Select Page ::

The 3 Secrets Of The Happiest Retirees (And How You Can Plan For Them) – Forbes

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

No matter where they live, what they did with their lives, or how much money they have, there are ... [+] three things I have observed over my career that happy retirees have in common.

No matter where they live, what they did with their lives, or how much money they have, there are three things I have observed over my career that happy retirees have in common.

The good news is, these are things you can plan for.

Theyre debt free.

Reaching financial independence wont be easy until youre free of debt especially adverse debt. Not all debt is adverse debt, but consumer debt for car loans, student loans, credit cards and other personal spending is categorically bad. The best way to free yourself of debt is to avoid it completely, but of course, thats not always an option.

Starting as early as possible, make a clear plan for getting out of debt and stick to it, even if it means delaying or reducing some of your savings or investments for retirement.

They have their health.

Being happy in retirement is undoubtably tied to being healthy in retirement. But a healthy lifestyle is something that must begin years before you retire.

Taking care of your health throughout your lifetimethrough nutrition, exercise, preventative medicine and mental health careis key to preserving your wellness into retirement. Find an active hobby, like tennis or hiking, that you can continue as you age to keep yourself physically fit.

If you already have health issues, take whatever steps you can to improve or preserve your health now and make sure you have a plan for how you will pay for health care throughout your retirement and have a good understanding of long-term care options.

They have a purpose.

As our life expectancy increases, the length of our retirement does as well. Day time television and shuffleboard will only keep you amused for so long.

Have a missiona reason to get out of bed in the morningthat will keep you active and thriving for all the years ahead of you. This can vary for each person, and Ive seen it include grandchildren, consulting, part-time work, volunteering and traveling. You can do anything, just dont do nothing.

Of course, you can take breaks and take time for yourself. But you cant spend 30 years sitting around and still feel fulfilled.

The lesson:

Being happy in retirement is not a coincidence, and its not something you can expect to achieve with no effort. Your plan for fulfillment and happiness is just as important as your plan for sustainable income.

Before you hand in your letter of resignation, make sure you know what you want to be when you grow up.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and may not necessarily reflect those held by Kestra Investment Services, LLC or Kestra Advisory Services, LLC. This is for general information only and is not intended to provide specific investment advice or recommendations for any individual. It is suggested that you consult your financial professional, attorney, or tax advisor with regards to your individual situation. Comments concerning the past performance are not intended to be forward looking and should not be viewed as an indication of future results.

Securities offered through Kestra Investment Services, LLC (Kestra IS), member FINRA/SIPC. Investment advisory services offered through Kestra Advisory Services, LLC (Kestra AS), an affiliate of Kestra IS. Brotman Financial Group, Inc. and BFG Financial Advisors are not affiliated with Kestra IS or Kestra AS.

Read this article:

The 3 Secrets Of The Happiest Retirees (And How You Can Plan For Them) - Forbes

Fitch assigns ‘A-‘ Insurer Financial Strength rating with stable outlook to the operating insurance subsidiaries of Ohio National Financial Services -…

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Fitch views Ohio Nationals risk-adjusted capitalization as strong

Stable outlook reflects Fitchs view the company is well positioned in a challenging external environment

CINCINNATI, July 29, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Ohio National Financial Services announced today that Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings for the financial strength of The Ohio National Life Insurance Company and Ohio National Life Assurance Corporation at A- with stable outlook.

The A- rating is Fitchs seventh-highest rating on a 21-part scale. According to Fitch, insurers rated with a category have high credit quality and are subject to low credit default risk.

The rating reflects, in part, the companys insurance operating subsidiaries strong risk-adjusted capitalization and leverage, stable financial performance and conservative investment portfolio. The stable outlook reflects Fitch's view the company is well positioned in an external environment that will present earnings-related pressures over the next 12-18 months.

Highlights from Fitchs release also include:

We are pleased that Fitch highlights our strong capitalization and stable growth in operating earnings, noted Gary T. Doc Huffman, CLU, ChFC, Ohio National chairman and chief executive officer. This rating highlights we are well positioned in the current economic environment as the coronavirus-related economic downturn is creating a severe and extensive credit shock and earnings pressures across many sectors, regions and markets, including the life insurance industry.

Huffman continued, We are successfully executing our strategy, all while maintaining our long-standing financial strength, and we continue to focus on serving our policyholders first.

About Ohio National Financial ServicesSince 1909, Ohio National has been committed to helping individuals, families and businesses protect what matters most. Through our network of financial professionals across 49 states (all except New York), the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico and through affiliated operations in South America, we provide the insurance products that help our policyholders achieve financial security and independence. As of December 31, 2019, its affiliated companies have $40.5 billion total assets under management. Products are issued by The Ohio National Life Insurance Company and Ohio National Life Assurance Corporation. Please explore ohionational.comfor more information and for the latest company updates, connect with Ohio National onLinkedIn,FacebookandYouTube.

Lisa Doxsee, APR513.794.6418 office 513.218.5519 mobilelisa_doxsee@ohionational.com

Andy Haskin513.794.6693 office513.608.3763 mobileandy_haskin@ohionational.com

See original here:

Fitch assigns 'A-' Insurer Financial Strength rating with stable outlook to the operating insurance subsidiaries of Ohio National Financial Services -...

Government of Canada invests $19 million to reduce human trafficking and support those most impacted – Canada NewsWire

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

OTTAWA, ON, July 29, 2020 /CNW/ -Today, the Honourable Maryam Monsef, Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development, along with the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness announced funds to support victims and survivors of human trafficking. The $19 million will be administered by two federal departments responsible for the implementation of the Government's five-year National Strategy to Combat Human Trafficking, a whole-of-government approach to eradicating human trafficking and supporting those impacted.

Human trafficking is a vile, harmful crime that disproportionately impacts women and girls. The Government of Canada is working with domestic and international partners to combat human trafficking in all its forms. The pandemic has made it more difficult to keep vulnerable populations safe, and help victims escape situations of human trafficking and access the supports they need. Starting today, the Government is accepting applications for projects that work to prevent and address human trafficking and support survivors.

$14 million will be distributed by Women and Gender Equality Canada (WAGE) and $5 million through Public Safety Canada. WAGE's call for proposals will support organizations that work to prevent and address human trafficking to develop and implement promising practices to enhance empowerment supports for at-risk populations and survivors of human trafficking. The call will remain open until September 4, 2020.

The funding available through Public Safety Canada will support two initiatives. The first is for projects that seek to empower victims and survivors of human trafficking through the provision of supports and services that are trauma-informed and culturally relevant. The second is for pilot projects to establish and test best practices to raise awareness of human trafficking among at-risk youth. The call will remain open until September 4, 2020.

Eligible organizations for the funds include not-for-profits, Indigenous governments (including band councils, tribal councils and self-government entities) and their agencies, Indigenous not-for-profit organizations (that represent First Nations, Inuit and/or Mtis interests, and that are controlled by members of the population they serve) and municipalities and their agencies.

Quote

"Human trafficking is largely hidden. New trends continue to emerge and the pandemic has increased the harms to the most vulnerable. If you are a survivor of sexual exploitation, forced labour; if you believe someone else might be; or if you are currently being exploited and ready to talk to someone about your next steps, please call the Canadian Human Trafficking Hotline at 1-833-900-1010. Caring professionals are ready to assist you 24/7. If you and your team provide holistic, trauma-informed services to help survivors regain their independence, reintegrate into their communities, and begin their healing and recovery process, we thank you. Eligible organizations for the funds announced today include those supporting victims and survivors and community-led empowerment programs addressing the root causes of human trafficking."

The Honourable Bill Blair, P.C., M.P.

Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

and

The Honourable Maryam Monsef, P.C., M.P.

Minister for Women and Gender Equality

Minister for Rural Economic Development

Quick Facts

The collective wisdom that emerges from The Baby-Sitters Club – The Christian Century

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

BETTERTOGETHER: In the new Netflix reboot of the classic young adult novels, the girls of the Baby-Sitters Club share the power of friendship and collaborative leadership. (Photo Kailey Schwerman / Netflix)

The new Netflix adaptation of The Baby-Sitters Club provides comfort nostalgia for adult viewers who grew up on the original series of young adult novels. It also offers something exhilaratingly fresh and wonderful: a vision of collaborative leadership and friendship centered around young women.

If you grew up in the 1980s and 90s, especially if you identified as a girl, you probably know the premise of the series: a group of 12-year-old girls bands together to start a babysitting service in their small Connecticut town. Each books story is told from the point of view of one of the girls as they tackle a new problem in babysitting and the challenges of growing up.

The original series had a relatively diverse cast of characters for the 1980s, and it dealt with complicated families. The new television series expands that diversity as it gracefully moves the series into the 21st century. This means both that the characters represent a wider range of racial, ethnic, class, and sexual identities and, perhaps more importantly, that growing up successfully means learning to talk about these identities with honesty and bravery.

In the books Claudia is a junk foodobsessed Japanese-American artist with a reputation for funky clothes. In the show she discovers her artistic voice when she grapples with her grandmothers stories about her experience as a child in American internment camps. Mary Anne is being raised by an overprotective single father, just as in the booksbut she discovers her own moral compass and bravery when she has to speak out on behalf of one of her babysitting charges, a trans girl who is consistently being misgendered as a boy. This in turn leads her to embrace her own curly black-girl hair as part of a more grown-up and authentic sense of style.

These are the struggles of 12-year-old girls, but it turns out 12-year-old girls have a lot to teach us. So much fiction jumps immediately from childhood make-believe kingdoms and talking animals to the perils of early adulthood. The BSC sets up shop in the in-between years, when young teens are seeking autonomy and the freedom to take risks but still fundamentally need and want the haven of a family or community to hold them. Perhaps the greatest lesson the girls are learning is how to be that community for each other as they press beyond their families of origin.

As a 12-year-old reader, I was enamored of the club part of BSC: this semiautonomous space where the girls assigned each other roles (president, treasurer) and made collective decisions. Sure, they relied on parents and older brothers to drive them there, but sitting up in Claudias bedroom eating hidden candy and waiting for the phone to ring, they practiced a form of collective leadership that felt like a vision of adult life.

In the reboot, the girls buy a retro phone on Etsy to re-create this experience in an iPhone age. They assign jobs based on a rotating calendar, vote on club decisions, and problem-solve complicated clients: a newly divorced mom who has farmed out all adult responsibilities to her sitter, a little girl who is going through a morbid phase and holds funerals for her dolls. Those of us who grew up on the BSC quickly realized that adulthood offers few models of community or collective leadership as compelling.

