Is Artificial Intelligence Overhyped in 2017? | HuffPost – HuffPost

Is AI over-hyped in 2017? originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world.

Answer by Joanne Chen, Partner at Foundation Capital, on Quora:

To quote Bill Gates We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. Don't let yourself be lulled into inaction.

In short, over the next ten years, I dont believe AI will be overhyped. However, in 2017, will all of our jobs be automated away by bots? Unlikely. I believe the technology has incredible potential and will permeate across all aspects of our lives. But today, my sense is that many people dont understand what the state of AI is, and thus contribute to hype.

Artificial intelligence, a concept dating back to the 50s, is simply the notion that a machine can performance tasks that require human intelligence. But AI today is not what the science fiction movies portray it to be. What we can do today falls in the realm of narrow AI (vs general intelligence), which is the idea that machines can perform very specific tasks in a constrained environment. With narrow AI, there are a variety of techniques that you may have heard of. Ill use examples to illustrate differences.

Lets say you want to figure out my age (which is 31).

1) Functional programming: what we commonly know as programming, a way to tell a computer to do something in a deterministic fashion. I tell my computer that to compute my age, it needs to solve AGE = todays date birth date. Then I give it my birth date (Dec 4, 1985). There is 0% chance the computer will get my age wrong.

2) Machine learning: an application of AI where we give machines data and let them learn for themselves to probabilitically predict an outcome. The machine improves its ability to predict with experience and more relevant data. So take age for example. What if I had 1,000 data sets of peoples ages and song preferences? Song preference is highly correlated with generation. For example, Led Zeppelin and The Doors fans are mostly 40+ and Selena Gomez fans are generally younger than 25. Then I could ask the computer given that I love the Spice Girls and Backstreet Boys, how old does it think I am? The computer then looks at these correlations and compares it with a list of my favorite songs to predict my age within x% probability. This is a very simple example of using machine learning..

3) Deep Learning: is a type of machine learning emerged in the last few years, and talked widely about in the media when Google DeepMinds AlphaGo program defeated South Korean Master Lee Se-dol in the board game Go.

Deep learning goes a step further than ML in that it enables the machine to learn purely by providing examples. In contrast, ML requires programmers to tell the computer what it should look for. As a result, deep learning functions much more like the human brain. This especially works well with applications like image recognition.

4) Deep reinforcement learning: DRL goes one step further and combines deep learning with reinforcement learning which is the notion of learning by trial-and-error, solely from rewards or punishments. DRL mimics how children learn they see observe other people doing things, they try things out and depending on the reward, they either repeat them or not!

Machine learning technologies have become more available (and the reason why there has been increasing media hype around this space) has been driven by advancements in three areas:

1) Infrastructure to run ML algorithms massive improvements in storage, processing capabilities (i.e. GPUs that speed up parallel processing), and accessibility for rapid innovation (cloud).

2) New available algorithms developed.

3) Data proliferation to train algorithms.

Between algorithms innovation and data availability, I believe data plays a more crucial role in advancements. If you look at the chart below, breakthroughs in AI have been quickly followed by availability of datasets, while many of the corresponding algorithms have been available for over a decade.

AI will permeate our lives in the next ten years. Think of the possible time, money, and manpower saved by automating simple processes. And as the technology becomes more advanced, the use cases will get even more exciting. I think its a wonderful time as an entrepreneur to be able to leverage this technology, and I couldnt be more excited as an investor.

This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

View original post here:

Is Artificial Intelligence Overhyped in 2017? | HuffPost - HuffPost

The Real Threat of Artificial Intelligence – The New York Times – New York Times

This kind of A.I. is spreading to thousands of domains (not just loans), and as it does, it will eliminate many jobs. Bank tellers, customer service representatives, telemarketers, stock and bond traders, even paralegals and radiologists will gradually be replaced by such software. Over time this technology will come to control semiautonomous and autonomous hardware like self-driving cars and robots, displacing factory workers, construction workers, drivers, delivery workers and many others.

Unlike the Industrial Revolution and the computer revolution, the A.I. revolution is not taking certain jobs (artisans, personal assistants who use paper and typewriters) and replacing them with other jobs (assembly-line workers, personal assistants conversant with computers). Instead, it is poised to bring about a wide-scale decimation of jobs mostly lower-paying jobs, but some higher-paying ones, too.

This transformation will result in enormous profits for the companies that develop A.I., as well as for the companies that adopt it. Imagine how much money a company like Uber would make if it used only robot drivers. Imagine the profits if Apple could manufacture its products without human labor. Imagine the gains to a loan company that could issue 30 million loans a year with virtually no human involvement. (As it happens, my venture capital firm has invested in just such a loan company.)

We are thus facing two developments that do not sit easily together: enormous wealth concentrated in relatively few hands and enormous numbers of people out of work. What is to be done?

Part of the answer will involve educating or retraining people in tasks A.I. tools arent good at. Artificial intelligence is poorly suited for jobs involving creativity, planning and cross-domain thinking for example, the work of a trial lawyer. But these skills are typically required by high-paying jobs that may be hard to retrain displaced workers to do. More promising are lower-paying jobs involving the people skills that A.I. lacks: social workers, bartenders, concierges professions requiring nuanced human interaction. But here, too, there is a problem: How many bartenders does a society really need?

The solution to the problem of mass unemployment, I suspect, will involve service jobs of love. These are jobs that A.I. cannot do, that society needs and that give people a sense of purpose. Examples include accompanying an older person to visit a doctor, mentoring at an orphanage and serving as a sponsor at Alcoholics Anonymous or, potentially soon, Virtual Reality Anonymous (for those addicted to their parallel lives in computer-generated simulations). The volunteer service jobs of today, in other words, may turn into the real jobs of the future.

Other volunteer jobs may be higher-paying and professional, such as compassionate medical service providers who serve as the human interface for A.I. programs that diagnose cancer. In all cases, people will be able to choose to work fewer hours than they do now.

Who will pay for these jobs? Here is where the enormous wealth concentrated in relatively few hands comes in. It strikes me as unavoidable that large chunks of the money created by A.I. will have to be transferred to those whose jobs have been displaced. This seems feasible only through Keynesian policies of increased government spending, presumably raised through taxation on wealthy companies.

As for what form that social welfare would take, I would argue for a conditional universal basic income: welfare offered to those who have a financial need, on the condition they either show an effort to receive training that would make them employable or commit to a certain number of hours of service of love voluntarism.

To fund this, tax rates will have to be high. The government will not only have to subsidize most peoples lives and work; it will also have to compensate for the loss of individual tax revenue previously collected from employed individuals.

This leads to the final and perhaps most consequential challenge of A.I. The Keynesian approach I have sketched out may be feasible in the United States and China, which will have enough successful A.I. businesses to fund welfare initiatives via taxes. But what about other countries?

They face two insurmountable problems. First, most of the money being made from artificial intelligence will go to the United States and China. A.I. is an industry in which strength begets strength: The more data you have, the better your product; the better your product, the more data you can collect; the more data you can collect, the more talent you can attract; the more talent you can attract, the better your product. Its a virtuous circle, and the United States and China have already amassed the talent, market share and data to set it in motion.

For example, the Chinese speech-recognition company iFlytek and several Chinese face-recognition companies such as Megvii and SenseTime have become industry leaders, as measured by market capitalization. The United States is spearheading the development of autonomous vehicles, led by companies like Google, Tesla and Uber. As for the consumer internet market, seven American or Chinese companies Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent are making extensive use of A.I. and expanding operations to other countries, essentially owning those A.I. markets. It seems American businesses will dominate in developed markets and some developing markets, while Chinese companies will win in most developing markets.

The other challenge for many countries that are not China or the United States is that their populations are increasing, especially in the developing world. While a large, growing population can be an economic asset (as in China and India in recent decades), in the age of A.I. it will be an economic liability because it will comprise mostly displaced workers, not productive ones.

So if most countries will not be able to tax ultra-profitable A.I. companies to subsidize their workers, what options will they have? I foresee only one: Unless they wish to plunge their people into poverty, they will be forced to negotiate with whichever country supplies most of their A.I. software China or the United States to essentially become that countrys economic dependent, taking in welfare subsidies in exchange for letting the parent nations A.I. companies continue to profit from the dependent countrys users. Such economic arrangements would reshape todays geopolitical alliances.

One way or another, we are going to have to start thinking about how to minimize the looming A.I.-fueled gap between the haves and the have-nots, both within and between nations. Or to put the matter more optimistically: A.I. is presenting us with an opportunity to rethink economic inequality on a global scale. These challenges are too far-ranging in their effects for any nation to isolate itself from the rest of the world.

Kai-Fu Lee is the chairman and chief executive of Sinovation Ventures, a venture capital firm, and the president of its Artificial Intelligence Institute.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on June 25, 2017, on Page SR4 of the New York edition with the headline: The Real Threat of Artificial Intelligence.

Link:

The Real Threat of Artificial Intelligence - The New York Times - New York Times

Beware the Hype of Artificial Intelligence – Fortune

Artificial intelligence has made great strides in the past few years, but its also generated much hype over its current capabilities.

Thats one takeaway from a Friday panel in San Francisco involving leading AI experts hosted by the Association for Computing Machinery for its 50th annual Turing Award for advancements in computer science.

Michael Jordan, a machine learning expert and computer science professor at University of California, Berkeley, said there is way too much hype regarding the capabilities of so-called chat bots. Many of these software programs use an AI technique called deep learning in which they are trained on massive amounts of conversation data so that they learn to interact with people.

Get Data Sheet , Fortunes technology newsletter.

But despite several big tech companies and new startups promising powerful chat bots that speak like humans when prodded, Jordan believes the complexity of human language it too difficult for bots to master with modern techniques like deep learning. These bots essentially perform parlor tricks in which they respond with comments that are loosely related to a particular conversation, but they cant say anything true about the real world.

We are in era of enormous hype of deep learning, said Jordan. Deep learning has the potential to change the economy, he added, but we are not there yet."

Also in the panel, Fei-Fei Li, Googles ( goog ) machine learning cloud chief and Stanford University Professor, said We are living in one of the most exciting and hyped eras of AI. Li helped build the ImageNet computer-vision contest, which spurred a renaissance in AI in which researchers applied deep learning to identify objects like cats in photos.

But while everyone talks about ImageNets success, we hardly talk about the failures, she said, underscoring the hard work researchers have building powerful computers that can see like humans.

For more about technology and finance, watch:

Still, Li is excited that current AI milestones will eventually lead to more breakthroughs that will touch every single industry, like healthcare. We are entering a new phase in AI, she said.

What will help usher more breakthroughs in deep learning will be the continuing advancements in powerful computing hardware, like Nvidia's GPUs that make it possible to crunch tremendous amounts of data faster than ever, explained Ilya Sutskever, the research director of Elon Musk-backed AI research group OpenAI . Deep learning will keep booming in tandem with advancements in computing hardware that shows no signs of slowing down .

