based on hearsay and not substantiated by its own investigations and subsequent appeals. A spokesman said: "the University of Rochester does not tolerate sexual misconduct. The university takes any allegations of such behavior very seriously."

Jessica Cantlon accuses school officials of trying to embarrass Jaeger's detractors by going through their emails. The EEOC complaint claims messages were used to portray them as liars and manipulators.

"In that moment, we were devastated. We felt ruined in the eyes of our colleagues," Cantlon said.

The university says it is cooperating with the EEOC and will ask an independent expert to review its discrimination and harassment policies and procedures.



JOHN Q AMERICAN IS GETTING TICKED OFF. WATCH YOURSELVES, REPUBLICANS. “... WAS UNDECIDED ON WHETHER TO BOTHER ... BURDENSOME BUSINESS REGULATIONS ... 143 MILLION PEOPLE,” AND SO ON, ARE KEY PHRASES THAT POP OUT AT MY EYES IN THIS EQUIFAX STORY. RESTRICTIONS ON BUSINESS HAVE TAKEN A NOSE DIVE SINCE RONALD REAGAN – THE DARLING OF SO MANY REPUBLICANS -- WAS IN POWER, AND NOW WE HAVE TRUMP AND THE TEA PARTIERS. IT DISGUSTS ME.

SO MANY AMERICANS TRUST “BUSINESSMEN” AND PLACE THEM UP ON A PEDESTAL, WHEN WELL OVER HALF OF THEM ARE IN SOME DEGREE “CROOKS.” WE’RE A VERY CRASS, GREEDY SOCIETY, AND GETTING WORSE. UNFORTUNATELY, I KNOW NOTHING WILL EVER CHANGE THAT, UNLESS WE COULD POSSIBLY EDUCATE EVERYONE TO A MUCH HIGHER DEGREE INCLUDING THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND ARTISTIC FIELDS; THEN INTEGRATE US INTO ENDEAVORS TOWARD GOOD RATHER THAN EVIL. WE COULD BE TAUGHT TO HELP THE POOR RATHER THAN RIP THEM OFF, FOR INSTANCE. RELIGION COULD BE REMOVED FROM THE AREA OF DOGMA INTO THAT OF CARING. IT ISN’T THAT NOBODY DOES THOSE THINGS, BUT THAT TOO MANY AREN’T EVEN INTERESTED IN IT. SOME OF THAT IS DUE TO MENTAL/EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS, BUT MUCH IS CAUSED BY SIMPLE LAZINESS. SOAP OPERAS, THE BODY BEAUTIFUL AND BLING ARE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT TO OUR PEOPLE. OTHERWISE, WHY WOULD A DONALD TRUMP BE ELECTED AT ALL?


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-politics-the-equifax-mess-pose-challenges-republicans?cid=eml_mra_20170918
The politics of the Equifax mess pose challenges for Republicans
09/18/17 10:00 AM
By Steve Benen

Photograph -- A person man uses a laptop. Karl-Josef Hildenbrand/dpa/AP

It’s been a week since the Equifax controversy first broke, and the scope of the story is still coming into focus. One of the nation’s largest credit reporting agencies was apparently the target of a major hack that “may have exposed private information belonging to 143 million people,” including Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, birth dates, home addresses, and in some instances, driver’s license numbers.

Making matters worse, three Equifax executives sold stock in the company after the breach was discovered (they deny any wrongdoing). Making matters worse still, it took about six weeks for the company to tell the public about the breach.

So, what does this have to do with politics? Quite a bit, actually. The Equifax mess has made it vastly easier for progressives to make the case that federal officials should be regulating the heck out of the credit-reporting agencies, but as the New York Times reported, that’s unlikely to happen given the direction of the prevailing political winds.

The credit bureaus have for decades successfully fended off calls in Congress for more oversight, despite warnings about potential problems that go back to Senator William Proxmire, a Wisconsin Democrat, in the 1960s. Now, the industry is likely to find support in the agenda of President Trump, who has pledged to strip away “burdensome” business regulations. […]

Equifax spent $1.1 million on lobbying last year, up from $300,000 in 2006, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Roll Call reported last week that Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee have been pressing for hearings on the Equifax scandal, but Banking Committee Chairman Michael Crapo (R-Idaho) was undecided on whether to bother. (The bipartisan leadership of the Senate Finance Committee, however, sent a written request for information to Equifax last week.)

And what about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which congressional Republicans have been trying to gut?

The New York Times’ report noted that the CFPB [CONSUMER FINANCE PROTECTION BUREAU] has made some progress in reining in the credit bureaus, forcing the industry’s largest companies to create new quality controls and make it easier for consumers to have errors in their reports corrected. This, however, was the striking detail:

The consumer bureau recently finalized a rule prohibiting companies from forcing customers into arbitration over disputes, a method that companies have used to block class-action lawsuits. Equifax initially included a mandatory arbitration clause in the fine print of the free credit monitoring product offered in the wake of the attack – language that could have prevented victims from banding together in court.

Customers immediately cried foul. Equifax quickly backed down and removed the clause.

A bill to repeal the consumer bureau’s arbitration rule passed the House in July, but has not yet been voted on in the Senate.

So, Senate Republicans, in the wake of Equifax’s controversy, just how willing will you be to endorse the measure House Republicans already approved?

Postscript: Several Senate Democrats last week wrote to Equifax, asking the company to drop its support for the GOP-sponsored bill. The idea, evidently, is that Congress is less likely to pass this if the credit-bureau giant isn’t asking for it.