Now I identify more with the girls parents, who are navigating second marriages, single parenthood, the illness of their own parents. Most of these parents were shaped by 1980s and 90s feminism and are doing their best to pass on those lessons to their kids. Kristys mom desperately tries to impart the importance of financial independence as she worries about marrying a much wealthier man. Dawns mother takes her to a feminist spiritual share-mony to purge bad energy as they start a new life in Connecticut after a move from California.

In the bright-eyed moment on the cusp of adolescence, the girls see adulthood clearly as a series of compromises and compensation strategies. They feel those compromises and live with sadness and grief, tooa dead mother, an absent father, financial precarity, their own illnesses. But they take what they are learning back to the club, where they discuss and debate it, work it out collectively, and arrive at their own sense of wisdom. We are used to thinking of adolescence as a time to find oneself as an individual. The BSC suggests this is a fools errand if you dont have a collective community to help you discern.

Most of us feel the collapse of leadership all around us. The future needs something more than a new set of leaders repeating the same mistakes. This reboot suggests that if the 12-year-old girls are alright, we might get a chance at a better future.

A version of this article appears in the print edition under the title The collective wisdom of 12-year-old girls.

10 Growth Stocks to Buy for Long-Term FIRE Investors – Investorplace.com

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

For young FIRE investors, retirement isnt an age. Its a number. And its a number which they believe they can get to rather quickly. Much more quickly than their parents did.

FIRE which stands for Financial Independence, Retire Early is a modern, Millennial-driven movement creating a blueprint for young workers to follow so that they can retire well before 65, and even as early as 35 or 40.

What does that blueprint look like? Its not too complex.

Save. Invest. Retire.

Specifically, live with minimal expenses so that you can afford to regardless of your income save anywhere between 50% and 75% of your annual salary. Take those savings and smartly invest them across various assets, like stocks.

Watch your investment portfolio benefit from the wonders of compounding. Retire within 15 to 20 years as a millionaire. Heres the math.

Its 2020. Lets say you have a job which pays $60,000 per year (the median household salary in the U.S. today). Lets also say you live by FIRE principles, and invest half of that salary every year. If you net out 10% returns per year on those investments, then by 2040, your investment account will have more than $2 million in it.

And thats what the FIRE movement is all about. Creating millionaires through frugal living and smart investing.

Of course, critical to unlocking this huge growth is picking the right stocks to buy so that you can net out those 10% returns per year. Here are 10 growth stocks to buy for long-term FIRE investors:

With a disciplined budget and these stocks in your portfolio, financial independence is closer than you think.

Source: Mike Mareen / Shutterstock.com

FIRE investors want exposure to Amazon. This company has its fingers in every important, hyper-growth industry out there.

Amazon.com is the global leader in e-commerce, a space which is projected to grow by leaps and bounds over the next several years as consumers continue to migrate into online channels.

Amazon Web Services is also the global leader in cloud computing, a space which is similarly projected to grow dramatically as businesses increasingly digitize office workloads.

Meanwhile, the companys smart home business headlined by Alexa is a leader in the emerging voice assistant and AI-powered consumer products market. Amazons digital ad business is in the first innings of becoming a formidable player in that secular growth industry. Amazon also owns Twitch, the leading video game streaming platform, which will see huge uptake over the next few years as eSports gain traction.

Theres also the autonomous vehicle business, which was boosted recently by the acquisition of Zoox. At scale, Amazon could build out a fairly robust self-driving logistics business.

Net net, Amazon has a ton of long-term growth potential through its various hyper-growth businesses. All of that potential will keep AMZN stock on a healthy upward trajectory for the next 10+ years.

Source: justplay1412 / Shutterstock.com

Maybe the best growth stock to buy for FIRE investors is Shopify.

Thats because this company is rapidly turning into the backbone of modern commerce, a journey which will ultimately power huge gains in revenues, profits and the stock price over the next 10+ years.

Shopify broadly provides e-commerce solutions to merchants and retailers of all shapes and sizes. Such tools include website building tools, expert consulting advice, digital marketing insights, social channel selling capabilities and much more.

These tools are the building blocks of modern commerce. That is, a retailer cannot stay alive for long today without a robust online selling operation, and that robust online selling operation is powered by the tools which Shopify provides.

To that end, Shopify is becoming the backbone of modern commerce. Yet gross merchandise value through the platform measured less than 2% of total e-retail sales last year. And the companys profit margins are essentially flat today, despite near 60% gross margins.

Thus, over the next 10+ years, Shopify will leverage e-commerce tailwinds to dramatically grow its share of the global retail market, power huge revenue growth, drive significant margin expansion and produce enormous profit growth.

That enormous profit growth will help SHOP stock sustain huge gains in the long run.

Source: Wachiwit / Shutterstock.com

Facebook has tremendous long-term growth potential, making it a must-buy for FIRE investors.

The company owns four of the most used social media apps in the world. Each of them Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger have over a billion users. Yet, only two of them Facebook and Instagram are populated with ads. Thus, Facebook has a huge opportunity in the long run to roll out ads on WhatsApp and Messenger, dramatically increase ad inventory in its ecosystem and power huge revenue growth.

Thats on top what is already rapid ad revenue growth on Facebook and Instagram, which is powered by an exceptionally sticky user base and a shift of ad dollars from offline to online channels.

Even further, Facebook has a huge opportunity in e-commerce. We are already spending all of our time on social channels. And we are already discovering tons of products and services on social feeds. So why not just buy products and services though social channels, too?

Facebook is trying to build out this last step in the shopping process, with new initiatives like Shops. If these initiatives gain traction over the next decade, Facebook could inject a ton of e-commerce related revenue into its growth narrative.

Big picture: Facebook has a ton of growth potential over the next decade, and all that growth potential will drive consistently large gains in FB stock.

Source: shutterstock.com

The shift from guess-and-check, human-driven processes towards data-driven, computer-powered processes is already one of the biggest trends in the world, and that is only set to acccelerate.

One way to play this trend is to buy programmatic advertising leader The Trade Desk.

The Trade Desk operates a demand-side advertising platform which leverages data-driven algorithms to dynamically and automatically run ad campaigns in way that decreases costs and optimizes every ad dollar spent.

This form of data-driven advertising is the future of advertising.

Yet today, only about 1% of total digital ad spending goes through The Trade Desks platform.

Thus, this innovative company has a huge opportunity to grow market share, ad spend and revenues over the next decade. The Trade Desk will do just that. At the same time, the companys highly scalable application software business model will benefit from positive operating leverage and profit margin expansion.

At the end of the day then, The Trade Desk is in the first few innings of a huge, multi-year growth narrative wherein the companys profits and stock price will soar higher.

Source: calimedia / Shutterstock.com

The future of meats consumption is plant-based, and this simple reality makes Beyond Meat one of the best stocks to buy for FIRE investors.

In a nutshell, one of the defining megatrends of the 2020s which started to emerge in the late 2010s will be a mass consumer shift towards socially and environmentally positive products and services.

Why? Thanks to the internet and social media, consumers are plugged into everything, all the time. This always on behavior from consumers has increased their social and environmental awareness, to a point where they increasingly want to do their part to save the planet.

The adoption of plant-based meat fits in perfectly with this trend.

Relative to animal meat, plant-based meat is environmentally positive (it eliminates the need for cows and meat production plants, which are huge contributors to global warming) and socially positive (it preserves animal welfare). So over the next decade, as more and more consumers pivot towards socially and environmentally positive products and services, many of these consumers will gradually adopt plant-based meat.

Beyond Meat is the Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) of this space. They have the branding power. They have all the distribution partnerships. And they have robust technological advantages in efficiently mass-producing plant-based meat of all varieties.

So, what Tesla did in the 2010s is what Beyond Meat could do in the 2020s.

And that makes BYND stock one of the best stocks to buy for young FIRE investors.

Source: r.classen / Shutterstock.com

Adobe as a leader in all things visual media is set to win big over the next 10+ years as the world increasingly communicates through visual media.

Long story short, everything is visual these days. Consumers are spending all their time communicating with each other through visual-heavy social apps, like Instagram, Snap (NYSE:SNAP), and TikTok. Because of this, brands are spending all their time communicating with customers through these visual-heavy social apps, too.

What this creates is persistently rising demand for tools which help consumers and enterprises create compelling visual content.

Adobe is the head-and-shoulders-above-the-rest sector leader when it comes to providing those tools.

Consequently, demand for the companys consumer-facing and enterprise-facing visual media content tools will surge over the next 10+ years as the world more significantly pivots into visual communication.

At the same time, Adobe has a digital workflow business which helps businesses digitize their contract management processes. This business, too, has secular growth prospects, thanks to the rise of remote work.

Overall then, Adobe has a bright future. That bright future will continue to guide ADBE stock to big gains for long-term investors.

Source: Lori Butcher / Shutterstock.com

Okta has developed a unique cloud security platform that represents the future of how companies will secure their workflows and data.

In a nutshell, Okta has created a security platform which turns identity into the defense perimeter. What that means is that, as opposed to protecting a companys workflows and data with a wall of security, Okta simply protects the identities of each employee in the ecosystem. In so doing, the company has created a cloud security platform which optimizes for employee mobility and workflow flexibility without compromising security integrity.

In the future, organizations will employ a hybrid business model which incorporates remote and in-office work. Oktas novel Identity Cloud platform is the ideal security solution in that world.

As such, Oktas Identity Cloud platform will go from relatively niche today, to nearly ubiquitous over the next decade. As that happens, the companys customer base, revenues and profits will all soar.

So will OKTA stock.

And that makes OKTA one of the best stocks to buy for long-term FIRE investors.

Source: JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock.com

The long-term bull thesis on Roku is very simple.

Streaming TV is the new cable TV. But, when you sit back and think about it, streaming TV isnt too different from cable TV. It just has multiple on-demand streaming services, as opposed to multiple pre-programmed channels.

Still, in both spaces the existence of multiple content options mandates the existence a centralized software platform that aggregates and curates all the content, and provides consumers with seamless access to whatever they want to watch.

In the old cable TV world, the cable box did this job. In the new streaming TV world, Roku does this job.

The company has created a centralized software platform which both operates through standalone plug-and-play Roku devices, and is built-in into smart TVs that aggregates, curates and provides seamless access to all the streaming services in the world, from Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) to Disney+ to Amazon Prime Video.

In so doing, Roku is turning into the cable box of streaming TV.

Thats a valuable position to be in. Over the next 5 to 10 years, the $70+ billion of ad spend sitting in the linear TV channel, will migrate into the streaming TV channel. As it does, a lot of those ad dollars will make their way into the Roku ecosystem, since its the biggest central access point in the entire industry.