"Compute has been the oxygen of deep learning," Sutskever said.

Originally posted here:

Beware the Hype of Artificial Intelligence - Fortune

Space probes of the future will have artificial intelligence, and it’s … – SYFY WIRE (blog)

When you think of artificial intelligence, you may think of Lt. Commander Data or C-3PO, but this AI will actually be the spacecraft rather than on board.

Exploring space has some far-out challengesand this is after weve sent robots to Mars and all manner of probes and orbiters to other planets, including Venus and Saturn. Future missions will venture deeper and deeper into unexplored star systems and galaxies that have only been observed via telescope. This is easier dreamed than done. Too many unforeseen obstacles could cause a craft to glitch or break down hundreds of thousands of miles away, which is why scientists developing these future missions need to be paranoid.

Space scientists Steve Chien and Kiri Wagstaff of NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory suggest that programming probes with advanced artificial intelligence will largely eliminate the need for prompts from the home planet that would have increasing difficulty reaching out to them the further they ventured into space. Not to mention that probes on more daring missions will have to be able to think for themselves, because they even more of them will be required and they will probably not be able to receive any intervention from Earth. It gets creepier with the realization that the capacity to learn will need to be wired into their computerized brains to make them adaptable.

"The goal is for A.I. to be more like a smart assistant collaborating with the scientist and less like programming assembly code," said Chien, who collaborated with Wagstaff on an article recently published in the journal Science Robotics. "It allows scientists to focus on the 'thinking' thingsanalyzing and interpreting datawhile robotic explorers search out features of interest."

Autonomous probes should be able to function on a hypersensitive level that includes understanding and carrying out mission requirements, recognizing geological phenomena and identifying differences between what passes for normal planetary conditions (depending on the planet) and extreme space weather. They should also be able to reprioritize if they eye something spontaneous, like ocean plumes erupting on watery worlds similar to Enceladus. Advancing the science of AI enough may even make them able to use their findings for future studies. Not having infinite fuel means the robo-brains will also need to make the call on which regions are worth delving into the most.

AI is already being prototyped for the Mars 2020 rover and could someday make once-impossible endeavors, like a mission to Alpha Centauri, possible, but even the researchers themselves admit it still has to level up.

"For the foreseeable future, there's a strong role for high-level human direction," Wagstaff said. "But A.I. is an observational tool that allows us to study science that we couldn't get otherwise."

(via Phys.org)

Read the rest here:

Space probes of the future will have artificial intelligence, and it's ... - SYFY WIRE (blog)

Canada has a chance to monopolize the artificial intelligence industry – The Globe and Mail

John Kelleher is a partner at McKinsey & Co. and the co-chair of Next Canada. Laura McGee is an engagement manager at McKinsey & Co. and co-founder of #GoSponsorHer.

John Kelleher is a partner at McKinsey & Co. and the co-chair of Next Canada. Laura McGee is an engagement manager at McKinsey & Co. and co-founder of #GoSponsorHer.

Theres no doubt that Canada could lead the planet in artificial intelligence (AI). Canadian academics such as Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio essentially created the field of deep learning and put Canada on the map; today, Edmonton, Toronto and Montreal are globally important centres of AI research. The best AI talent in the world is also increasingly coming to Canada to launch AI businesses such as integrate.ai and others.

All these companies and researchers are convinced of the technologys enormous commercial potential. If AI develops like other technologies, most of these benefits will flow to the country that builds the first good ecosystem. This is a huge opportunity for Canada.

At the same time, AI poses clear challenges to business and government. Over the next 10 to 20 years, nearly half of Canadas jobs are at high risk of being affected by automation. Women hold a lot of these jobs and are especially at risk the World Economic Forum says that globally, women will face about twice the rate of job loss as men in what it calls the fourth industrial revolution.

How can Canadian companies gain the benefits of this disruptive technology while ensuring that large segments of society are not left behind? In our view, the public and private sectors should take six steps to outsmart AI and avoid its dislocations:

Commit to building the worlds best AI ecosystem: The winning AI cluster will create many high-paying jobs and create spillover effects for the middle class but the also-rans will not. Half-measures wont work. Canada must play to win. If there is going to be a steam engine that disrupts the status quo and AI is shaping up that way then Canada should develop and build the very best steam engine it can, right here at home.

Create at-scale AI training programs: Industry can form coalitions to collect data, oversee curriculum development and rapidly retrain workers in the skills needed to succeed in nascent AI applications.

Take Generation, a McKinsey-supported initiative that works with employers to quickly train and place young workers in sectors like health care and technology. Graduates have an 84 per cent employment rate within 90 days of completing the program and earn two to six times more income than before. Similarly, Prominp in Brazil trains 30,000 youth each year for positions in the oil and gas industry, with 189 skill-profile tracks and an 80-per-cent postgrad employment rate.

In Canada, such a program could be built in partnership with new research groups such as the Vector Institute in Toronto or with incubators such as Communitech, Next Canada and the Creative Destruction Lab.

Launch innovative new training models: The government could launch and fund a venture capital lab to create innovative training programs, so new training ideas can be tested, validated and scaled up (as recommended by the Advisory Council on Economic Growth). Startups such as Ryersons Magnet have great potential to address labour-market challenges. A so-called FutureSkills Lab could help scale great ideas and share learnings across provinces.

Build real links between companies and research schools: Large companies could partner with universities and vocational schools to provide equipment, facilities and expertise to prepare students for AI. In exchange, these companies could receive preferential recruiting.

For example, TAFE SA in South Australia trains approximately 500,000 students each year in high-demand areas such as aged care and nursing, trades and information technology. It partners with hundreds of businesses each year, which provide apprenticeships and traineeships. TAFE also orchestrates reverse co-op program where large corporations and small-to-medium-sized enterprises send workers back to campus for a term to learn critical AI skills.

Urgently reinvent curriculums for software and AI: Elementary, high-school and university programs have to develop the skills that empower students to be leaders in the coming AI tsunami critical thinking, teamwork, coding, algorithmic understanding and math. Some jurisdictions (e.g., Chicago and Queensland, Australia) are already moving to make software-coding classes mandatory. Canada should consider doing the same.

Government may want to consider practising what it preaches and adopt AI itself: A technology-enabled, AI-smart public service could not only be more efficient and provide better services. It might also create a product that Canada could export to the world.

Canadian companies have a real opportunity to leverage AI for growth but not without an inclusive work force. We all have a stake in getting this right.

Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeBusiness

See more here:

Canada has a chance to monopolize the artificial intelligence industry - The Globe and Mail

Tuskegee University aerospace engineering program ascends with industry – Made In Alabama

The project would create 750 high-wage, full-time jobs over a 10-year period starting in 2019, and total investment is estimated at up to $250 million. Moton Field is where the legendary Tuskegee Airmen, the first African-American military pilots, trained during World War II.

CLIMBING ENROLLMENT

The number of undergraduate students in the department has increased from 75 students to about 140 students the last five years.

The numbers have really ratcheted up, Khan said. There was a time when we used to graduate five or six a year. This 2017 academic year, the department graduated 21 African-American aerospace engineers.

We have been really growing recently. Weve done a better job of marketing the program, and weve added activities that have sparked interest, such as a rocket competition, an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) design-build-fly program, and a zero gravity program.

Tuskegee is the first and only historically black institution of higher learning to offer an accredited Bachelor of Science degree program in this field.

Our graduates are working at all the big aerospace companies, and there are also many graduates who go into the military, NASA, the FAA and other agencies, Khan said. We contribute very substantially to the workforce and to the diversity of it.

INDUSTRY CONNECTIONS

Alabamas thriving aerospace industry has benefited the program.

One of the biggest advantages of having industry in the area is that some of our students are involved in some of the engineering hands-on activities/projects. In addition, students get internships, and after graduation, many of them are recruited by these companies, Khan said.

Theres also a big advantage for our students to go and visit and get an understanding of how the industry works. We also invite people from industry to provide professional talks to our students.

As for the Leonardo project, it could be a great addition to the internship and work opportunities available to Tuskegee students, he said.

It would be a great asset to us in that we could always invite the experts in the facility there to come and talk to students, and students could go there to see all the different parts of the airplane and the different stages and processes of assembly, he said. For us, its going to be a great learning opportunity.

Faculty at Tuskegees Aerospace Science Engineering Department also could benefit by being involved in different research opportunities related to Leonardos work, Khan added.

AIRCRAFT DESIGN

Khan, who received his undergraduate degree in Aerospace Science Engineering from the Pakistan Air Force College of Aeronautical Engineering, is also personally excited about the project, because of his own background in aircraft design.

Prior to joining Tuskegee, he served in the Pakistan Air Force and attained the rank of Brigadier General. While in the PAF, he served as the Head of the Aerospace Engineering Department at his alma mater and the Chief of Engineering of the largest operational base. He also was responsible for the F-16 fleet, among other aircraft.

In addition, Khan was the Deputy Chief Project Director (Aerospace) of the joint Sino-Pakistan military aircraft development program, the JF-17. In this capacity, he led the design and development contractual negotiations, conducted the Air Staff Requirements verifications, conceptual design and preliminary design reviews. He also supported the financial reviews.

Leonardos plan for Moton Field is very exciting because it brings back a lot of memories, he said.

Khan received his masters degree in Aeronautical Engineering from the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology and his Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering from Texas A&M University.

He is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineers (Pakistan), a Fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society (U.K.) and an Associate Fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. His research interests include vortex dominated flows, aircraft design and engineering education, and he has received more than $2 million in research grants from organizations including the National Science Foundation and NASA.

RICH LEGACY

Greg Canfield, secretary of the Alabama Department of Commerce, said Tuskegee has a rich legacy when it comes to aerospace and aviation, and the region is in line to make an even greater impact.

From the preeminence of Tuskegees Aerospace Science Engineering Department to Leonardos plans to build world-class training aircraft at Moton Field, all of the pieces are in place to influence the industry for generations, much like the courageous Tuskegee Airmen did for the military many years ago, he said.

Khan said the success of the Tuskegee students and faculty are part of the Airmens legacy.

Just as they were facing a challenge in the second World War, and were very successful, here we are in the 21st Century, meeting the challenge of staying on the cutting edge of technology, he said.

Read the original here:

Tuskegee University aerospace engineering program ascends with industry - Made In Alabama

Aerospace beckons manufacturing sector – Journal Advocate

By Jeff Rice

Journal-Advocate staff writer

Joe Kiely of Foreign Trade Zone No. 293 explains the benefits of an FTZ designation to those attending the Progressive 15 manufacturers expo in Sterling Friday. (Jeff Rice / Sterling Journal-Advocate)

Breaking into the manufacturing big leagues will take time and is only for those willing to make the commitment, according to a couple of heavy hitters at Friday's Progressive 15 Manufacturing Expo.