Explore:
The MaddowBlog and Financial Industry


THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE MAY BE OF INTEREST TO THOSE WHO WANT TO REPORT VIOLATIONS. IT’S A GOVERNMENT BODY, SO IT’S FREE OF CHARGE.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/
Having a problem with a financial product or service?

Tell us about your issue—we'll forward it to the company and work to get you a response, generally within 15 days.

Submit a complaint

We’ve handled over 1 million complaints, helping consumers connect with financial companies to get direct responses about problems with mortgages, student loans, payday loans, debt collection, credit reports, and other financial products and services.

Every complaint we receive gives us insights into problems that people are experiencing in the marketplace and helps us to identify and prioritize problems for potential action. The result: better outcomes for consumers, and a better financial marketplace for everyone.

Read complaints from other people

We publish complaint data (without information that directly identifies you) in our Consumer Complaint Database. Learn from other people’s experiences and see how companies have responded to complaints.

Report a potential violation to us

You can report a tip to us, through a separate process, if you are a current or former employee of a company that you think has violated federal consumer financial laws or if you are an industry insider who knows about such a company. Unlike submitting a complaint, your tip will not be sent to the company. Please be aware that we cannot take in privileged information.

About us

We're the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a U.S. government agency that makes sure banks, lenders, and other financial companies treat you fairly.


fatal misunderstandings ....

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united-nations-antonio-guterres-donald-trump-north-korea-general-assembly/
By PAMELA FALK CBS NEWS September 19, 2017, 9:39 AM
U.N. chief opens General Assembly with jabs at Trump, North Korea

Photograph -- United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres addresses the 72nd United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, U.S., September 19, 2017. REUTERS

UNITED NATIONS -- Secretary-General Antonio Guterres kicked off the United Nations General Assembly's annual debate on Tuesday by warning that we're living in "a world in pieces," and some very thinly veiled jabs at the current U.S. leader's efforts to solve the biggest problems on the planet.

"Our world is in trouble," Guterres said in his speech, which served as a prelude to speeches later Tuesday by world leaders including President Donald Trump. "People are hurting and angry. They see insecurity rising, inequality growing, conflict spreading and climate changing."

RELATED ARTICLES:
After bad-mouthing U.N., Trump seeks its help on N. Korea
How to watch Trump's speech to U.N. General Assembly
An insider's guide to Trump's 1st UNGA address

The U.N. chief went on to outline seven key threats facing the world, and the major challenges to resolving them: the risk of nuclear conflict, international terrorism, unresolved conflicts and violations of international humanitarian law, climate change, rising inequality, cybersecurity, and the refugee crisis.

In an unusual pre-debate event on Monday, Guterres, Mr. Trump and U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley sat side by side, collaborating in support of reforming the United Nations.

At the U.S.-sponsored meeting, aimed at supporting Guterres' reform agenda, the U.N. chief thanked Haley for "her leadership, her partnership and her commitment," saying the global body's bureaucracy and endless red tape keep him up at night.

President Trump delivers first remarks at United Nations
Play VIDEO
President Trump delivers first remarks at United Nations

Mr. Trump's words were also unusually positive about the U.N., saying it has been at the forefront of "feeding the hungry, providing disaster relief, and empowering women and girls in many societies all across the world."

But a day after the display of unity by the U.N. and U.S. leaders, Guterres took what appeared to some diplomats to be a not-so-subtle jab at Mr. Trump and his efforts to curb immigration and refugee intake.

Without mentioning any country in particular, Guterres said Tuesday that, "instead of closed doors and open hostility, we need to reestablish the integrity of the refugee protection regime and the simple decency of human compassion.

"With a truly global sharing of responsibility, the number of refugees we face can be managed. But too many states have not risen to the moment," he said.

To understand the comments, one need only look at Guterres' background as former High Commissioner of the U.N. Refugee agency for a decade, making his name protecting migrants. As he opened the General Assembly's debate, Guterres spoke about the importance of refugees in a broader context.

"I myself am a migrant," Guterres said, "as are many of you… But no one expected me to risk my life on a leaky boat or cross a desert in the back of a truck to find employment outside my country of birth."

North Korea major focus for Trump at U.N.
Play VIDEO
North Korea major focus for Trump at U.N.

Dealing with the realities of the refugee crisis must be a global task, Guterres said, mentioning the thousands who have died trying to reach Europe in perilous sea crossings from Africa and the Middle East, and the still-developing crisis as Rohingya Muslims flee alleged persecution in Myanmar.

Climate change was a major focus of Guterres' speech as well, coming little over a month after the Secretary-General received notice of the Trump administration's intention to withdraw from the accord, which he called a "major disappointment." Since that time, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has said there is some chance the U.S. could remain party to the agreement -- under the right conditions.

Guterres singled out North Korea, condemning the rogue state's nuclear and missile tests and saying the Security Council's unanimous adoption of sanctions sent a clear message: "Only that unity can lead to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and -- as the resolution recognizes -- create an opportunity for diplomatic engagement to resolve the crisis."

Then, clearly admonishing both Kim Jong Un and Mr. Trump, Guterres warned that "fiery talk can lead to fatal misunderstandings."

In the end, Guterres returned to the theme that he, Mr. Trump and Haley discussed -- and agreed upon -- on day 1, that of reform: "We need to reform our world, and I am committed to reforming our United Nations."

Cultures, religions and traditions vary, at times compete, and at times, result in open conflict, Guterres said, "That is exactly why multilateralism is more important than ever."

The General Assembly debate began Tuesday and will continue through September 25, with 100 Heads of State and Government speaking to the 193-member world body.

Pamela Falk
Pamela Falk is CBS News Foreign Affairs Analyst and an international lawyer, based at the United Nations.