This huge influx of TV ad dollars will propel equally huge revenue growth at Roku. Big profit growth will follow suit. So will big gains in ROKU stock.

Source: Michael Vi / Shutterstock.com

Young FIRE investors should invest in the big data revolution.

Thats because over the next decade, the widespread proliferation of data-tracking software will dramatically increase the volume of data globally. At the same time, technological advancements in AI-powered data analytics algorithm will dramatically increase the value of insights companies can glean from data.

In essence then, the global big data market is on the cusp of huge growth. By the end of the decade, data will be everywhere. So will data analytics tools and platforms.

Splunk is at the heart of this big data megatrend.

The company provides market-leading data analysis tools through its Data-to-Everything platform which allow companies to take the mountains of data they are collecting, and quickly turn into them into accurate and actionable insights.

These tools will increasingly become mission-critical and ubiquitous over the next decade.

As they do, Splunks growth narrative and SPLK stock will power higher over the next 10+ years.

Source: IgorGolovniov / Shutterstock.com

Last but not least, on this list of growth stocks to buy for FIRE investors is Square.

Square is a pure-play on the cashless commerce revolution.

The era of cash is coming to an end. The era of card and digital payments is here. Square has built a robust portfolio of tools and services to help facilitate this transition from cash to cashless payments.

This includes seller-side tools, such as cashless payment readers, digital payroll management services and e-banking services. It also includes buyer-side tools, such as the digital peer-to-peer payments ecosystem, Cash App and an accompanying debit card.

Both of these sets of tools will see robust adoption over the next few years as cash increasingly becomes antiquated.

Squares reach across the global payments network will increase. The companys revenues and profits will soar. So will the SQ stock price.

Luke Lango is a Markets Analyst for InvestorPlace. He has been professionally analyzing stocks for several years, previously working at various hedge funds and currently running his own investment fund in San Diego. A Caltech graduate, Luke has consistently been rated one of the worlds top stock pickers by various other analysts and platforms, and has developed a reputation for leveraging his technology background to identify growth stocks that deliver outstanding returns. Luke is also the founder of Fantastic, a social discovery company backed by an LA-based internet venture firm. As of this writing, he was long AMZN, SHOP, FB, TTD, BYND, ADBE, OKTA, ROKU, SPLK, SQ, and NFLX.

Swine building maintenance the topic of online webinar series | The Standard Newspaper – Waukon Standard

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

The overall profitability of a livestock production operation greatly depends on the age of the buildings.

Maintenance of the buildings is critical for their continued use. Techniques that can help improve the usable life of roofs, concrete, slats and trusses need to be considered and implemented, notes Kapil Arora, agricultural engineering specialist with ISU Extension and Outreach.

ISU Extension and Outreach is joining industry partners to offer a five-part webinar series on the maintenance issues faced by facility managers and maintenance crews. The sessions are geared toward livestock producers, livestock building owners and contractors, facility managers, maintenance crew members, engineers, designers and others interested in swine building maintenance.

- Aug. 19: It Is Your Concrete Pit as Well.- Aug. 21: Maintenance of Concrete Pits and What to Look For.- Aug. 24: Gable End Attic Air Intakes for Roof and Moisture Management.- Aug. 26: General Maintenance Tips for Swine Buildings.- Aug. 28: Building Truss Management.

Each session is offered from 1-2 p.m. CDT by Zoom videoconference.

Sessions will discuss concrete pit maintenance and construction, truss management, roof and moisture management and other repair and maintenance issues that can help protect the building and extend its life.

Participants also will learn about unique ways to allow clean air into the attic space and minimize pit-ventilated gases from entering the attic during periods of minimum ventilation during winter months, helping to reduce roof corrosion. Ways to maintain concrete slats including their repair, to help enhance their usable life, will also be discussed.

The series is offered in collaboration with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and sponsored by Ag Property Solutions, AgVICE, Hills Bank, Hog Slat, Iowa Pork Producers Association, Marcus Lumber and Pinnacle.

Advance registration is required to participate and must be completed for all five sessions by midnight, Aug. 17. Payment is online with credit card only.

Online registration and additional information is available at http://www.aep.iastate.edu/building. For questions, contact ANR Program Services at anr@iastate.edu, or contact your regional Iowa State University Extension and Outreach agricultural engineering field specialist.

Excerpt from:

Swine building maintenance the topic of online webinar series | The Standard Newspaper - Waukon Standard

Instead of crying wolf on Section 230 reform, platforms should focus on the predators within | TheHill – The Hill

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Internet platforms and their defenders want you to believe that every attempt to reform Section 230 would repeal the provision and, with it, free speech on the internet. That isnt the case. The proposals under serious consideration do not strike Section 230, but instead make narrow changes to fix its flaws. And, as always, the First Amendment has the final word on free expression in the United Stateseven on the internet.

Congress decision to create Section 230 was precipitated by the 1995 case of Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy. Applying a traditional libel analysis, the New York Supreme Court had ruled that Prodigys efforts to moderate inappropriate language on its electronic bulletin boards meant Prodigy had exercised editorial discretion, making it a publisher. Consequently, Prodigy was potentially liable for defamatory statements on the bulletin boards, even if it wasnt aware of the statements. Platforms that chose not to moderate content, by contrast, could not be held culpable unless they knew or should have known about such statements.

Concerned that platforms would stop moderating content to avoid liability, Congress overturned Stratton legislatively. In particular, Section 230(c)(2) states that [n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

By creating a safe harbor for content moderation, Section 230(c)(2) gives platforms confidence to serve as outlets for user-generated content and free expression. Thats a good thing. Section 230(c)(1), however, states that [n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. Courts have held that this language shields platforms from liability even if they inadequately moderate illicit activity or refuse to moderate at all, including in cases involving sexual disparagement, revenge porn, harassment, and terrorism.

That interpretation eliminates for internet platforms the legal duty of care that businesses ordinarily have: to take reasonable steps to curb illicit use of their services and facilities. Platforms say they take such steps, anyway, and that may be true in some cases. But their decisions are beyond judicial scrutiny, which means they cannot be held accountable even when they dont take such steps.

Internet platforms oppose Section 230 reform because they wish to continue avoiding liability when they negligently, recklessly, or willfully disregard illicit activity. But thats not a winning argument. So they claim that reforming Section 230 would imperil free speech and the internet.

This simply isnt true, at least under proposals by a number of commentatorsmyself includedto require that platforms take reasonable steps to curb illicit conduct as a condition of receiving protection under Section 230.

The reasonableness standard is inherently flexible. It would account for the resources available to a platform and the benefits and risks posed by use of its services. The effort needed to meet the reasonableness standard will be proportional to platform size, ensuring smaller platforms are not unreasonably burdened as they try to grow and that firms are asked only to expend resources that make sense in light of the severity of a potential harm and the costs to combat it.

Because this approach does not require regulation, it avoids censorship concerns. Significantly, it would also leave in place the Section 230(c)(2) safe harbor for content moderation. So long as platforms meet the modest responsibility of taking reasonable steps to curb illicit activityas other companies mustthe platforms could continue to serve as outlets for free expression without fear of liability.

Moreover, even if an internet platform failed to take such steps, it would not automatically be subject to liability. It simply could no longer hide behind Section 230. Any lawsuit would still need to prove some cause of action. And a court would still be bound to consider the free speech implications before assessing liability, because loss of Section 230s special protections does not eliminate the First Amendments protections.

Internet platforms desire to stop changes to a provision that gives them liability protection not enjoyed by non-internet servicesmany of which they compete withis not surprising. But that does not represent good public policy when it vastly increases harmful behavior online that victimizes real people. If the platforms would take reasonable steps to prevent predatory behavior on their services, rather than cry wolf, they should have nothing to fear from this reform of Section 230, as both they, and the internet, could continue to thrive.

Neil Fried, former Chief Counsel for Communications and Technology to the Energy and Commerce Committee, testified at the Committees June 24 hearing on Section 230. In January, he left the Motion Picture Association and started DigitalFrontiers Advocacy.

View original post here:

Instead of crying wolf on Section 230 reform, platforms should focus on the predators within | TheHill - The Hill

The statue defenders are the real enemies of free speech – Open Democracy

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

In the decades which followed the end of the Second World War, Britain emerged as a democratic state shorn of its empire, committed to a new global order based on the self-governing sovereignty of nations and the equality of their citizens. This was a radical break with what had gone before. Protecting empire had been a central theme in the politics of the 1930s. War was fought by the empire, in part to defend empire. But after 1945 empires collapsed quickly, and as they did so, in most parts of the world, the imperial statues came down quickly.

Statues celebrating Germanys empire were the first to fall, replaced by heroes of nations like Poland and Czechoslovakia, newly independent from Nazi occupation. In India, statues were first moved by Britons anxious to protect the monuments of imperial heroes from newly enfranchised Indian crowds. For example, a figure in Kanpur commemorating the death of Britons during the rebellion of 1857 was quietly moved in 1947 to protect it from Indians let into the previously white-only park where it had been housed. By the 1960s, Indian state governments were pulling down imperial statues in the hundreds. They did so to express a more confident sense of cultural nationalism, and caused diplomatic protests from Harold Wilsons government in London. More recently, the fall of the Soviet empire has seen the mass removal of statues to Russias Communist empire-builders in eastern Europe.

In Britain, statues to imperial heroes were until recently ignored not pulled down, more likely to be the repository of bird-shit than political rage.

Britain moved on from empire, without taking statues down. In part that happened as mid-century politicians and intellectuals rewrote empires story to claim independence in India and elsewhere was its culmination, not collapse. But by 1960, empire had been abandoned so fundamentally that Harold Macmillan could stand before parliaments in Ghana and South Africa in his Winds of Change speeches and celebrate Black African nationalism.

A review of the imperial statues in our towns and cities is long overdue.

Most were put up in a short period between the 1860s to 1920s, and they commemorated a politics based on racial inequality and violent conquest. The statue-builders imagined the world was divided between a small number of large competing imperial states whose power was based on force. Many of the figures celebrated, Robert Baden-Powell and Cecil Rhodes for example, thought war allowed better societies to thrive, and the weaker ones to die out.

These kinds of ideas have always been contested. The figure of Robert Clive standing amidst cannon-fire which Lord Curzon erected in King Charles Street was fervently opposed by liberals, who wanted Garibaldi put up instead. But there were enough like Curzon with the power to get statues put up to celebrate the men who embodied imperial violence.