Joe Rice, director of governmental relations for Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Littleton, told those attending the conference that it's a long process to become a Lockheed Martin supplier, but the company is looking to diversify its supply chain.

"We have to get our costs down," Rice said. "We have grown up with suppliers in certain areas, primarily the East Coast and California, but they have become very expensive. If we can diversify our supplier base a little bit, we can lower our costs.

The company doesn't want to set any false expectations, however, and Rice emphasized that becoming a Lockheed Martin supplier can be a long process.

"Nobody decides they want to build a satellite tomorrow. It's designed years out, so the supply chain for it is designed years out," he said. "The good news is that we have found a lot of skills in agriculture, in the oil and gas industries out here that transfer to our technicians."

Rice pointed out that Lockheed Martin has recently found parts fabricators in Grand Junction and in Trinidad.

"There's no reason we can't find them out here, in Sterling, or in Julesburg," he said.

Lockheed Martin isn't the only aerospace company in the state, and Rice said Colorado is now the No. 2 "aerospace state" in the nation. There are 52,860 Coloradans employed in aerospace, he said, and Colorado will soon become first in the nation in terms of per-capita aerospace employment.

The industry sprang up in Colorado in the mid-1950s when Glenn L. Martin Co. built its intercontinental ballistic missile laboratory and factory in Colorado because it was believed that Soviet submarine-based nuclear missiles couldn't reach this far. Since then the Maryland-based company has been through a number of evolutions, first merging with Marietta-American to become Martin Marietta, and then with Lockheed in 1995.

Rice said Lockheed Martin wants to lead the U.S. back into space exploration, an area the American people have largely ignored since the end of the Space Shuttle program.

"Aerospace has become so common that people don't think about it," Rice said. "There are consequences to that. At beginning of space age, only two countries could put astronauts into space, the United States and the USSR. Today, there are still just two nations who can put people in space, and the U.S. isn't one of them. Russia and China can put astronauts in space. We still have astronauts, but we pay Russia to put Americans in space. Why? Because we as a society took our eye off of space, we didn't fund space shuttle or the next generation of technology."

Rice said his company wants to lead the U.S. back into space exploration, and in the process make Colorado the center of the American return to space. And, he said, small companies all over Colorado can be part of that effort. He said companies that can provide an innovative product or an existing product with better quality, faster or cheaper has a shot at becoming a supplier. He said aspiring aerospace suppliers should consider starting as a partner of an existing supplier. And it doesn't happen overnight.

"It typically takes two to three years to get through the process, and then only if there is a need that matches," he said.

Rice suggested potential suppliers go to Lockheed Martin's web site and "poke around in the part about to do business with (us.)"

Earlier in the morning Joe Kiely of Limon, director of Foreign Trade Zone No. 293, told expo attendees that manufacturers who are interested in taking advantage of Colorado's free trade zone can save money on import and export duties, but it can take up to a year to gain a designation as a sub-zone or "magnet site" attached to the foreign trade zone.

The purpose of an FTZ, Kiely said, is to avoid paying customs duty when importing raw materials to be used for manufacturing goods for re-export. He used the example of Vestas Corp, which makes wind turbines at its plants in Windsor, Brighton and Pueblo. Vestas imports much of its manufacturing technology and some raw materials, then builds the turbines for sale overseas. According to federal law, an FTZ is a "geographic area where goods may be landed, stored, handled, manufactured or re-configured, and re-exported under specific customs regulations."

Colorado's foreign trade zone covers Adams and Arapaho counties and major parts of Elbert, Lincoln, and Morgan counties. Kiely said he wanted to do all of eastern Colorado but regulations say an FTZ cannot extend beyond 90 minutes of the Denver Port Office. He said Vestas was able to take advantage of the FTZ by setting up sub-zones for its plants and showing compelling reasons why the factories couldn't be moved into the existing FTZ.

Another option, Kiely said, is to get a "magnet site" designation, but that can take up to a year. A magnet site would be, for instance, a business park set up to attract companies that want to use FTZ procedures. Magnet sites must be able to attract multiple users, Kiely said, and the designation must be in use within five years of being issued.

Afternoon sessions at the expo included a presentation on apprenticeships, a women in manufacturing panel, and a young manufacturing entrepreneur panel.

Jeff Rice: 970-526-9283, ricej@journal-advocate.com

Read more:

Aerospace beckons manufacturing sector - Journal Advocate

Companies plan to spend more on cloud computing services this year, higher prices among drivers: Clutch – Canadian Underwriter

Companies are planning to spend more on cloud computing services in 2017, but must be cognizant that anticipated costs could balloon absent appropriate monitoring and use, suggest survey results released this week by Clutch.

Reflecting input from 283 IT professionals at businesses in the United States that use a cloud computing service, Clutchs Second Annual Cloud Computing Survey found 67% of polled businesses plan to increase cloud computing spending this year.

Almost half of businesses surveyed report they expect their cloud computing to increase by 11% to 30%, while almost one in five expect the increase to exceed 30%, note poll results from the Washington, D.C.-based B2B ratings and reviews firm.

Just 8% of businesses participating in the survey which explored current and future trends say they expect their cloud computing spending will go down in 2017.

Cloud is the new normal, suggests Jeremy Przygode, CEO of Stratalux, Inc., an Amazon Web Services advanced consulting partner and managed service provider.

When businesses need to evaluate new solutions, or need to do a hardware refresh on existing solutions cloud is the go-to solution to figure out how to do that, Przygode says in a statement from Clutch.

Notes Clutch, As the cloud gains popularity, businesses are perhaps less likely to see it as an alternative option, but rather as the logical next step for their data storage. Therefore, they will increase their spending in the technology.

While the anticipated spending rise may be encouraging, Clutch cautions that these additional expenditures may be due to a variety of factors, from a greater desire to use the cloud to negligence regarding usage.

Consider that 47% of polled business the largest percentage of all options cited increased cost as a challenge encountered with their cloud provider in the past year.

This suggests that, in some cases, the increased spending is perhaps not always intentional or wanted, Clutch reports. The reality of cloud computings mechanisms means that businesses may end up paying more than they expected.

Keeping costs in line can be advanced by monitoring and appropriate use. For example, if usage surges, prices can increase dramatically.

Cloud computing is a dual edged sword, says Przygode.

Its great because you can quickly provision equipment or resources in the cloud by simply pushing a button. Thats the agility. However, the other edge of that sword is, because its so easy, people tend to fire stuff up and forget about it, he points out.

When starting out with a cloud project, the customer may think that its much cheaper, says Haresh Kumbhani, founder and CEO of Zymr, Inc., a cloud consulting and software development services company.

But, by the time they go to production, the bill goes from $800 to $8,000 per month, Kumbhani notes, adding price increases can be alleviated through proper monitoring.

That surge happens because theyve chosen the auto-scale option and didnt tune the policies which govern the costs, he explains.

Survey findings show that advances have been made on a number of fronts, including security and perception of how secure cloud can be. In fact, the largest percentage of respondents listed security as a benefit of using the cloud.

Still, Kumbhani advises considering three aspects when it comes to cloud security:

Around 80% of breaches occur because this third part is not very well-secured, Kumbhani points out. That being the case, he recommends that clients encrypt their data and databases, ensure users privileges are correct, and deploy features such as cyber security scanners that monitor for threat scenarios.

There is also movement with regard to what type of cloud private, hybrid or public respondents are using or looking into using.

Though a private cloud remains the most popular option, results indicate a hybrid cloud is an increasingly attractive option, with 82% of polled businesses that do not currently use a hybrid cloud saying they are exploring the option for the future.

A hybrid cloud has services and infrastructure spread between a private network and off-site cloud provider, offering flexibility and customizable features.

Even if you are committed to a private cloud solution, a hybrid cloud solution can provide additional benefits where you can burst your workloads into the public cloud as needed, Przygode suggests.

Burstability is defined as meaning even if cloud usage surges past average levels, then the public cloud can provide the CPU to manage that, as opposed to maxing out.

When you go with a hybrid solution, you have to make sure as a company its engineered properly to gain access to it, advises Kevin Rubin, president and COO of IT managed service provider Stratosphere Networks.

Although a bit more challenging, customizing your cloud experience allows [a business] to leverage different toolsets that are truly drilled down to their department, their individuals, and how they do business, Rubin explains.

Przygodes view is that the transition towards public cloud is an inevitability.

Size also matters when it comes to the cloud and choices around that.

Findings show the needs of small- to mid-sized businesses versus large enterprises are very different, and that each type of company should evaluate their specific needs before deciding between private, public, or hybrid cloud options.

While large enterprises may be able to afford external help, Rubin says, small- to mid-sized businesses may need to wait to transition, or seek out lower priced options.

Related: Global spending on worldwide cloud services and infrastructure to reach US$122.5 billion in 2017: International Data Corporation

In addition, almost one in five surveyed businesses using a cloud computing service are using artificial intelligence (AI) encompasses the concept of computer systems accomplishing tasks that previously required human intelligence features.

The cloud can progressively power AI with larger computing power and data storage, Clutch reports, adding that 60% of polled businesses using AI began doing so in 2015 or 2016; and 10% in 2017 (from January and mid-May).

Przygode points out that AI can be used to scan IT environments and analyze potential threats with greater efficiency.

AI is a really good use case for finding the signal in the monitoring noise, because sometimes there might be alerts for an activity that is perfectly normal, but using AI, we can filter alerts through machine learning algorithms and reduce false positives before they get escalated to our team, he explains.

As businesses explore their options for data management and storage in the future, it is important to understand the opinions and trends regarding cloud computing, and how this technology is evolving, Clutch recommends.

Companies can go it alone, Przygode says.

He adds, however, that cloud computing is not the same type of computing as it was in previous generations, and traditional IT and cloud IT are different. Frankly, the infrastructure and, more importantly, the way of managing that infrastructure, has changed dramatically, he maintains.

Continued here:

Companies plan to spend more on cloud computing services this year, higher prices among drivers: Clutch - Canadian Underwriter

In 1928, One Physicist Accidentally Predicted Antimatter – Popular Mechanics

Getty Mark Garlick/Science Photo Library

In the first quarter of the 20th century, it was an intense time to be a physicist. It seemed like every day someone was coming out with a new theory that completely revolutionized our understanding of the universe. In 1905 Einstein published his Theory of Special Relativity, which changed the way physicists thought about space and time. Ten years later, Einstein published his Theory of General Relativity, which was even more revolutionary. OK so it was a lot of Einstein, but still.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

At about the same time, a group of physicists were beginning to study very tiny particles like electrons, as well as the weird things that can happen with light. They began to develop a theory called quantum mechanics, which contains the idea that at the smallest level, measurements of position, momentum, energy, and other quantities are uncertain.