Britains empire ended a long time ago. The fall of statues to slavers and imperial officers is an opportunity for the iconography of our public spaces to finally be brought into line with the democratic approach that has governed public life for almost a century. Protests in response to the Black Lives Movement create the exciting prospect of Britain properly reckoning with the empire it lost generations ago. In its place, they allow us to collectively create a shared national story to reflect and celebrate what, in practice, the country has been since the 1950s: a democratic, self-governing, multi-racial post-imperial society.

But that national conversation is currently being blocked by the irate response of politicians and commentators who vigorously condemn the removal of statues. Some of these largely conservative critics use hysterical rhetoric about totalitarianism and revolution. The more apoplectic among them (Peter Hitchens and Toby Young, for example) imagine that anti-imperial iconoclasm is undermining Britains liberal, easy-going, tolerant society.

The irony is worth noting peaceful protests against statues which commemorate the anti-liberal supporters of authoritarian regimes are condemned as attacking free speech. Its worth reminding ourselves how different the world which produced these statues is from the values that Hitchens, Young and comrades defend. The early twentieth-century Conservative party was imperialist and protectionist. It championed tariffs to protect national and imperial trade. Its arguments for imperial federation, an imperial single market and customs union were linked to ideas about racial hierarchy, and to the idea of uniting what Rhodes called the Anglo-Saxon race. But supporters of empire also used arguments about the need for big states in a competitive world familiar to present-day supporters of the European Union. By contrast, the modern Conservative party is avowedly anti-racist, economic liberal and strongly wedded to the idea of free trade. Most importantly it believes in the sovereignty of the nation-state, imagining the world to consist of independent, self-governing societies that have a right to resist the encroachment of external forces on national life. Rhetorically it is more likely to appropriate the language of anti-imperialism opposing the great empire of Europe, for example - than to justify imperial rule.

None of this is surprising. Since the mid-1950s the most articulate Conservative intellectuals had either become committed anti-imperialists (for example Enoch Powell) or simply remained silent on the subject. There is no unambiguously celebratory history of the British empire written by a Conservative-voting writer until 2003. Niall Fergusons Empire published in that year celebrates empire as something it was emphatically not: a vehicle for diffusing free trade. Until Iraq, even for Tories, empire was consigned to the irrelevant past. The useful, celebrated past for Britains right consisted instead of the moderate, decent, down-to-earth lessons learnt from the supposedly continuous history of an insular, island nation state over many generations.

My point is to highlight the strange predicament of those protesting against the downfall of statues. They defend statues which celebrate figures symbolising values exactly the opposite of those they support. They talk of a cultural revolution, but dont defend the order the supposed revolutionaries are trying to replace. Their worry is not that anything specific which the statues stood for might be dethroned; it is with the act of dethroning itself, and what conscious change in our public realm might entail.

This only makes sense if, a century after universal suffrage, conservatives are anxious about democratic conversation. If there is, in other words, a deep-rooted authoritarianism in conservative thinking which distrusts popular debate. From the comments of the statue-defenders, this certainly seems the case. Critics argue that those encouraging discussion of statues are accused of playing an irresponsible and dangerous game; dissent pushes us down a slippery slope. For one prominent blogger, protests about statues in Britain threaten the degeneration of our ordered polity into feudal tribalism unless the state adopts a vigorous, violent response. Given the largely peaceful character of protests and the success of the police in maintaining order, these are remarkable statements. They imply the paranoid view that open debate about the destiny of the nation and its heroes will quickly lead to disorder. In fact of course, theres no sign that thats the case.

The statue-defenders claim to defend the nation, but they have a hollow and undemocratic idea of what it is. They do not think we, its citizens, can debate and agree on our moral values, so instead they need to be imposed by an elite. They believe there is no space for reasoned disagreement within the national public. They do not trust people to speak other than through the narrow questions asked in plebiscites. Ultimately, the dictates of order force these fearful conservatives to defend silence in public space.

There are better ways of engaging with our national history than this, and they are being developed in towns and cities throughout Britain, by leaders from all political sides. In less than two months weve seen the debate about who to represent on the empty plinth in Bristol where Thomas Colston once stood; Sadiq Khans review of London statues and the discussion convened by a Conservative councillor in Croydon about imperial street names in Croydon. These, and conversations which will begin over the next months and years show that citizens want a mature and sustained debate about what and who we value in our history, about what we share in common, about which elements of the past we can celebrate and which move beyond or challenge.

Contrary to the fears of frightened Conservatives, we are capable of reaching a consensus about whose image should stay and who should go. The question is not whether each individual was morally pure, but whether they connect with what we want to celebrate now. My guess is wed keep Churchill and Gladstone, but remove Clive and Baden-Powell. But lets have the debate. If the defenders of silence and opponents of debate dont get their way, the empty plinths which emerge are an opportunity for a national conversation about the relationship between the past and present which is long overdue.

Excerpt from:

The statue defenders are the real enemies of free speech - Open Democracy

Good Faith And The Golden Rule At Mediation – JD Supra

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Authors preface: Mediation is indisputably the most cost-effective and efficient way to resolve disputes. Moreover, there is positive energy and cautious optimism in the mediation process, which every participant enjoys. Especially, now in the time of Covid, we enjoy seeing people face-to-face, even if it is on the computer or mobile device. The enhanced communication of the mediation process increases the ability to view the issues from the perspective of the other parties and the mediator.

Be transparent

At mediation, It is better to be transparent from the start, lay your cards on the table and show good faith with the neutral and opposing counsel. Unwanted surprises can sometimes derail a settlement.

The number onesurprise commonlyencountered is when a party appears at mediation with a settlement position that is so high or so low as to be unreasonable. An outrageous starting point isn't so bad if the party taking that position becomes more flexible during the mediation and brings the position within the realm of reason. But last minute details may very well derailany chance of a quicksettlement.Instead, therevelation becomes the main subject of discussion as the mediation continues.

The mediator's function is to helpthe parties sort through the facts of thecase.His or hersuccessas a mediator depends upon treating everyone in the room with equanimity. It's difficult enough to prepare for a mediation, but finding out that the playing field has been changed at the last minute makes thingsthatmuch more difficult.

Good Faith

The Golden Rule states you should treat others as you wouldlike tobe treated

and is especially applicable to all mediations. Good faithinsettlement negotiations includes how we handle theentireprocess, not just being willing to pay a reasonable settlement number.All parties have an ethical obligation to bargain in good faith. This, of course, does not always happen,which raises question about suchunconventional negotiationtactics.

The principle of good faith must be adhered to when negotiating at mediation. There is little to be gained by disclosing new information that may significantly change the value of the case. in fact, it might force a case to court that could and should be reasonably settled early on.The party springing the surprise during negotiations may actually end up being the one most surprised at the end of a long and expensive trial.

Be reasonable and respectful

People who frequently mediate find it useful to maintain a reputation for predictability and consistency. This makes it easier to negotiatewith all partiesand reach a result acceptable to the client.Taking realistic positions and not wasting time usually makes the people on the other side of the table more forthcoming. When somebody likes dealing with you, it makes it easier for them to offer you what you need. Some of the most effective people take a reasonable position and stick with it. If it turns out that the position has a weakness, they will listen to reason. If their position is strong, they will stick with their position. Rationality, not emotion, drives effective strategy.

Mutual respect is essential. When people spend several hours at mediation only to find that there was never any settlement possibility from the get-go, they are universally unhappy. Delay and obfuscation make the other side unwilling to make any deal. Consider being up-front with your position well prior to the mediation day, so the other side has time to consider it and to consult with necessary authorities. The need to speak with supervisors is particularly true when dealing with insurance carriers. Any settlement authority given by those supervisors is based only on known information. If you appear at mediation and for the first time disclose a substantial lien, a new injury or recent surgeries, many times the insurance representative at mediation cannot get the additional settlement authority needed, the case can't settle, and preventable delay ensues.

Don't fall in love with your case

Don't let emotion color your position. Any jury may disagree with your idea of justice and any trial judge may refuse to admit evidence essential to your position. Maybe you need to step back, talk with colleagues, and see if your expectations should be adjusted.

Many dealing in the law recognize the Golden Rule as akin to Karma; What goes around comes around. This may not always be true, but regulars at mediation know that being up-front yields benefits in the long run. Be prepared, professional, considerate, and let the other side know that there is nothing personal in the position you are taking. A mutual attitude of cautious optimism makes mediation both enjoyable and effective. Building positive relationships with the opposition makes it much easier to settle cases in the future.

One last aphorism to ponder when you are on your way to the next mediation: You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar.

[View source.]

View post:

Good Faith And The Golden Rule At Mediation - JD Supra

Should owner-occupied duplexes in Berkeley be subject to rent control? – Berkeleyside

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

The Rent Board voted to ask the City Council to place a measure on the November ballot eliminating the golden duplex exemption, among other actions. The council will take up the matter tonight. Photo: Pete Rosos

For the last two years, the Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board has worked to eliminate a carve-out to the citys rent control laws the so-called golden duplex rule.

When Berkeley voters adopted rent control in 1980, they decided that people who owned a duplex, lived there by Dec. 31, 1979, and rented out the other apartment should not be subject to rent control. The thinking was that was an intimate relationship that shouldnt be regulated by a government institution.

But in ensuing years, that philosophy has come under attack. Tenant activists say that all tenants should be protected by rent and eviction controls and that the intimate relationship between a golden duplex owner and their tenants is ripe for exploitation. The owner can raise their tenants rent as high as they want and as often as they want. The owner can kick someone out of their unit whenever they want and for whatever reason they want. For that reason, many Rent Board commissioners, and groups like the Berkeley Tenants Union, want to eliminate the rent and eviction control exemptions for golden duplexes.

On May 29, in a 7-2 vote, the Rent Board voted to ask the City Council to place a measure on the November ballot eliminating the golden duplex exemption, among other actions. The council will take up the matter tonight.

No one is certain how many golden duplexes there are in Berkeley, but estimates range from 400 to 1,000. Since they are exempt from rent regulations, owners do not have to register them with the Rent Board. There are about 27,550 rental units in Berkeley, according to the Rent Board. About 19,667, or 71% of them, are covered by rent and eviction controls

The golden duplex vote has prompted lobbying and action from organizations representing both renters and property owners.

The Berkeley Tenants Union, an organization dedicated to defending and advancing the rights of Berkeley renters, encouraged its members this week to write to the City Council and urge them to place the golden duplex law on the November ballot. Two leaders of the BTU also serve as Rent Board commissioners and voted to ask the council to put the item on the ballot Paola Laverde, the Rent Board president, and John Selawsky. The BTU is providing talking points for members to say at tonights council meeting or in an email.

Dont be fooled by landlords, who are falsely claiming that they need their businesses to be exempt from reasonable regulations, the BTU wrote on Facebook. Just a cursory investigation shows that they are lying about supposed reasons to continue exempting golden duplexes and ADUs.

Being a landlord is a FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS, and a very lucrative one, the BTU post continued. Like every other for-profit industry, it must be regulated at EVERY SCALE in order to protect consumers in this case tenants from exploitative practices.

The Berkeley Property Owners Association, which represents landlords in Berkeley, many of them small property owners, is also advocating for its members to get involved with the vote. In addition, the BPOA filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission against Leah Simon-Weisberg, a Rent Board commissioner. The complaint states that Simon-Weisberg should have recused herself from voting to ask the City Council to place the golden duplex measure on the ballot because she lives in a golden duplex, according to the complaint. Therefore, she stands to benefit financially if that unit becomes rent-controlled, the complaint contends.

Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board Commissioner Leah Simon Weisberg violated [the law] section 87100 when she made a governmental decision which had a reasonably foreseeable material effect on one of her personal financial interests, reads part of the FPPC complaint.

Matt Brown, the acting executive director of the Rent Board, told Berkeleyside that Simon-Weisberg did not have a conflict.

Commissioners are free to participate in discussions and vote upon proposals that may have direct consequences for their personal housing situation or the financial performance of their rental property, so long as the proposal does not treat the Commissioners any differently from anyone else who owns or lives in the same type of property, he said in an email.

(The BPAO also sent a letter to the Berkeley city attorney which incorrectly argued that Simon-Weisberg cast the deciding fifth vote to send the matter to the council. Since she should not have voted, that matter would not have advanced, the letter argued. The BPOA later acknowledged it had counted the votes incorrectly).

The Berkeley Property Owners Association also wants Mayor Jesse Arregun to recuse himself from voting tonight because it believes he lives in a golden duplex in North Berkeley, said Krista Gulbransen, the organizations executive director. She sent what the BPOA considers evidence of this situation to the Berkeley City attorney late Monday night. She said she believes City Council member Ben Bartlett also lives in a golden duplex and should not vote.

In light of this evidence, and due to the fact that the Council will be considering whether to remove the rent control exemption from these properties, we assert the that Mayor stands to gain a financial benefit and should recuse himself from Item #41 ahead of tomorrow nights meeting, just as Councilmember Bartlett has been advised to do, Gulbransen wrote.

Mayor Arregun and Councilmember Bartlett will recuse themselves from voting

Arregun said he has contacted the Fair Political Practices Commission to determine whether it would be a conflict for him to vote on the golden duplex issue since he lives in a golden duplex. He said he was not aware there might be an issue until last night when the BPOA sent a letter to the city.

Out of an abundance of caution, he will not participate in the discussion of the issue, he said.

I resent suggestions I have acted improperly, he said. This last-minute attempt of the Berkeley Property Owners Association to silence me and the people I represent is undemocratic.

Arregun said he will join in on the discussion on the other items the rent board wants put on the ballot.

Bartlett told Berkeleyside that he lives in a golden duplex and is negotiating to buy a property with an ADU so he will not vote on those issues coming up tonight. Bartlett said he consulted with the city attorney about this a few weeks ago and had alerted his constituents to the matter.

Arregun has introduced a compromise measure around golden duplexes. The proposed ballot language suggested by the Rent Board would immediately eliminate the exemptions. Arreguns measure, in contrast, would only eliminate the measure after current owners sell their property. (Arregun said he will no longer introduce this measure).

As long as you owned and lived in your golden duplex as of March 1, 2020 and continuously reside there, you keep the exemption, Arregun said in an email. If you sell it, then you lose the exemption. It is intended to be a compromise to keep existing golden duplex owners rights, recognizing they bought the property with a certain understanding of their legal rights and the landlord-tenant relationship, but once it is sold, it is no longer exempt. This would have the effect of gradually phasing in these properties into full rent control.

The Rent Board also asked the City Council to add other items to the November ballot, including one that would put newly constructed accessory dwelling units, ADUs, under rent control. They are:

Update: 3:45 p.m. This article has been updated twice to add Arregun and Bartletts viewpoints.

Should owner-occupied duplexes in Berkeley be subject to rent control? - Berkeleyside

Letters to the editor for July 30, 2020 – Opinion – Echo Pilot

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Gordon Lampitt, a true American hero

As we continue to fight a deadly pandemic, racial injustice and an economic crisis, we are consistently reminded of the fragility of life. But there are also moments that remind us of the heroes among us.

Gordon Lampitt, a Browns Mills resident since 1958 who recently passed at age 96, was one of those unsung heroes. He dedicated his entire life to his beloved family and his country. U.S. Army Command Sgt. Maj. Lampitt was one of few Americans to have served three tours in World War II, three tours in the Korean War and two tours in the Vietnam War.

A decorated veteran, Gordon continued to serve his country even after retiring from the Army, working at Fort Dix for 15 years. His unwavering commitment and dedication to his country, exemplified by his service in three wars was the ultimate testament of his patriotism and courage. He is a true American hero.

My thoughts, prayers and deepest condolences are with Gordons family and loved ones. I thank Gordon for making this country a better place and South Jersey is eternally grateful for his service and countless contributions to our community.

Congressman Donald Norcross, 1st District, New Jersey

First and foremost, we are all Americans

We are all Americans. We all live in this great melting pot called the United States of America. We come from different ethnic, racial and societal backgrounds. But first and foremost we are Americans.

We all have under the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution the rights of life, liberty and freedom and the pursuit of happiness. We seem to have lost sight of these facts.

People in China, Russia, North Korea and Syria live under the thumb of the likes of Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un and Bashar Hafez al-Assad. So be thankful that you live here.

Wear your camouflage, dreadlocks, hijab, Ivy League button downs I don't care. Just treat each other with respect, dignity and the knowledge that we all have the right to exist and to pursue our dreams and goals.

If you are the best qualified to do the job you need to get it albeit with a crew cut, piles of dreads or hijab. Teach the Golden Rule to your babies. They are our future and we owe it to them to fix all the mistakes we and our forebears made so they can live in peace with their fellow Americans.

Richard Egloff, Mount Laurel

Read this article:

Letters to the editor for July 30, 2020 - Opinion - Echo Pilot

Connecticut’s great job managing the ‘plague’ – News from southeastern Connecticut – theday.com

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Connecticut, and especially New London County, has weathered the first wave of COVID-19 magnificently. In March, April and May Imarveled at the courage of our ICU team; men and women who bravely donned hazmat suits to care for very sick patients in air thick with COVID-19. Now there arefew cases. Why? Thanks to you, our fellow citizens, who get it, who socially distance, wear masks in public and look out for each other.

This will be a temporary victory if we drop our guard. Only about 10% of us have gotten COVID-19. Getting it does not mean we are immune. It is likely that a vaccine will reduce but will not eliminate acute illness from COVID-19. In other words, get used to this new reality and do not stop what you are doing. The greatest civic virtue derivative of the Golden Rule is looking out for our neighbors. With COVID-19, we must continue to protect each other, especially the most vulnerable among us. Do not despair. For the gullible, political puffery will eventually give way to self-interest, severe illness, or death (see Florida, Texas and Arizona).

We Nutmeggers have mastered this plague but itmay never go away entirely. Keep your focus to distance, mask, and insist (politely, but firmly) on the same from all.

Constantine Manthous

East Lyme

See the article here:

Connecticut's great job managing the 'plague' - News from southeastern Connecticut - theday.com

How Seinfeld predicted the we live in a society meme – Happy

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

On May 23, 1991, the NBC first aired The Chinese Restaurant,the eleventh episode of a failing second season of Seinfeld. The episode sees the three characters Jerry Seinfeld, Elaine Benes, and George Costanza waiting for a table at a Chinese restaurant. Thats it. Thats the entire plot of the 23-minute episode. The audience watches in real-time as the characters simply wait.

The episode eventually ends with the characters leaving before getting a table because they no longer want to stand around. Today, its remembered as one of the greatest and most exemplary episodes of the radical, revolutionary 90s sitcom.

When the second season of Seinfeld aired, it was to disinterested spectators. Episodes were met with lukewarm audience responses, a bewildered network, and dwindling ratings. Unlike its contemporaries, Seinfeld pulled humour out of the most mundane of activities and interactions. It didnt make up elaborate conflicts or climaxes. Instead, it proudly garnered a tagline as The show about nothing. Seinfeld went on to air for another six seasons, generate an audience of 76 million, and rack up $3 billion in returns. Today, running gags like yada yada yada, master of his domain, and no soup for you, still thrive in the current 21st-centurycultural zeitgeist.

Outside mainstream popular culture, Seinfeld remains prophet to the surrealist memescape of 4chan and Reddit, having predicted the trends of recontextualising quips and subversion of genre, as well as a distinct departure from elitist forms of media and traditional storytelling. The show about nothing would go on to set the precedent for everything.

It goes without saying that popular culture is distributed and consumed in a very different fashion today versus the 1990s. Seinfeld seemed to initially trip-up at a time when sitcoms like Full House, Married With Children, and of course network frenemy, Friends, were situated in a landscape that was still riding the sitcom wave of the 70s; creating plots from the same rules of relatable and accessible post-war television, with familiar characters in familiar scenarios created for a casual weekly viewership.

Seinfeld, on the other hand, was a sitcom meant for a binging era. With characters continually smirking nods to past jokes, it rewarded viewers for sticking with the sinking ship. Creator Larry David had one golden rule for the Seinfeld writers: no hugging, no learning. It pushed boundaries, always keen to test audiences with controversial story arcs like trying to abstain from masturbation or the meta episode arc in the fourth season where Jerry and George pitch their lives as a sitcom on the NBC. It was a show for its cult following and it didnt try or want to appeal to the masses.

Platforms like TikTok, 4chan, and Reddit thrive off this same exclusive community consciousness and, like Seinfeld, it can be difficult to penetrate them from the outside. Think of the different sides of Tik Tok basically the idea that the algorithm funnels users into different subsets of TikTok content, and liking particular clips will see your timeline inundated with similar posts.

Once creators discovered this is how the app curated the For You page, they purposely played on this idea by creating an absurdist bean genre of TikTok (which was basically nonsensical 15-second edits of beans from a can), or the Jason Daniel Earles side of TikTok (which saw clips dedicated to the appreciation of the 43-year-old on-screen brother of Miley Cyrus in the since finished Disney Original series, Hannah Montana).