Many physicists spent their entire careers trying to unify these two titans of 20th century physics. In 1928, one man finally succeeded, and in the process, managed to predict the existence of antimatter. As PBS Space Time explains:

Physicists trying to unite relativity and quantum mechanics had a bit of a problem. One of the key ideas of relativity is that time and space are relative, and everything depends on where you are and how fast you're moving. But that idea doesn't show up anywhere in quantum mechanics.

British Physicist Paul Dirac decided to fix this problem by combining Einstein's famous E=mc2 equation with Schroedinger's equation from quantum mechanics. What he got could only be described as an ugly mess. But Dirac saw a way to fix it.

Paul Dirac in 1928.

Getty Science Source

However, his solution was a bit strange. In order for the math to work, he needed to add in an extra type of electron, with negative energy. Nobody knew what this was or even what it meant, but it made the end result so simple and elegant that Dirac just knew it was true.

Only a few years later, observations of cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere discovered the first antimatter particles, confirming Dirac's hypothesis. He showed that relativity and quantum mechanics could be combined after all, creating a completely new branch of physics: quantum field theory.

Source: PBS Space Time

See the article here:

In 1928, One Physicist Accidentally Predicted Antimatter - Popular Mechanics

Physicists settle debate over how exotic quantum particles form – Phys.Org

June 23, 2017 by Carla Reiter Here 3 symbolizes an Efimov molecule comprised of three atoms. While all 3s look about the same, research from the Chin group observed a tiny 3 that is clearly different. Credit: Cheng Chin

New research by physicists at the University of Chicago settles a longstanding disagreement over the formation of exotic quantum particles known as Efimov molecules.

The findings, published last month in Nature Physics, address differences between how theorists say Efimov molecules should form and the way researchers say they did form in experiments. The study found that the simple picture scientists formulated based on almost 10 years of experimentation had it wronga result that has implications for understanding how the first complex molecules formed in the early universe and how complex materials came into being.

Efimov molecules are quantum objects formed by three particles that bind together when two particles are unable to do so. The same three particles can make molecules in an infinite range of sizes, depending on the strength of the interactions between them.

Experiments had shown the size of an Efimov molecule was roughly proportional to the size of the atoms that comprise ita property physicists call universality.

"This hypothesis has been checked and rechecked multiple times in the past 10 years, and almost all the experiments suggested that this is indeed the case," said Cheng Chin, a professor of physics at UChicago, who leads the lab where the new findings were made. "But some theorists say the real world is more complicated than this simple formula. There should be some other factors that will break this universality."

The new findings come down somewhere between the previous experimental findings and predictions of theorists. They contradict both and do away with the idea of universality.

"I have to say that I am surprised," Chin said. "This was an experiment where I did not anticipate the result before we got the data."

The data came from extremely sensitive experiments done with cesium and lithium atoms using techniques devised by Jacob Johansen, previously a graduate student in Chin's lab who is now a postdoctoral fellow at Northwestern University. Krutik Patel, a graduate student at UChicago, and Brian DeSalvo, a postdoctoral researcher at UChicago, also contributed to the work.

"We wanted to be able to say once and for all that if we didn't see any dependence on these other properties, then there's really something seriously wrong with the theory," Johansen said. "If we did see dependence, then we're seeing the breakdown of this universality. It always feels good, as a scientist, to resolve these sorts of questions."

Developing new techniques

Efimov molecules are held together by quantum forces rather than by the chemical bonds that bind together familiar molecules such as H2O. The atoms are so weakly connected that the molecules can't exist under normal conditions. Heat in a room providing enough energy to shatter their bonds.

The Efimov molecule experiments were done at extremely low temperatures50 billionths of a degree above absolute zeroand under the influence of a strong magnetic field, which is used to control the interaction of the atoms. When the field strength is in a particular, narrow range, the interaction between atoms intensifies and molecules form. By analyzing the precise conditions in which formation occurs, scientists can infer the size of the molecules.

But controlling the magnetic field precisely enough to make the measurements Johansen sought is extremely difficult. Even heat generated by the electric current used to create the field was enough to change that field, making it hard to reproduce in experiments. The field could fluctuate at a level of only one part in a milliona thousand times weaker than the Earth's magnetic fieldand Johansen had to stabilize it and monitor how it changed over time.

The key was a technique he developed to probe the field using microwave electronics and the atoms themselves.

"I consider what Jacob did a tour de force," Chin said. "He can control the field with such high accuracy and perform very precise measurements on the size of these Efimov molecules and for the first time the data really confirm that there is a significant deviation of the universality."

The new findings have important implications for understanding the development of complexity in materials. Normal materials have diverse properties, which could not have arisen if their behavior at the quantum level was identical. The three-body Efimov system puts scientists right at the point at which universal behavior disappears.

"Any quantum system made with three or more particles is a very, very difficult problem," Chin said. "Only recently do we really have the capability to test the theory and understand the nature of such molecules. We are making progress toward understanding these small quantum clusters. This will be a building block for understanding more complex material."

Explore further: Exotic, gigantic molecules fit inside each other like Russian nesting dolls

More information: Jacob Johansen et al. Testing universality of Efimov physics across broad and narrow Feshbach resonances, Nature Physics (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nphys4130

University of Chicago scientists have experimentally observed for the first time a phenomenon in ultracold, three-atom molecules predicted by Russian theoretical physicist Vitaly Efimov in 1970.

An exotic physical effect based on the attraction among three particles has a similar universality to that of common two-body interactions, Yusuke Horinouchi from the University of Tokyo and Masahito Ueda from the RIKEN Center ...

An international team of physicists has converted three normal atoms into a special new state of matter whose existence was proposed by Russian scientist Vitaly Efimov in 1970.

When a two-body relation becomes a three-body relation, the behaviour of the system changes and typically becomes more complex. While the basic physics of two interacting particles is well understood, the mathematical description ...

Some years ago, Rudolf Grimm's team of quantum physicists in Innsbruck provided experimental proof of Efimov states a phenomenon that until then had been known only in theory. Now they have also measured the second Efimov ...

(Phys.org) Chemical reactions drive the mechanisms of life as well as a million other natural processes on earth. These reactions occur at a wide spectrum of temperatures, from those prevailing at the chilly polar icecaps ...

Researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the University of Colorado Boulder have demonstrated a new mobile, ground-based system that could scan and map atmospheric gas plumes over kilometer ...

(Phys.org)In the late 1800s when scientists were still trying to figure out what exactly atoms are, one of the leading theories, proposed by Lord Kelvin, was that atoms are knots of swirling vortices in the aether. Although ...

New research by physicists at the University of Chicago settles a longstanding disagreement over the formation of exotic quantum particles known as Efimov molecules.

In experiments at the Department of Energy's SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, scientists were able to see the first step of a process that protects a DNA building block called thymine from sun damage: When it's hit with ...

Elemental metals usually form simple, close-packed crystalline structures. Though lithium (Li) is considered a typical simple metal, its crystal structure at ambient pressure and low temperature remains unknown.

In an arranged marriage of optics and mechanics, physicists have created microscopic structural beams that have a variety of powerful uses when light strikes them. Able to operate in ordinary, room-temperature environments, ...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

See the rest here:

Physicists settle debate over how exotic quantum particles form - Phys.Org

Donald Trump Offers Nearly Incomprehensible Explanation For James Comey Tapes Claims – HuffPost

President Donald Trump admitted this week that he did not tape his conversations with former FBI Director James Comey despite his earlier tweets suggesting he had. When asked why he did this in an interview that aired Friday, he offered the following perplexing explanation:

When he found out that there may be tapes out there, whether its governmental tapes or anything else, I think his story may have changed, Trump said in an interview alongside first lady Melania. I mean, youll have to take a look at that, because then he has to tell what actually took place at the events.

While we didnt exactly follow his logic, Fox &Friends co-host Ainsley Earhardt ate it up.

It was a smart way to make sure [Comey] stayed honest in those hearings, she said.

It wasnt stupid, I can tell you that he replied, adding,You never know whats out there but I didnt tape and I dont have any tapes.

He also seemed to resurface another one of his favorite unfounded claims, that former President Barack Obamas administration spied on him, doing all of this unmasking and surveillance.

He first made clear that he didnt have tapes on Thursday afternoon, when headmittedthat with all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are tapes or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings.

Trump fired Comey in May after he refused to end the FBI investigation into whether Russia meddled in the 2016 election and whether Trumps campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the results.

Visit link:

Donald Trump Offers Nearly Incomprehensible Explanation For James Comey Tapes Claims - HuffPost

What do young Indians think of Donald Trump? – CNN

His visit comes at a time of immense uncertainty and unpredictability in Indian-US relations.

Earlier this month, he singled out India during his announcement declaring the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

Top of the leaders' agenda will be the H1-B visa rehaul, the fight against terror and expanding on bilateral relations with the new administration.

We spoke to five young Indians about the importance of bilateral ties between the two countries and what they make of Trump.

Harshit Tibrewal, 22, is a software engineer working for a start-up. He believes good relations between the two democracies are vital, especially given India's rise in the global order.

"I think the relationship between the US and India is very strong, because a lot of trade happens between the two, a lot of people from here go to work and study there. Both countries are superpowers and Modi going to meet with Trump shows that the relationship is strong and getting stronger. It's very good to have such a good relationship with a strong country."

His sunny outlook comes despite being in an occupation hardest hit by Trump's visa crackdown.

"I don't think it (H1-B visa reform) will affect Indians. Most of these software companies need us," says Tibrewal.

Indian firms like Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys and Wipro use the H-1B program to send thousands of engineers to the US.

Around 70% of the 85,000 H-1B visas issued annually go to Indian workers.

According to Tibrewal, Trump's America First agenda could actually backfire on him -- and the US.

"Indians have great minds of their own. Quoting Bill Gates, 'If I stopped hiring Indians, another Microsoft would have opened in India'. Donald Trump should know this too."

Twenty-year-old Kanika Sethi is a recent commerce graduate. While she understands the importance of relations between India and the US, she's skeptical about Trump's leadership.

"Donald Trump is a rich leader. I can't say whether he is a good or bad leader. But the first thing that comes to mind is money."

Between Modi's election in 2014 and Obama leaving office at the beginning of 2017, the two leaders met eight times. A record for leaders of the two nations. Obama is also the only sitting US President to have visited India twice while in office.

"There's no comparison with Obama. Obama was the best."

Yakita Somani, 20, also a commerce graduate, is more pragmatic about the upcoming visit especially on the hot button topic of H1-B visa restrictions.

"The first preference is given to American people and that's absolutely right. In India, if we protest for our rights, then that's the same thing. Indians there (the United States) who are facing discrimination and inequality, I feel you need to struggle for something. It's their policy and being the most powerful country, they don't need to think about the entire world."

At the same time, she is aware that forging closer ties with the United States is crucial for India.

"I feel America is the most powerful country, so if India is tied up with a country of this position, it will be beneficial i areas such as defense, security and many other things. Our country will become powerful."

Surya Hooda, 22, wants to become a civil servant and is currently studying for his exams.