There was a thrill in seeing if you could make it into the niche community, and knowing that your contribution could mean that these nonsensical TikToks could make it onto an unassuming users timeline. Isolated and without context, these edits are not particularly witty. But when it exists within a cultural consciousness where everyone except those on the outside gets the joke, there is humour in its unapologetic absurdity.

It can be difficult to deconstruct the surrealist meme genre, much like how its difficult for an audience to resonate with an episode about waiting and leaving a Chinese restaurant. Both are aware of their irrelevance, and both soak in it.

The we live in a society meme emerges from these same themes of absurdity within a community connected by cultural consciousness. If you arent aware of this meme or have just come to accept you probably arent deep enough into the internet to get it dont worry, thats the entire point of its appeal. Like all absurdist memes, its born completely out of irony and subversion of the meme genre. Typically, the meme is connected to the Joker, either including the character himself or editing other people to look like the green-haired, red-lipped man.

So where doeswe live in a society meme come from? The earliest trace of its origins can be found on Hong Kong-based meme site 9gag in April 2015. This is in the form of an image macro of the Joker, accompanied by the caption: When the nice guy loses his patiance (sic) / the devil shivers.

This particular meme struck gold for a few reasons. Firstly, the whole nice guys finish lastgamer/incel superiority complex has long been a running joke in the commentary of 9gag. This meme captures it in just absolute peak irony: channelling the Joker to symbolise a higher than average IQ, and then misspelling patience. The joke wrote itself. As of a couple of months ago, the meme had garnered upwards of 38,600 points and 520 comments on 9gag, with much of the engagement boosted by ironic trolls, wanting to make sure this meme became the absolute epitome of the meme site.

The DC supervillain has long been connected to the gamer identity, a sort of figurehead for a whole online incel cyber world syndicate after the Dark Knight film came out in 2008. Online outcasts began to worship the Joker, believing they too embodied the misunderstood, highly intelligent social outcast driven to villainy by the amorality of society. In a world where its impossible to compete: the nice girls chase after hot guys and neckbeards are left without girlfriends.

So, in that way, the Joker became a sort of re-contextualisation, a way to armour themselves with their difference. These people were proud of their nonconformist identity. It showed they were wiser, more woke. To them, the way the world operated was backwards; it rewarded parasites and liars. And so, they used these online spaces to vaunt how corrupt humanity was and how, rather than society excluding them, it was they who refused to be a part of society.

As these cringe, wannabe-profound memes became increasingly popular on sites like 9gag, they began to be enjoyed as pieces of satire on edgier online spaces like 4chan, Reddit, and shitposting groups on Facebook. In the process, absurdist meme-makers began to pierce the elitist, counterfeit-intellect of the Joker symbolism, making their own memes with a sentence fragment that mocked the incel gamer ipseity, in what we now understand as the we live in a society meme. However, this meme has certainly diverged from its DC comic origins and now the phrase has evolved into internet shorthand for being faux woke with a profound lack of self-awareness.

While somewhat disputed, it is thought that the phrase we live in a society was chosen due to the aforementioned The Chinese Restaurant episode of Seinfeld, where George channels his own hyper-macho superiority complex to sanctimoniously discuss the injustices of the episodes payphone politics, and ultimately, the wrongs of the world. Seething, with clenched fists, he yells: Were living in a society!

Still angry, Costanza goes on a rant, not unlike the incel gamers on 9gag Does anyone ever display the slightest sensitivity to the problems of a fellow individual? No! only to immediately double back and change his tone when the stranger apologises for their extended use of the payphone. Immediately, George snaps out of this edge-lord fantasy and back into his wimpy character, no way being this macho man he made himself out to be.

While its arguable that this clip is just a coincidence and unrelated to the true origins of the we live in a society meme, it is certain that Seinfeld polished the tools of the trade that we see within the 4chan and Reddit memescapes. These memes, fuelled by irony and subversion of the form, are not dissimilar to how Seinfeld took the sitcom and made a joke out of it, forcing the audience to wait 23 minutes for a table to become available at a Chinese restaurant.

Seinfeld, much like absurdist memes, never tries to act like it has the answers or holds some greater meaning. In fact, Seinfeld actively opposed this sentiment. It never tries to be about more than whatever is happening to its characters at any given moment, just like the humble we live in a society meme.

If we can take away anything from this, its that only one thing is for certain. There is a societyand we live in it.

Link:

How Seinfeld predicted the we live in a society meme - Happy

Trumps dream of a V-shape rebound slowly slips away – POLITICO

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Pending home sales rebounded strongly in May and June amid declining mortgage rates. Existing home sales also rose sharply in June. Soaring jobless claims began declining in March as states started to reopen and the unemployment rate declined from a high of 14.7 percent in April. But the increase last week suggested the fresh wave of virus cases and a return to stricter lockdown orders in some states has dented the labor market comeback.

Economists say a great deal has to go right for this rosiest of scenarios to play out including swift passage of further enhanced jobless benefits, rapid progress in vaccine development and the survival of thousands of businesses that are unlikely to make it through further lockdowns.

Not many are confident that all of this will come together.

To me it seems like a pipe dream. I cannot image a V-shaped recovery in the offing any time soon, said Beth Ann Bovino, chief U.S. economist at Standard & Poors Ratings Services. Aside from the fact that Covid-19 doesnt seem to be under control, this is a $22 trillion economy. You cant turn it off and on like a light bulb.

The most likely scenario painted by economists is that a significant bounce back does arrive in the third quarter given the depth of the drop in the second. But the persistence of the virus, reluctance of Americans to go back to their offices or go out to shop and eat and spend money keeps a lid on the scale of the recovery.

Under this scenario, the unemployment rate could stagnate or even rise again before the election as fresh lockdowns cause more businesses to lay off workers and widespread uncertainty over the future keeps a lid on business investment.

Any significant lapse in expanded jobless benefits, which officially expire July 31 but have already run out for many, could also put a major dent in spending and lead to increases in defaults on mortgages, credit cards, automobiles and other loans.

We still have a large part of the population that still depend on these benefits, Moya said. And its not easy to be optimistic about large swaths of the labor market. I once thought we might see the unemployment rate drop to around 8 percent this year but now it looks like it will probably be higher.

Moya added that good vaccine news probably wont arrive until October or November with the completion of the first Phase III trials. And that means Americans will probably remain hesitant to engage in a lot of normal economic activity. The work-from-home economy will remain resilient but you arent going to see a widespread return to normalcy very quickly.

Evidence of a slowing recovery pace is also piling up. Consumer confidence sank to 92.6 in July from 98.3, according to the Conference Board, amid mounting fears of rising virus cases. The index hit a near 20-year high of 132.6 in February before the virus slammed the U.S.. Retail sales bounced in July but could fade again as virus cases mount. Further virus-driven declines in consumer activity are likely, Goldman Sachs analysts wrote in a recent note. We estimate that if all states currently tightening policy imposed stricter measures similar to those just imposed in California, this would reduce U.S. consumption back to the June level.

The doomsday scenario would feature Covid-19 raging out of control again without enough good news from Phase III vaccine trials coming this fall. It would also feature Congress failing to extend jobless benefits and pump enough streams of cash into the economy through direct payments and more aid to individuals, small businesses and state and local governments. In essence this would be a return to fiscal austerity at a time when over 30 million are receiving jobless aid and the virus remains unchecked.

Under this scenario, the jobless rate would begin rising again by August and September and the fourth quarter would see a much smaller GDP gain and perhaps even a return to contraction.

Several things could turn this already slow recovery into a nosedive including bad health outcomes and a premature return to fiscal austerity, said Bovino. Her teams worst-case scenario with the virus going out of control would show a GDP drop of 8.7 percent for 2020 and 14.6 overall from the peak of the economic cycle to the trough.

A rising jobless rate, widespread new lockdowns and increased Covid-19 deaths could make Trumps reelection prospects close to impossible. The president once enjoyed a solid lead on the economy over Biden. But recent polls show that lead has essentially evaporated. Its likely to go negative if the economy goes in the tank again. And while not the most likely scenario, it could certainly happen.

The worst case is we reverse all the job gains and any progress in terms of economic activity, said Farooqi. And that sort of spreads from the service side of the economy to manufacturing. And then instead of a strong rebound we get a slower pace of growth or even a return to contraction.

View post:

Trumps dream of a V-shape rebound slowly slips away - POLITICO

Trump’s decision to move troops from Germany slammed as ‘a gift to Putin’ – CNN

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Trump's explanation to reporters about the withdrawal, announced Wednesday morning by Defense Secretary Mark Esper, misrepresented how NATO works and contradicted his own military officials, raising questions about what strategy -- if any -- drove the decision.

Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah described Trump's move as "a gift to Russia" and a "slap in the face at a friend and ally." Romney added that the "consequences will be lasting and harmful to American interests."

Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas, the senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said aspects of the move, including the cap on US personnel in Germany, were "troubling."

Rachel Rizzo, director of programs at the Truman National Security Project, who specializes in European security, said, "It's hard, if not impossible, to see any benefit."

Counterproductive

The former commanding general of US Army Europe, retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, said in a tweet that he was "sickened by this decision and explanation. It is not tied to any strategic advantage and in fact is counterproductive to showing strength in Europe."

And retired US Navy Adm. Jim Stravidis, the former top military commander in Europe and NATO, said in a tweet that "abruptly pulling 12,500 troops out of Germany (to put half of them in countries who spend LESS on defense) doesn't make sense financially, hurts NATO solidarity overall, and is a gift to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin."

Removing US troops from Germany pulls them from a central location with a sophisticated transport and logistical network that speeds the movement of troops and equipment in Europe and beyond -- allowing for a powerful counterweight to Russia, analysts say.

Reducing the American footprint in Germany could waste billions spent on recent upgrades to US military facilities there and require spending billions more to replicate those resources elsewhere. Among other issues, military analysts also say that replacing permanent troops with rotational forces can make training with host countries more challenging and create morale issues.

Trump himself seemed to underscore that thinking Wednesday, saying the troop reductions had to do with Berlin's failure to meet defense spending targets and not the strategic reasons Esper laid out when he announced the move, which included countering Moscow.

The President most recently spoke to Putin last Friday, the latest in a series of phone calls that CNN's Marshall Cohen has documented as the most sustained publicly disclosed period of contact between the two leaders. In an interview released Wednesday, Trump told Axios that in that conversation, he did not raise US intelligence that alleges Moscow offered bounties to Taliban fighters to kill US troops in Afghanistan.

It's not clear if the two leaders discussed Trump's plan to reduce the US military presence in Germany, meant to be a bulwark against potential Russian aggression. But after Esper announced the troop drawdown, Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the "champagne must be flowing freely this evening at the Kremlin."

Esper explained the current plan is to move approximately 11,900 military personnel from Germany, reducing numbers from roughly 36,000 to 24,000. Of the troops leaving Germany some 5,400 will be "staying in Europe," a senior US defense official said. The remaining 6,400 forces and their families will be returned to the US and will, in time, redeploy to Europe.

While Esper said the move was intended to help deter Russia, it did not appear that any US troops are being permanently repositioned to countries closest to NATO's eastern frontier with Russia, despite those countries' long-standing requests for such forces.

Italy and Belgium

The President of one of those countries, Lithuania, posted on Twitter, "We are ready to accept more US troops."

But the vast majority of the troops permanently remaining in Europe will instead be relocated to Italy or Belgium, not posted in countries most concerned about the Russian threat.

"There are or may be other opportunities as well to move additional forces into Poland and the Baltics," Esper said, without offering much in the way of specifics.

Removing US troops from Germany takes them from what Jeff Rathke, president of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University, calls "the best place from which they can operate. The German logistical network, which the US is able to access, is very sophisticated -- airfields and bases, the rail network, which allows the US to move equipment."

Germany is also "a central location from which the United States can move," Rathke said. Pointing to the combination of Germany's location along with its transportation and logistics, Rathke said, "You can't replicate that in other places. They don't exist in Poland or farther east."

Menendez noted in a statement that Germany doesn't just allow for "an enhanced forward presence effort in Eastern Europe to counter Russia," but also "for US security interests across the Middle East and Africa."

"That platform is not easily replicated elsewhere," Menendez said.

There's also the question of how much this will cost American taxpayers at a time of record-setting US budget deficits. The military move will potentially cost "several billion dollars," Esper said Wednesday.

The Pentagon would be walking away from billions spent between 2004 and 2011 on upgrades to secure and consolidate key US military locations in Germany, Hertling said, only to have to replicate facilities such as housing, schools, HQs and barracks in new locations.

Rathke points out that there also are costs to bringing troops back to the US. "If you're going to bring people back from Germany, where are you going to put them and has it been budgeted for, whether it's housing or the base infrastructure for these people returning from Europe."

NATO said in a statement that the announcement "underlines the continued commitment by the United States to NATO and to European security."

But Hertling said that "what is obvious to me -- having served 12 years in Germany and having participated in the last force structure change from 2004-2011, this is not a 'strategic' move." Instead, he said, "it is disruptive, and affects readiness ... especially when this is all happening without a previous plan."

'Punishing Merkel'

Moreover, Hertling was among many who argued that the President's decision is about "punishing Merkel" and "is specifically a directed personal insult from Trump to our great & very supportive ally Germany."

Agathe Demarais, global forecasting director at The Economist Intelligence Unit, said the move is part of a broader story of disintegration in US-German relations that "is partly because of a mutual enmity between the political leaders of the two countries." Merkel and Trump "are different characters and have failed to build any sort of rapport since Trump came to power in 2016."

Germans themselves pointed out that in moving US troops, the Trump administration seems to be working against some of its stated goals.

"In withdrawing 12.000 soldiers from Germany, the USA achieve the exact opposite from what Esper outlined," the head of the German Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, Norbert Roettgen, who is a staunch Merkel ally, tweeted on Wednesday. "Instead of strengthening #NATO it is going to weaken the alliance," Roettgen said. "The US's military clout will not increase, but decrease in relation to Russia and the Near & Middle East."

In Bavaria, which hosts several US bases, the state governor, a member of Merkel's conservative block, said, "We very much regret the decision of the US government."

"Unfortunately, this seriously damages German-American relations," Markus Soeder said. "A military benefit cannot be seen. It weakens NATO and the USA itself."

CNN's Fred Pleitgen in Berlin contributed to this report.

See the original post here:

Trump's decision to move troops from Germany slammed as 'a gift to Putin' - CNN

Your first look at Donald Trump, as played by Brendan Gleeson in The Comey Rule – CNET

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Gleeson looks convincing as Donald Trump.

The Comey Rule, a mini-series based on James Comey's book A Higher Loyalty, is set to be shown on Showtime on September 27 and 28. It stars Jeff Daniels as Comey himself, with Brendan Gleeson taking on the role of Donald Trump.

In a new trailer released today, we finally get to see brief glimpses of Gleeson's performance as Trump. It seems... good.

(Disclosure: CNET is owned byViacomCBS, which also owns Showtime.)

Which is to be expected since Gleeson is one of the best actors in the business.

We're used to seeing Trump parodied. Everyone does a Trump impression. And while spoofs like Alec Baldwin's recurring role on Saturday Night Live are good in their own way, Gleeson's take appears to be far more menacing. I'm hoping this signifies that Glesson's take is less of an impression and more of a performance. Seems promising so far.

According to Vanity Fair, who first revealed the trailer in a feature story published today, Gleeson initially turned the role down, but later agreed to get on board with the project.

Entertain your brain with the coolest news from streaming to superheroes, memes to video games.

The Comey Rule is written and directed by Billy Ray, best known for his work on Captain Phillips. He was intent on making sure this series was released before the 2020 election.

"I wanted this series to air before the 2020 elections," Ray told Vanity Fair. "I think our democracy is on the line right now. And I wanted this series to be part of that conversation."

View original post here:

Your first look at Donald Trump, as played by Brendan Gleeson in The Comey Rule - CNET

Latest Donald Trump news, coronavirus updates and more: Whats trending today – cleveland.com

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Read the latest coronavirus news, get updates on Donald Trump and his administration and see more stories trending online today.

Trump doubles down on defense of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 despite efficacy concerns (ABC)

Twitter removes tweet highlighted by Trump falsely claiming COVID-19 cure (NBC News)

Trump administration is refusing to fully reinstate DACA (Vox)

Trump administration in talks with Oregon governor to draw down federal agents: report (Fox News)

White House, lawmakers tangle over scope of new coronavirus legislation (Reuters)

Fauci says there are early signs coronavirus outbreaks are brewing in Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and Tennessee (CNBC)

21 states now in federal red zone for serious coronavirus outbreaks (The Hill)

Misleading coronavirus video spreads online (NY Times)

Hong Kong on verge of large-scale outbreak (BBC)

States resist mask rules as Midwest virus uptick stirs alarm (AP)

These womens coronavirus symptoms never went away. Their doctors willingness to help did. (NBC)

Readcomplete prior coronavirus coverage.

Biden says he will pick running mate by end of next week (Washington Post)

Agriculture officials warn not to open unsolicited packages of seeds labeled from China (ABC News)

U.S. expands charges against ex-Twitter employees accused of spying for Saudi Arabia (CBS News)

Virgin Galactic unveils the interior cabin of its tourist spaceplane (The Verge)

Tempers flare in Dodgers-Astros game following sign-stealing punishment (CNN)

New Hubble image of Saturn released (CBS)

Latest Donald Trump news, coronavirus updates and more: Whats trending today - cleveland.com

Facebook CEO corrects confused congressman over Trump Jr. Twitter ban – Mashable

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Leave it to a member of Congress to make Mark Zuckerberg seem relatable.

The opening statements at Wednesday's House antitrust hearing had barely cooled when Republican Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin accused Facebook of temporarily suspending the account of Donald Trump, Jr. There was just one problem, which the Facebook CEO wasted no time in addressing: Congressman Sensenbrenner had confused Facebook with Twitter.

That's right, it was not Facebook which took the described action against the president's son for sharing dangerous coronavirus misinformation. Rather, it was Twitter which briefly suspended Trump Jr. for sharing a video that hyped the drug hydroxychloroquine and suggested masks aren't necessary to stop the spread of the coronavirus.

"I think what you might be referring to happened on Twitter."

But no one apparently told that to Congressman Sensenbrenner, who, at the antitrust hearing, appeared fixated on the baseless claim that Facebook censors conservatives.

"It was reported that Donald Trump, Jr. got taken down for a period of time because he put something up on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine," Sensenbrenner said to Zuckerberg. "Now, I wouldn't take it myself, but there still is a debate on whether it is effective either in treating or preventing COVID-19, and I think that this is a legitimate matter of discussion and it would be up to a patient and their doctor to determine whether hydroxychloroquine was the correct medication, you know, given the circumstances. Why did that happen?"

Congressman Sensenbrenner trying really hard to miss the point.

Image: screenshot / house Judiciary hearing

Zuckerberg, likely relieved to not have to address any of the substantive antitrust arguments against his company, took it upon himself to patiently explain why Donald Trump, Jr. had been suspended from Twitter.

"Congressman, well, first to be clear, I think what you might be referring to happened on Twitter so it's hard for me to speak to that," replied the Facebook CEO. "But I can talk to our policies about this. We do prohibit content that will lead to imminent risk of harm, and stating that there's a proven cure for COVID, when there is in fact none, might encourage someone to go take something that could have some adverse effects."

To drive the point home, Zuckerberg added that Facebook would remove content promising an unproven cure for COVID-19.

"So we do take that down," explained the clearly exasperated CEO. "We do not prohibit discussion around trials of drugs, or people saying that they think that things might work, or personal experiences with experimental drugs. But if someone is going to say that something is proven, when in fact it is not, that then could lead people to make a decision with their health."

SEE ALSO: Facebook, Amazon, Apple, and Google deserve to be grilled at the House antitrust hearing

In fact, the misleading viral video in question was viewed 17 million times on Facebook before it was taken down by Facebook. Versions of it were still being shared across Facebook-owned Instagram as of yesterday, however.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, meanwhile, was not in attendance at the hearing. Perhaps, instead, he's spending the day drinking salt juice in his EMF-shielded tent.

See the original post here:

Facebook CEO corrects confused congressman over Trump Jr. Twitter ban - Mashable

First Thing: Trump’s ‘serious’ approach to Covid-19 lasted a week – The Guardian

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Good morning. Donald Trumps serious new approach to the pandemic lasted all of one week. Speaking at his daily White House coronavirus briefing on Tuesday, the president described as very impressive a doctor who claims face masks do not combat the spread of Covid-19 and says DNA from aliens is being used in medical treatments.

Trump had shared an online video featuring the doctor and other supposed experts recommending the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, and contradicting official government guidelines on the disease. The clip, which was also touted as a must-watch by the presidents son, Donald Trump Jr, has since been removed by Facebook and YouTube for containing false public health information.