"India's relations with America are very important. During Obama's time, they were on the rise. Now, Trump and his administration are going back on a lot of policies that the Obama administration employed."

"Trump has pulled back from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). India was not a part of the TPP so now there's an opportunity where we can directly establish bilateral relations directly with the US so that's a plus point."

Just weeks after coming into office, Trump formally withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation deal that had been negotiated under Obama.

Twenty-two-year-old Kilang Walling is an engineering graduate.

He describes Trump as a "loudmouth" and "not the kind of person you find in power."

However, like the other young people CNN spoke with, he understands the importance of US-Indian relations, especially in South Asia.

"India is growing in terms of power and the economy. Both India and the US need to cooperate. And because India is surrounded by not so friendly countries like China and Pakistan, India needs the US and the US also needs India because America and China also don't function well."

For Walling, the issue he wants to see most discussed during Modi's visit is the US' withdrawal from the Paris climate accord.

"He (Trump) shouldn't have done that. America being a leader and a forward thinking country, he shouldn't have pulled out."

"I feel very strongly about the Paris deal. How the world is going, how climate change is going. It's essential that every human being needs to worry about this because we need sustainability. It's not only about living today, there are generations to come so we have to worry about this."

See the article here:

What do young Indians think of Donald Trump? - CNN

Is Donald Trump right that Mexico is the second-deadliest country in the world? – Washington Post

MEXICO CITY With another flurry of his Twitter fingers, President Trump got Mexico gnashing its teeth.

On Thursday night, Trump tweeted that Mexico was just ranked the second deadliest country in the world, after only Syria. Drug trade largely the cause. We will BUILD THE WALL!

The Mexican Foreign Ministry said hold up, no. Although the countryhas a significant violence problem, Mexico is not the second most violent country in the world, the office said in a statement.

So who's right?

The unsatisfyingly squishy answer: It's hard to know. The second-deadliest claim is actually more than a month old. A British think tank called the International Institute for Strategic Studies published a report in May arguing that Mexico's total homicide count last year of 23,000 deaths was surpassed only by Syria (50,000).

That report was rejected by the Mexican government, which cast doubt on the methodology and pointed out that in Mexico, the homicide rate (deaths per 100,000 people), which is the usual way to rank deadly countries, was far below even other Latin American countries.

Mexico is far from being one of the most violent countries in the world, the Mexican government pointed out at the time, citing United Nations statistics, even though the latest figures are a few years old. The most recent U.N. stats put Mexico's homicide rate at about 20 per 100,000 people, farbelow several other Latin American countries, including Honduras, at 90 per 100,000 residents.

Several security experts in Mexico considered the think tank study a bit sensationalist. Alejandro Hope, a top security analyst here, described it as idiotic.

Mexico has undoubtedly been extremely violent over the past decade, with an estimated 200,000 dead in the drug war. And the number of killings has risen sharply in the past two years, approaching record highs. Mexican newspapers reported that May 2017 was deadlier than any month since such statistics started being tabulated even bloodier than at the height of the drug war.

But the problem goes beyond how you count. When you reach the upper ranksof the world's most violent countries, torn by insurgencies and civil wars, the accuracy of statistics often goes out the window. War zones are notoriously difficult places to compile an accurate tally of deaths. How many people died last year in South Sudan's civil war? It's hard to know.During the peak years of the U.S. involvement in the Iraq War, the casualty estimates sometimes varied by hundreds of thousands of people.

Getting a straight answer is also hard given how politically delicate the homicide rate is. In countries such as Honduras and El Salvador, which have suffered severe gang violence for years, day-to-day fluctuations in the homicide rate get reportedlike football scores, a way of pinning success or failure on the countries' governments.

Mexico is highly bureaucratic but also keeps official information closely guarded. Corruption is rife and distrust of government runs high. Given all this, counting homicidesis fraught. Different federal agencies have different statistics and homicidesare broken down into different types.

One of the best recent studies on Mexican violence, by researchers at the University of San Diego, found that no other country in the Western Hemisphere has seen such a large increase in its homicide rate or in absolute number of homicides over the past two decades as Mexico.

No one can deny Mexico is plagued by terrible violence right now regardless of their opinion on Trump's wall.

Read more:

Violence is soaring in the Mexican towns that feed America's heroin habit

View post:

Is Donald Trump right that Mexico is the second-deadliest country in the world? - Washington Post

Donald Trump Is Reckless, Erratic And Incompetent, According To Business Leaders Around the World – Newsweek

Donald Trump entered the Oval Office with zero political experience, touting his successes as one of New Yorks most famous business moguls to carry his 2016 presidential campaign to victory. But the president's managerial skills can be described as "antagonistic,""authoritarian"and "confusing,"according to some of the most prominent chief financial officers from around the world.

CFOs representing Yahoo, Wells Fargo, UPS, Target, Starbucks and SiriusXM, amongothers at CNBCs Global CFO Council, were tasked with describing Trump in the groups quarterly survey. Each used a single word to characterize the presidents leadership capabilities, with several C-level professionals using the same negative-leaning phrases, CNBCreported Friday.

Related: Here's how Trump could actually be impeached

Daily Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

Four CFOs described Trump as "chaotic."Two said the president was "erratic,"with another two stating that he is "reckless."The commander-in-chief also was called "unpredictable"by two of those surveyed.

The vast majority of answers were far from positive, alluding to the presidents ego and short temper by calling him "narcissistic,""self-absorbed"and "disjointed."Other responses were less damaging, though arguably unfavorable: One CFO called Trump "unconventional,"while another wrote the president is "disruptive."

The Trump White House has taken to categorizingrecent weeks according to the administrations apparent primary focus, moving from from "infrastructure week"to "womens health week."Perhaps thats why one CFO labeled the president fluid in his response to the quarterly survey.

Whether you love him or hate him, theres no denying the Trump presidency has been a whirlwind since he took office in January. Many likely will agree with one business leader's response Friday: "There are no words."

Read more:

Donald Trump Is Reckless, Erratic And Incompetent, According To Business Leaders Around the World - Newsweek

Donald Trump Does His Best Joe McCarthy Impression – New York Times

But within days, Mr. McCarthys accusation that there was a hidden Communist cabal at the heart of the American government blew up into a bitter national controversy. And before long, Joe McCarthys Wheeling speech had triggered a wave of paranoia and fear mongering that would forever bear his name: McCarthyism.

On June 28, 2016, another Republican politician landed at Stifel, now named Wheeling Ohio County Airport, to campaign here: Donald Trump.

Mr. Trump appeared first that night at a private fund-raiser held just blocks from the McLure Hotel. He went straight from the fund-raiser to a rally 15 minutes away in St. Clairsville, Ohio.

There, the Republican nominee for president spoke to a crowd of roughly 4,000. Theres something going on thats really, really bad, he said. And we better get smart, and we better get tough, or were not going to have much of a country left, O.K.?

It was a dark speech that harkened back to the most fearful tones of Joe McCarthy. Drumming up fears about the Islamic State, which he said was spreading like wildfire, Mr. Trump said that if he was elected, he would bring back the use of torture techniques like waterboarding in the interrogations of terrorism suspects. I dont think its tough enough, he said, of waterboarding, adding, We cant do waterboarding, but they can do chopping off heads, they can do drowning people in steel cages, they can do whatever they want. Mr. Trump also highlighted his other hits from the campaign trail, reminding the crowd about the threats from Nafta, Mexican immigrants and China. There was so much in the world to fear, and Donald Trump was the only one who could protect us.

One year after he walked in Joe McCarthys footsteps in Wheeling, Mr. Trump now practices Mr. McCarthys version of the politics of fear from the White House. The two figures, who bear striking similarities and who shared an adviser, Roy Cohn both mastered the art of fear politics.

Since he took office, Mr. Trump has expressed an apocalyptic vision of the United States and the wider world at nearly every turn, starting with an Inaugural Address in which his most memorable phrase was American carnage.

Over the past few months, he hasnt missed a chance to try to exploit fears over terrorism, using a series of attacks in Europe to argue in favor of his executive order calling for a travel ban on people from six Muslim-majority countries, which has been blocked by the courts. He has criticized other politicians, both in the United States and overseas, for political correctness on terrorism. He sticks to his scare tactics even when he is proven to be factually wrong and despite public rebukes from other world leaders.

He keeps doing it because it works for him, just like it worked for Joe McCarthy. Mr. Trump knows what people want to hear how terrifying the world can be and how he can protect them. Fearmongering resonates with his political base, particularly white voters without college degrees.

Fear of the other increases when the potential threats Mr. McCarthys Communists, or Mr. Trumps Muslims or Hispanics are poorly understood.

Underlying it all is a broad and unspoken fear of the looming loss of white dominance in American society. Increased diversity, notably the rapidly growing Hispanic population in the United States, is leading to a broader fear of all minority groups and foreigners, analysts believe.

White working-class voters who say they often feel like a stranger in their own land and who believe the U.S. needs protecting against foreign influence were 3.5 times more likely to favor Trump than those who did not share those concerns, concluded a study released in May by the Public Religion Research Institute and The Atlantic magazine.

Recent studies by psychologists have found that when they talk to white Americans about a future in which they are in the minority, that drives them to express more conservative views. You see a pretty reliable shift to the right when you emphasize the projected change in the demographics of the United States, says Jennifer Richeson, a professor of psychology at Yale University and one of the researchers involved with the studies. Once you activate the fear of a threat to group status, then anybody who is seen as not part of that group is seen as more of a threat.

Scott Crichlow, a professor of political science at the West Virginia University, sees that phenomenon in West Virginia, where whites without a college degree represent a larger percentage of the population than in any other state and where Mr. Trump saw one of his biggest margins of victory of any state in the 2016 election.

Clearly there is an audience for speeches that rally nationalist causes and against amorphous perceived threats, Mr. Crichlow said. What I think may be driving some of the appeal of the politics of fear is the states low education and demographics.

Wheeling Mayor Glenn Elliott believes there were several reasons for Mr. Trumps success here but thinks that fear of the other certainly played a big role.

When you have 40 years of economic stagnation, that leads to frustration with the status quo and to zero-sum thinking, the mayor said. And I also think part of his appeal was that he said, Im going to protect you from the Muslims, or Hispanics. There is a fear of that.

Trump supporters want to make America great again, to go back to what they believe were the halcyon days of the 1950s, which, ironically, was the decade of the fearmongering of Joe McCarthy.

I dont think West Virginia is a state full of racists, Mayor Elliott added. He does describe his state, though, as a place where cultural isolation and economic anxiety made it a perfect target for Mr. Trumps speech. There is also a fear of change that a skilled demagogue can tap into by focusing on the fear of the other, he said. Fear resonates.

An earlier version of a picture caption with this article misstated Senator Joseph McCarthys role in the Army-McCarthy hearings. He was the head of the subcommittee that called the hearings, but he did not preside over them as chairman.