Meanwhile, US officials say Russian intelligence services are using English-language websites to spread disinformation to Americans about the pandemic, as part of an ongoing effort to sow confusion before the presidential election in November.

The US attorney general clashed with Democrats on the House judiciary committee on Tuesday, as he denied the interventions of federal agents in Portland and in Washington DCs Lafayette Square were motivated by Trumps re-election efforts. The president wants footage for his campaign ads, and you appear to be serving it up to him as ordered, the committee chairman, Jerry Nadler, told Bill Barr, who insisted the federal forces cracking down on protests in Portland were not out looking for trouble.

Meanwhile in New York, there was outcry after police apparently bundled a protester into an unmarked minivan, in an arrest described by the American Civil Liberties Union as dangerous, abusive, and indefensible.

Trump is damaging Americas reputation abroad not only with his own antics, but also through those of his ambassadors, according to a report by Senate Democrats, entitled Diplomacy in Crisis. A record number of the presidents ambassadorial appointments have been political, and many such senior diplomats had no qualifications besides being big-money Republican donors, writes Julian Borger.

Woody Johnson, the billionaire Trump backer who became the US ambassador to London, has been accused of making sexist and racist remarks (which he has denied). Jeffrey Ross Gunter, the US ambassador to Iceland and a dermatologist by trade reportedly became so paranoid about security that he asked to carry a gun and to travel in an armoured car, despite the absence of security concerns in Reykjavik, the Icelandic capital.

The Five Eyes intelligence alliance could expand by adding Japan to its existing membership: the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Some British Conservative lawmakers say widening the longstanding alliance would pool key strategic resources and help to lessen the wests dependency on China.

As the Guardian continues its climate countdown in the run-up to the presidential election and to Trumps threatened withdrawal of the US from the Paris climate agreement Emily Holden examines the environmental plans of the presumptive Democratic nominee. Joe Biden has pledged to link the climate fight to jobs, by spending $2tn on clean energy as quickly as possible within four years, and transitioning the US entirely to clean electricity by 2035.

The US needs collective action and systemic change to fight the climate battle, argues Prof Michael Mann and the simplest way to start that systemic change is by voting:

Your vote will reverberate for years, as the efforts that have grown in the dark shade of the Trump administration are poised to bloom with a President Joe Biden, a climate-friendly Congress and state and local politicians who favour climate action.

The Esselen tribe of northern California has regained part of its ancestral land after 250 years, buying a 1,200-acre ranch near Big Sur, which tribal leaders say will be used for education and cultural purposes, and to conserve local flora and fauna.

Mark Zuckerberg will tell Congress companies arent bad just because they are big, when he appears with other top tech CEOs at a hearing on Wednesday, part of a major antitrust investigation into the power and size of the big tech firms.

Abortion could be decriminalised in Mexico as the result of a potentially historic supreme court ruling on Wednesday, which is hotly anticipated by activists on both sides of the countrys abortion debate.

Americans have been warned not to plant seeds from packets reportedly sent to residents in several US states from China. The seeds are thought likely to be part of a brushing scam, whereby people receive unsolicited items from a seller who then posts false customer reviews to boost sales.

The photographer snapping New Yorkers private thoughts

Photographer Jeff Mermelstein has spent most of his career emulating the classic, 35mm sidewalk reportage of Diane Arbus or Joel Meyerowitz. But for the past three years he has been pursuing a new project: capturing New Yorkers private messages as they compose them on their phones, as he explains to Alex Rayner.

The white women defecting from Trump

Trump won in 2016 with help from a crucial and somewhat unlikely demographic: white women with college degrees. Four years later, finds Adam Gabbatt, some of them bitterly regret their decision and are trying to make amends in 2020.

In a new interview, Ed Sheeran admits he used to binge-eat and vomit at the height of his fame. The revelation is a reminder that its not just women who can have a tortuous relationship with food, writes Arwa Mahdawi.

The late Steve Jobs is another example of how we mythologise rather than pathologize unhealthy eating in important men. According to his official biography, Jobs would sometimes live on only apples and carrots for weeks and would fast for days on end in an attempt to induce euphoria. That is something I did when I was 15 and it was quite rightly labelled anorexia.

Virgin Galactic has unveiled images from the interior of the VSS Unity, the craft in which the commercial space firm plans to take paying tourists to the edge of Earths atmosphere. For most of us, the photographs are the closest well get to a suborbital flight on Sir Richard Bransons passion project: tickets cost $250,000 each.

First Thing is delivered to thousands of inboxes every weekday. If youre not already signed up, subscribe now.

See original here:

First Thing: Trump's 'serious' approach to Covid-19 lasted a week - The Guardian

Donald Trump Doesn’t Want You to Read the Tell-All. That’s Why You Want to Read the Tell-All. – TownandCountrymag.com

Posted on July 30, 2020 by Danzig

Michael Cohen, President Trumps former personal attorney, was released from prison today by a judge who ruled on Thursday that Cohen had been returned to federal custody from home confinement because he refused to agree to not write a book.

I make the finding that the purpose of transferring Mr. Cohen from furlough and home confinement to jail is retaliatory. And its retaliation because of his desire to exercise his First Amendment rights to publish a book and to discuss anything about the book or anything else he wants on social media and with others, said Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of Federal District Court.

David Dee DelgadoGetty Images

Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to criminal campaign finance violations (for arranging hush-money payments to women who said theyd had affairs with Trump) and for lying to Congress. He was released on medical furlough in May but was sent back to prison on July 9 after what he and his lawyer had thought would be a routine parole meeting.

Instead, according to Cohen, he was asked to sign a document promising he would not continue work while he served his sentence on a book he is writing about the President. When he refused, Cohen said he was abruptly taken back into custody.

Earlier this week, Cohen filed suit against Attorney General William Barr and federal prison officials (the ACLU also filed a petition on Cohens behalf) claiming, among other things, that his First Amendment rights had been violated. The suit stated that Cohens book, tentatively titled Disloyal: The True Story of Michael Cohen, Former Personal Attorney to President Donald J. Trump, would allege that President Trump made anti-Semitic remarks and racist statements, including about President Obama and Nelson Mandela. On Wednesday, the Department of Justice denied it had taken retaliatory action against Cohen.

Hellersteins order was the most recent setback in a series of legal efforts to prevent or curtail the publication of books critical of the President written by former staffers, political appointees, and a family member. Its very hard to prevent a book from being published, says James Zirin, a former Assistant United States Attorney and the author of Plaintiff in Chief: A Portrait of Donald Trump in 3500 Lawsuits. Courts view most attempts at prior restraint as a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech.

So what have all the lawsuits achieved?

Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the Worlds Most Dangerous Man

Simon & Schusteramazon.com

Plot Twist: President Trumps nieces first-hand account of growing up in the New York real estate dynasty shines a bright light on the dark history of their family, according to its publisher, Simon & Schuster.

Legal Case: President Trumps brother Robert Trump sued Mary Trump and Simon & Schuster to block publication, claiming she violated a confidentiality agreement that was part of a 2001 settlement of the estate of his father and her grandfather, Fred Trump Sr. The case against the book went all the way to the New York State Supreme Court, which ultimately vacated a restraining order on July 13. Interestingly, even though the book is aimed at President Trump, the suit was brought by his brother, said Zirin. The President would have been subject to deposition and interrogatories [if he had brought the suit himself] and he probably wanted to stay out of all that.

Howd it do? Too Much and Never Enough sold 950,000 copies on its first day of publication, a record for Simon & Schuster, and 1.35 million copies in its first week.

The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir

amazon.com

Plot Twist: The former national security advisors memoir includes behind-the-scenes details of his time at the White House, including descriptions of his many disagreements with President Trump and fellow White House advisors over policy issues.

Legal Case: The Trump Administration sued Bolton, claiming his book contained classified information, but a judge refused to issue an injunction. The courts only agree to [prevent publication] in extreme cases, usually involving national security. said Zirin. In this case, most of the juicy parts of Boltons book had already been described in newspaper and on website articles. The information was already public, and an injunction would have been moot.

Howd it do? The Room Where it Happened sold 780,000 copies in its first week of publication and has been on the New York Times Best Seller list for non-fiction ever since.

A Warning

Twelveamazon.com

Plot Twist: This book, by the same author who wrote an un-bylined piece in the New York Times opinion page in September 2018 titled I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration," claims to offer a first-hand perspective by a senior administration official of President Trump and to explain why electing him to a second term would be a terrible idea.

Legal Case: Treason? tweeted President Trump on the day the op-ed came out. And while there was no mention of that particular charge from the Department of Justice, one of its lawyers did send a letter a year later to the publisher Hachette and literary agent Javelin warning that the author of the forthcoming book might be breaching non-disclosure agreements. Both refused to comply with DOJs request for information, and no further action was taken.

Howd it Do? Shortly after its publication, A Warning appeared at the top of the New York Times Best Seller list in the non-fiction category.

Unhinged: An Insider's Account of the Trump White House

Gallery Booksamazon.com

Plot Twist: A tell-all by one of Donald Trumps former co-stars on The Apprentice who went on to become communications director for the Office of Public Liaison in the White House, a position from which she was fired in 2018.

Legal Case: The Trump Campaign filed an arbitration case against Manigault Newman, claiming she had violated a non-disclosure agreement she signed in 2016. Two days later, she released a secret recording she made in which the Presidents daughter-in-law Lara Trump discussed a potential job offer. Final results of the arbitration filing were not made public.

Howd it Do? Unhinged reached the number one spot on the New York Times Best Seller list for non-fiction in August of 2018, a few weeks after the arbitration case became public.

Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House

1250158060amazon.com

Plot Twist: After being granted unprecedented access to the Trump White House, Wolff wrote an unsurprisingly (to anyone who had ever read anything by the author) unflattering book about its inner workings.

The Case: In January 2018, a lawyer for President Trump sent an 11-page legal demand to the publisher Henry Holt claiming the forthcoming book included defamation, libel, and invasion of privacy. A spokesperson responded, Henry Holt confirms that we received a cease and desist letter from an attorney for President Trump. We see Fire and Fury as an extraordinary contribution to our national discourse, and are proceeding with the publication of the book. The legal demand didnt stand a chance, says Zirin. All it did was boost sales for a book.

Howd it Do? Debuted at number one on the New York Times Best Seller list when it came out on January 4, 2018. By the end of the month it had sold over 1.5 million copies.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

This commenting section is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page. You may be able to find more information on their web site.

Visit link:

Donald Trump Doesn't Want You to Read the Tell-All. That's Why You Want to Read the Tell-All. - TownandCountrymag.com

Select Page ::