James Risen is an investigative reporter for The Times and the author of Pay Any Price: Greed, Power and Endless War. Tom Risen is a reporter for Aerospace America Magazine.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

See original here:

Donald Trump Does His Best Joe McCarthy Impression - New York Times

Donald Trump’s lawyers feel the brunt of his Russia-related mood swings – Salon

President Donald Trump is not only struggling to avoid losing control of his presidency due to the ongoing Russia scandal. He is also struggling to maintain control over his temper.

One indication of this is Trump dressing down White House counsel Donald McGahn for not being more effective at ending the Russia investigation, according to a report by Politico. The president also spent Monday morning discussing his anger that special counsel Robert Mueller is continuing to press forward in investigating potential collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, as well as whether Trump himself committed obstruction of justice by firing former FBI Director James Comey.

The Monday outburst was not an isolated incident. Trump has also developed a habit of calling members of his outside legal team every morning so that he can vent to them about his concerns regarding the Russia scandal, according to a report by The Washington Post. This ritualserves the ostensible purpose of allowing Trump to get his Russia anger out of his system so that he can focus on other aspects of his presidency during the rest of the day, but when one White House adviser was asked whether or not this actually works, The Post reports that the individual paused for several seconds and then just laughed.

Trump has also been reported to have taken his anger out on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Not surprisingly, however, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway downplays these reports, saying that conjecture about the mood and momentum of the West Wing is inaccurate and overwrought. The pace is breakneck, the trajectory upward.

Read more:

Donald Trump's lawyers feel the brunt of his Russia-related mood swings - Salon

The Perverse Presidency of Donald Trump – New York Magazine

President Donald Trump speaks at Kirkwood Community College on June 21, 2017, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Photo: Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

I was mulling, as one does, over this presidency, and something crystallized in my head that I had not quite grasped before. Its policies are best described as simply perverse. The new Senate health-care bill is just the latestshining example. As Peter Suderman explains, it certainly isnt based on any serious conservative ideas about reforming health care; it has no vision of how it wants health care to be organized; the loss of health care for the working poor will be most intense in Republican districts; and, just as important, a huge amount of it is simply kicked into the future and could easily be forestalled or nullified by future Congresses and presidents. For good measure, by ending many of the taxes in the bill that make it work, and by removing the individual mandate, itriskssendingthe insurance markets into a deeper crisis.

So what on earth is the point? For Trump, it seems to me, the whole point is to have a win. He doesnt give a shit about what the bill actually contains. Hell just lie about it afterward and assume his cult followers will believe him. For Ryan, its just a way to make a future tax cut for the superrich more budget-friendly, while pushing the political costs of shredding Medicaid onto some future sucker.

And then you think about those tax cuts Ryan wants so badly. We are told that these cuts will spark so much growth they will pay for themselves and more. And yet if there is one thing we really do know by now, it is that this strategy has spectacularly failed and failed again to work. Reagans tax cuts left the U.S. with an unprecedented peacetime deficit; George W. Bush inherited a small surplus and, after his tax cuts didnt spur higher growth, handed Obama a Treasury close to bankrupt. In Kansas, the exact same strategy has incurred so much debt that a supermajority of the legislature, led by Republicans, have junked it. To pursue it a third time on a national scale is the definition of madness.

The only theme I can infer is this: Whatever Obama did, Trump will try to undo.

We are also living in an era of extreme inequality. Any responsible politician would be trying to find a way to ameliorate this, if for no other reason than it is deeply dangerous for the stability of our society and the health of our democracy. And yet the policy of the Republicans is to further increase such inequality to levels beyond even the robber-baron era. Again, the only word for this is perverse.

Ditto, for that matter, the idea that coal is the future of energy, and that climate change is a hoax. There was absolutely no point in withdrawing from the nonbinding Paris Accord which is why Trump is now lying by claiming, as he did last Wednesday night, that it was binding. It was an utterly pointless way to isolate the U.S. from the rest of the world, and cede leadership to China. There wasreally no point at all in trashing the modest opening to Cuba under Obama, poisoning relations, and then just fiddling with the details.

Elsewhere in foreign policy, we have just begun a deepening of the war in Afghanistan, the longest in American history, with no strategy in place. Weve also junked the very careful limits that Obama put on the war against ISIS, leading to increasingly dangerous conflict with the Russians. And we now have a broader Middle East policy that has needlessly junked the core gain of the Obama years. The opening to Iran gave the U.S. far more leverage in the region, balancing out our previous Sunni commitments with a Shiite counterweight. Now Trump has fully committed the United States to one side of an intra-Muslim divide, while trashing Qatar, which houses the most important military base in the entire region. Again: perverse.

And what on earth was the purpose of equivocating about the criticalcommitment to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, undermining the core underpinning of the Atlantic alliance and then affirming it anyway? We havent even gotten commitments to more defense spending from the Europeans, apart from what Obama had managed to get them to agree to already. But what we have achieved is an unprecedented rupture in relations with most of the key European allies.

It is also, frankly, perverse to ignore Russias blatant attempt to disrupt our elections and to keep reaching out to Putin when the Congress will rightly deepen sanctions anyway, and Putin willpursue his own ambitions regardless. None of this is coherent strategy, and almost all of it counterproductive.

The only theme I can infer is this: Whatever Obama did, Trump will try to undo.The perversity is the flip side of spite.

Nathaniel Franks new book on the long fight for marriage equality, Awakening: How Gays And Lesbians Brought Marriage Equality to America, has one thing going for it: Its a professional work of history. The only book on the movement we have so far wasnt. Jo Beckers hagiography of Chad Griffin, Forcing the Spring my review is here was an outright attack on everyone who had worked for the cause decades before Griffin tried to pass himself off as the gay Rosa Parks (yes, the book actually called him that). Awakening is therefore by default the best account we have, but its also a truly impressive, nuanced, fair account in its own right. Its astonishing to me that the New York Times and the Washington Post have yet to review it.It relays the lung-filling highs and stomach-churning lows of the long trek toward gay dignity. Better still, it brings into focus the small band of disparate individuals who somehow brought what was unimaginable into reality. Many people think marriage was won overnight. This book proves it wasnt.

But its chief merit is that it explains for straight people and the younger gay and lesbian generations just how deeply divisive this issue was in the gay world for so long all the way back to the 1950s, when the story really starts. The core gay divide in the gay world has always been between those who wanted equality and dignity in mainstream society and those who wanted to revolutionize and subvert the mainstream itself. Civil marriage was an issue where this divide was perhaps deepest. You can go back to the old gay magazine, One, published by the Mattachine Society, and see exactly the arguments that erupted later. In 1953, Frank notes, it ran an essay called Homosexual Marriage? The question mark was more like a gasp. In a screed against the normalization of gays, it worried thatequal rights means equal responsibilities. Equal freedoms means equal limitations. A decade later, in 1963, a counterpoint appeared: Lets Push Homophile Marriage. The term homophile itself was an attempt to redefine gay men as more than just sexual. The argument: It seems to me that when society finally accepts homophiles as a valid minority with minority rights, it is going first of all to accept married homophiles. We are, after all, closest to their ideals. In some ways, the gay-rights movement has spent the last few decades having that same fight over and over again.

But it is, of course, more complicated and interesting than that. Marriage equality was both subversiveandintegrationist. It subverted nascent gay culture and traditional heterosexual assumptions. And yet it was also a uniquely powerful symbol of integration, equality,and a common humanity. It was based on a submerged reality, which was that many gay men and especially lesbians had always been in committed relationships and that that experience was a vital bridge with heterosexuals, who usually comprised the rest of our families. The proof of that is in the number of gays and lesbians now in civil marriages: around a million.

Nonetheless, for the longest time, the fight for marriage had almost no constituency in the post-1969 gay world too conservative for some, way too utopian for others and was kept aloft by a tiny group of activists, lawyers, and writers, who never gave up, despite setbacks at almost every turn. The biggest gay-rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, for example, remained hostile to pushing for marriage all the way through to the mid-aughts.The central figure from the get-go, Evan Wolfson, had to fight the rest of the movement continuously to keep the dream alive. Its easy, in the wake of victory, to forget that story but Frank covers its nuances better than anything else Ive read. And he gives everyone their due. Toward the end of the book, he focuses a little too much on the litigation and not enough on the culture, but this is a small flaw in an otherwise indispensable account.

What resolved the gay divide, in the end, was the religious right. When George W. Bush endorsed the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004, as Frank explains, almost everyone in the gay movement realized that something fundamental to our human dignity and civil rights was at stake. Old ideological divisions briefly evaporated in the heat of the struggle, and the fast-rising support for the idea among gays and lesbians themselves turned into a grassroots revolution. The long game eventually, cumulatively brought the breakthrough.What began as as light covering of snow, easily brushed away, became, snowflake by snowflake, a drift, which eventually precipitated an avalanche. We live in the wake of it.

The other day, I managed to see the new documentary by David France, The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson, at the Provincetown Film Festival. It shines a piercing light on another cleavage in the gay world. And thats the long tension between gays and lesbians and transgender people. Theres an astonishing clip in the movieof a gay-rights rally for New York Pride in 1973, when a transgender instigator of Stonewall, Sylvia Rivera, forced herself onstage and grabbed the microphone. And as she began her impromptu speech, you can see and hear the crowd booing, shouting, and heckling at the interloper. Its a riveting and horrifying moment. For all the high-flown talk about the LGBT community, the truth is, these three groups have often had little in common apart from marginalization. Many gay men have sadly long been uncomfortable around transgender people; and many lesbians have bristled at times at the notion that transgender women are trulythe same as women who have been physiologically such from birth.

And then there was Marsha P. Johnson, an icon of Stonewall and the lost gay world of the West Village in the 1980s and early 1990s. I actually dont know quite how to identify her. She dressed as a woman but also as a man. Her family refer to her in the film interchangeably as he and she. She floated through all these divisions and seemed to belong in every camp. Was she a drag queen? Or transgender? Or a cross-dresser? In the end, I think, her charisma transcended all these identities. She was an individual, and in some ways, a saint. Gentle, African-American, always beaming, bringing outcasts into her home, shimmering through Pride like a vision of divine love, she seemed to have no enemies in an often contentious community. And she died like a martyr, her body suddenly washing up at the Christopher Street piers in 1992, quickly designated a suicide, with only the most cursory of investigations.

No one who knew her believed she killed herself. And the movie tries, all these years later, to solve the mystery of her death. Sadly, it doesnt quite deliver the payoff you want, but you learn so much along the way it doesnt really matter. As an evocation of a different era, the movie is quite wonderful. I have just two quibbles. Theres an implication that the Stonewall riots were instigated by trans people of color, who were then erased by the white cis middle class. Thisis far too pat. Its critical that the key trans figures at Stonewall be recognized. Ditto gay men of color. Putting them front and center on that fateful night is vital for the historical record, and Im glad this movie exists for that reason alone. But you only have to look at the actual photographs of the riots to see masses of young gay white men as well, lining up on the streets, jumping into the melee. And in some ways, it was the rebellion of those with much more to lose that marked a shift in consciousness.

Theres also a statement in the movie that there was no gay-rights movement before Stonewall. This is just untrue, and it erases the legacy of the early gay rights pioneers in the 1950s, like Frank Kameny, Barbara Gittings, and Harry Hay, who founded the movement in the terrifying era of the lavender scare. People who risked their lives and careers marching in front of the White House in the 1950s, who started the Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis, who laid the foundations for marriage equality, gays in the military, nondiscrimination in employment, and coined the term Gay is Good, deserve not to be forgotten. This movie wipes them from history.

But there I go again, I suppose. It wouldnt be a gay movie without an internal gay controversy. And the internecine fights will never fully end because the accident of homosexual orientation more than any other knows no single demographic, or gender, or race, or class. To form a coherent movement out of that massive, random diversity was never going to be easy. Pride Marches this year have beendisrupted and halted by groups connected with Black Lives Matter who oppose the mainstream corporate support and openly gay police organizations that so many of usregard as huge achievements of integration, rather than blights.Butpurist factionshave always triedto impose a singular vision on a very non-singular group of people. It has always been that way, from the very beginning. Love breaks through every human identity, and so must a movement rooted in the search for love. And of that divisiveness and contentiousness, spats and feuds, marches and countermarches, and rare, fleeting moments of unity, I am, in some, yes, perverseway, proud.

See younext Friday.

D.C. might still be revolving around legislative gridlock and investigations. But the electoral landscape would be very different.

A U.S. representative said he couldnt back the resolution which condemned violence against women because it supported safe abortion.

Obamacares popularity seems to be peaking just as Republicans get closer to taking it down in legislation that is not popular at all.

The Saudi-led coalition wants the tiny Gulf state to cut off ties with Iran and close Al Jazeera, ultimatums Qatar isnt likely to meet.

Change is slow. Thats why we have to keep working.

She met with a handful of Republican senators this week, but they couldnt agree on a plan.

The president also admitted that his tape bluff was an attempt to intimidate Comeys testimony.

A quick break from the off-camera briefings.

Inclusion of this House deal in the Senate bill shows McConnell playing the long game. But it could encourage shakedowns by fence-sitting senators.

This is why the Senate bill can ignore everything the moderates demanded and still probably pass.

His singular policy aim appears to be overturning anything Obama accomplished.

GOP senators, governors, and medical groups expressed concerns, but the initial lack of enthusiasm may be part of McConnells plan.

About a dozen representatives met on Thursday to discuss whether theres a way to force her out ahead of the midterms.

Theresa Mays government is low on goodwill from the U.K. public, and the European Union.

The ten-year proposal calls for vastly reducing the jail population and building new jails elsewhere, among other welcome reforms.

By the end of the year, 600 jobs will have been cut.

This is not a health-care bill, Obama said, but a massive transfer of wealth from middle-class and poor families to the richest people in America.

While McConnell might make some accommodations to moderates, these key areas are non-negotiable.

Link:

The Perverse Presidency of Donald Trump - New York Magazine

Fact check: Trump makes misleading claims at Iowa rally – USA TODAY

Robert Farley, Eugene Kiely, Brooks Jackson and Lori Robertson, FactCheck.org Published 9:07 a.m. ET June 23, 2017 | Updated 4 hours ago

President Donald Trump, speaking at a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, touted the wealth of some of his top economic advisers. 'In those particular positions, I just don't want a poor person," he commented. (June 22) AP

President Trump speaks during a rally on June 21, 2017, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.(Photo: Kelsey Kremer, The Des Moines Register)

The 2020 presidential campaign is more than 1,200 days away, but President Trump held yet another Make America Great Again rally this time in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. And, as he did in past campaign speeches, Trump spoke for a long time and reeled off numerous false and misleading claims:

The president visited Iowa on June 21, making an official stop first at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids to talk about agriculture. Later that evening, Trump spoke to a large crowd in the nearby U.S. Cellular Center at a political rally organized by his campaign.

At his rally, Trump exaggerated when he claimed that his administration had deported MS-13 gang members by the thousands. It is by the hundreds, not thousands.

Trump, June 21: "The other thing that I have to tell you. You have a gang called MS-13. These are true animals. We are moving them out of the country by the thousands, by the thousands."

Trump is referring to the Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, a gang that was formed by Salvadoran immigrants in Los Angeles in the 1980s. In April, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that there are 10,000 MS-13 gang members in the United States. That made us skeptical of the claim that thousands already had been deported.

We asked the White House how many gang members have been removed under the Trump administration, but it declined to comment.

However, TheWashington Post on May 24 wrote that this year the U.S. has deported 398 gang members to El Salvador compared with 534 in all of 2016, according to Salvadoran government statistics. Those figures represent members of all El Salvador gangs, such as MS-13 and the 18th Street gang. MS-13 is primarily El Salvadoran, according to a 2005 National Gang Threat Assessment report by the National Alliance of Gang Investigators Association, though its possible there are members from other countries.

Danielle Bennett, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told us in an email that so far in fiscal year 2017 from Oct. 1, 2016, to June 4, 2017 ICE has removed 2,798 gang members. But that includes all gang members, not just MS-13 members. She said ICE does not track gang removals by specific gang, so it does not know how many of the 2,798 were MS-13 members. The 2,798 removals also span both the Obama and Trump administrations, so not all of the FY 2017 deportations occurred under Trump.

By contrast, there were 2,057 gang members deported in fiscal 2016, so there has been an increase this fiscal year. We dont know how much of that is attributable to Trumps policies, but Bennett said that ICE under the Trump administration does specifically target MS-13 members for arrest and removal. That appears to be corroborated by the statistics from El Salvador published in the Post.

Bennett also said that ICE Homeland Security Investigations has made 602 criminal arrests and 170 administrative immigration arrests of MS-13 members so far in fiscal year 2017, as of June 4. But those figures include arrests made under both administrations, and the criminal arrests include citizens and noncitizens alike. For example, ICE reported last month that it arrested 104 MS-13 gang members as part of a six-week anti-gang enforcement operation that resulted in 1,378 arrests from March 26 to May 6. But nearly two-thirds of all those arrested were U.S. citizens, so most would not have been eligible for deportation.

Trump can take credit perhaps for cracking down on gang members and increasing the deportation rate of gang members from El Salvador. But he exaggerates when he says he is deporting MS-13 gang members by the thousands.

In the farming state of Iowa, Trump repeatedly played on the mythical claim that the federal estate tax is keeping family farms from being passed on to the next generation of farmers.

First, in his speech at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids, the president said:

Trump: "I want to make sure the next generation of Americans has that opportunity [to live on a farm] as well. And, in particular, that includes your children and your grandchildren, and [we are] working very hard to get rid of the death tax so that those farms can be passed on."

And at his rally later that evening, he said the estate tax should go because, You should have a right to pass your farm onto your children and onto your grandchildren.

The fact is, however, that more than 99% of all farms are expected to be passed on without paying any estate tax at all. Repeal of the federal estate tax would benefit only the very wealthiest multimillionaires. And even the few who owe any tax may spread payments out over more than a decade.

A March 15 study by the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimated that 38,328 farms would become part of estates in 2016, of which only 0.42% 161 estates would owe any estate tax at all.

All of those would be multimillion-dollar farms; only estates worth $5.45 million or more must file a return, and most of them dont owe any tax. For those who do owe tax, the study estimated that the average effective rate would be 20% with the option of spreading payments over 14 years.

Separate research by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center puts the number even lower. TPC estimates that only 50 farms and closely held businesses will pay any estate tax in 2017.

And regardless of whether the number is 161 or 50, those farm estates that owe any tax at all have the option to spread installments over 14 years at reduced interest rates.

When we wrote about this estate-tax myth in 2015, we reached out to Neil Harl, an Iowa State University professor of economics and agriculture, who has been studying the estate taxs impact on small businesses and farms for decades.

I have been involved in this area since 1958 and I have never seen land that had to be sold to pay the federal estate tax and I have conducted more than 3,400 seminars in 43 states which included federal estate tax planning, Harl wrote to us in an email. The italics were his. And for this article, we checked back with him, and he said that is still the case.

The lobbyists early on, I am told, concluded farmers as a group are more highly respected than billionaires, at least on this issue, he added.

Trump wrongly claimed that all insurance companies have left the individual market in Iowa. In fact, Medica Health announced on Monday that it would stay in the market statewide.

The president further claimed that insurers are leaving all of the states. There are currently 44 counties in three states with no insurer for 2018, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Trump:"In fact, I was just told by your great governor and ex-governor that your insurance companies have all fled the state of Iowa. Pretty sad, isnt it? Well, theyre Ill tell you what, theyre going from every state. Theyre leaving all of the states."

Iowas individual insurance marketplace where those who get Affordable Care Act subsidies buy their own insurance has had a shaky outlook for 2018. Before Medicas announcement on Monday, the state was unsure if the insurance carrier would participate next year. Two other insurers Aetna and Wellmark had already said they wouldnt sell plans on the state marketplace in 2018, leaving Medica as potentially the sole statewide insurer. (Gundersen Health Plan sells policies in five of the states 99 counties, Iowas Insurance Division says.)

Iowas Insurance Division said it was unlikely these carriers will remain in 2018 and proposed on June 12 to the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services a stopgap measure to retool the states ACA marketplace, where 72,000 Iowans now get coverage. That stopgap measure would change the income-based tax credits to age- and income-based assistance; create one plan rather than the metal levels of the ACA (bronze, silver, gold, platinum); and add funding to a state reinsurance program to help insurers cover high-cost individuals.

Iowas Insurance Division confirmed to FactCheck.org that Medica was the only insurer to file 2018 proposed rates by this weeks deadline; Gundersen did not.

Medicas announcement was widely reported, and it said its 2018 plans would come with a 43% average premium increase. Iowa Insurance Commissioner Doug Ommen said the state would still move forward with the stopgap proposal, and he expressed concern about Medicas average rate increase driving away younger and healthier policyholders.

Medica CEO John Naylor told CNBC on June 16 that the company wanted certainty from the federal government on whether cost-sharing subsidies for low-income individuals would continue. In late May, the Trump administration and House of Representatives asked for a 90-day delay to the federal lawsuit on the matter, according to Politico.

When the federal government set out certain rules, our expectations are that these rules are followed, Naylor told CNBC. So as we look at pricing we need to know are those rules going to be enforced in 2018.

Trump greatly exaggerated when he claimed that insurance companies are leaving all of the states. As of June 21, there were 44 counties, with 31,268 insurance enrollees, at risk of having no insurance carrier for 2018, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation, which relied on state rate filings and media reports. Those counties are in three states: Ohio, Missouri and Washington. However, the analysis notes that the insurer Centene said it would expand its insurance business in several states, including those three, but hasnt detailed exactly where.

Insurer participation in 2018 will not be finalized until fall of 2017, KFF says.

Trump again claimed he has reversed the trend of coal mining job losses, and misleadingly pointed to the opening of a new coal mine in Western Pennsylvania as evidence that his policies have led to a resurgence in coal mining. Neither of those is true.

Trump, June 21:"And weve ended the war on clean, beautiful coal. And were putting our miners back to work. In fact, you read about it, last week a brand new coal mine just opened in the state of Pennsylvania, first time in decades, decades. Weve reversed and 33,000 mining jobs have been added since my inauguration."

In fact, there has been an increase of about 1,000 coal mining jobs since January, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For some perspective, there has been a total loss of nearly 40,000 coal mining jobs over the last five years.

How does Trump get to 33,000? After talking specifically about coal mining, Trump cites a figure for all mining jobs including gas, oil, metal ores, coal and nonmetallic mineral mining and quarrying. There have been 32,600 total mining jobs added since January. We wrote about this issue once before when EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt tried a similar sleight of hand.

As for the grand opening of the Corsa Coal Companys Acosta Deep Mine near Pittsburgh on June 8, that had nothing to do with Trumps efforts to roll back coal regulations. As we wrote when Trump made similar boasts earlier this month, development of the Acosta mine began in September, two months before Trumps election victory.

Industry experts also tell us it is not emblematic of a resurgence of coal mining.

The Acosta mine produces a particular type of coal that is used to make steel. Thats a bit of a niche market in the coal industry, accounting for just 10% of coal production in the U.S. There has been a surge in demand for this kind of coal because of production problems overseas.

However, the vast majority of coal produced in the U.S. is thermal coal, the kind used to generate electricity. Consumption of that kind of coal has declined by nearly 18% between 2012 and 2016, mostly due to the surge in cheaper natural gas production driven by the shale revolution and to competition from renewable energy.

Environmental regulations which Trump has targeted also hurt coal mining, but according to an April report from Columbia Universitys Center on Global Energy Policy, those regulations were a significantly smaller factor in the shrinking of the coal industry. Industry experts say Trumps efforts to roll back those regulations might stem the decline in coal consumption, but would not bring coal mining jobs back to levels seen even a few years ago.

Trump touted his decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, which he said would have been an economic catastrophe for the U.S. The agreement, which took effect last year, was signed by 195 countries and primarily aims to keep warming well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C.

The president pushed back at critics who said the pact is nonbinding.

And they all say its nonbinding, he said. Like hell its nonbinding. When we get sued by everybody because we thought it was nonbinding, then you can tell me it was nonbinding.

There are aspects of the agreement that are legally binding. Todd Stern, a former U.S. special envoy for climate change, explained in a press conference shortly before the agreement was reached that countries must submit nationally determined contributions that outline their emissions targets and report actions taken to meet those targets. But meeting emissions targets wasnt one of the legal requirements.

Stern, Dec. 2, 2015:"Weve made our position clear all year long that we support an agreement thats legally binding in many respects, including the elements of accountability of the agreement, the requirement to put forward a target, to do it with information that clarifies it, the obligation to report and be reviewed on your inventories and the actions youre taking in order to meet your target. Any number of rules and so forth. So a whole number of elements that are legally binding, but not the target itself."

Stern wrote a May 8 op-ed for TheWashington Post urging Trump to stay in the Paris Agreement. He said the president should keep in mind that as much as I would be sorry to see any retrenchment countries can adjust their emissions targets downward. The agreement permits it, and I know because I helped negotiate that flexibility.

Trump said he was promoting legislation that would bar new immigrants from receiving welfare for five years, but a 20-year-old law already does that. He introduced his proposal after promising to preserve the safety net for people who truly need help.

Trump, June 21: "But others dont treat us fairly. Thats why I believe the time has come for new immigration rules which say that those seeking admission into our country must be able to support themselves financially and should not use welfare for a period of at least five years. And well be putting in legislation to that effect very shortly."

But as The Hillpointed out, such a law already exists. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, signed into law in 1996 by then-president Bill Clinton, states that immigrants are not eligible for any Federal means-tested public benefit for a period of 5 years beginning on the date of the aliens entry into the United States. That would include such benefits as food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security.

As USA TODAY noted, there are some exceptions in the law for children and pregnant women, refugees, and active duty military or veterans. Its possible, the story notes, that Trump is seeking to toughen the restrictions, or to eliminate some exceptions. Trumps proposed FY 2018 budget notes that refugees are exempt from the five-year waiting period, and stresses the need to control the cost of benefits paid to immigrant-headed households. But it offered no details on how that would be accomplished beyond reducing the number of refugees, curbing illegal immigration and increasing merit-based legal immigration.

We reached out to Trumps press office for clarification, but it declined to provide any information on the record.

Trump also repeated the claim that the U.S. already has spent $6 trillion in the Middle East since 2001. It hasnt.

Trump, June 21:"After decades of rebuilding foreign nations all over the world, we are now rebuilding our nation. As of a few months ago, our country has spent $6 trillion in the Middle East, wasted. We started 16 years ago and its in far worse shape than it was 16 years ago by many times over. So, we spent all of this money, all of these lives."

Actually, the U.S. has spent about $1.7 trillion through fiscal year 2016, which ended Sept. 30, 2016, according to a February report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

During the campaign, Trump made the $6 trillion figure a talking point. For example, in Philadelphia, he gave a speech in which he said, We must declare our independence from a failed establishment that has squandered $6 trillion on foreign wars in the Middle East that never end and that we never win and that have made us less safe.

His campaign at the time cited a Reuters news article about a study that projected the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will cost the U.S. $6 trillion over the next four decades. The story said the cost estimate included future commitments, such as the medical and disability claims of U.S. war veterans.

It may be that the wars eventually will cost the U.S. $6 trillion. However, Trump said the U.S. has spent $6 trillion (past tense) as of a few months ago. Thats not accurate.

Read more:

Trump rides high into Iowa stop after Congressional wins

Trump proposes a law that's existed for 20 years

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2tWxwKR

Read more:

Fact check: Trump makes misleading claims at Iowa rally - USA TODAY

Vladimir Putin gave direct instructions to help elect Trump, report says – CBS News

Last Updated Jun 23, 2017 11:31 AM EDT

A report Friday morning claims Russian President Vladimir Putin gave direct instructions to help elect Donald Trump president.

According to a Washington Post investigation, former President Obama received a secret CIA report in August.

That report "captured Putin's specific instructions on the operation's audacious objectives - defeat or at least damage the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton."

CBS News confirmed last year that U.S. intelligence officials knew that the Russian government operation to interfere in the U.S. election had been approved by Putin himself, but they were reluctant to reveal how much they knew out of concern that sources and methods could be compromised, CBS News justice and homeland security correspondent Jeff Pegues reports.

Play Video

According to a Washington Post investigation, in August the CIA gave then-President Obama a report that "detailed Russian President Vladimir Puti...

The Post reports that U.S. intelligence agencies had sourcing deep inside the Russian government capturing Putin's direct instructions in the operation.

The Post also reports that before he left office Mr. Obama set in motion a secret program that authorized the deployment of "implants" in Russian networks - digital bombs that could be triggered in a retaliatory cyberstrike in the event of Moscow aggression - and that it would be up to President Trump to decide to use the capability.

CBS News confirmed that Obama officials felt that their effort to expel Russian diplomats in retaliation was undermined by the incoming administration.

Play Video

CBS News confirmed that congressional investigators are examining whether Trump campaign associates obtained information from hacked voter databa...

Determining whether that is true is part of the ongoing investigations. CBS News has confirmed that congressional investigators are looking into whether Trump campaign associates obtained information from hacked voter databases during the election.

So far there is no evidence of that, but it is a sign that the congressional investigations are expanding.

2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Read more:

Vladimir Putin gave direct instructions to help elect Trump, report says - CBS News

How Sears Canada’s Bankruptcy Impacts Sears Holdings Corp. – Seeking Alpha

Sears Canada Inc. (NASDAQ:SRSC) filed for bankruptcy on June 22 in Canada under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). While this has only a minor direct impact on Sears Holdings Corp. (NASDAQ:SHLD), the indirect impact is significant. If Eddie Lampert is willing to throw in the towel on his equity investment in SRSC, it could indicate that he is not willing to pour more of his cash into propping up SHLD. In addition, vendors who were already nervous about dealing with Sears may stop shipping goods for the critical Back to School and Fall shopping season. In my opinion, SRSC's bankruptcy filing is just a dress rehearsal for a Chapter 11 filing by SHLD in July.

Canadian Bankruptcy Laws

Sears Canada filed under the CCAA instead of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA), which would have resulted in complete liquidation. There are two critical points in the CCAA that differ from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. A monitor, in this case FTI Consulting, is appointed by the court, who has oversight authority but does not control day-to-day operations. The first critical point is that the monitor has supervision over the sale of assets, and not Eddie Lampert. The second point is that the monitor is required to report to the Superintendent of Bankruptcy when they feel creditors would be better off if the case was switched to BIA, which would mean total liquidation.

A June 22 Pre-Filing Report prepared by FTI Consulting contains a large amount of useful information. According to the report, SRSC had cash outflows of C$30-100 million per month over the last 5 months, and in May was burning C$20 million a week. The company only had C$139 million on June 19. Without new sources for cash, it was forced to file.

Its current plan entails: closing 59 stores and laying off 2,900 employees; getting a C$300 million DIP revolving loan at LIBOR+4.5% and a $150 USD equivalent term loan at LIBOR+11% which mature on December 20, 2017; trying to get the authority to suspend certain pension and retiree benefit payments; creating a C$9.2 million key employee retention plan.

A key item mentioned in the report was that the company would try to get "interest in a range of potential transactions involving all or part of the assets or businesses of Sears Canada Group". It is critical to remember that this will be done "under the supervision of the monitor", and not by Lampert.

Below are the cash flow and operational projections until September 16. According to FTI Consulting's forecast, SRSC will only have a negative C$25.7 million operating cash outflow during the 13-week period. It is only closing 59 stores, and it would seem unrealistic to expect that the current burn rate of cash would improve so significantly.

Cash Flow Forecast Until September 16, 2017

13-Week Operating Forecast

Impact on Sears Holdings Corp.

To many SHLD shareholders this information about SRSC may be interesting, but they feel it has little impact on SHLD because SHLD only owns 12% of SRSC and a loss of a few million dollars will not kill SHLD. Correct, but the indirect impact will most likely have a very significant negative impact on SHLD shareholders.

Prior to the filing, SRSC was able to arrange for about C$109 million in financing, but it needed C$175 million. Lampert did not step up and loan the company the other C$68 million. Does this indicate he will no longer be ready to step up and loan SHLD when other financing sources are not? Lampert also owns about 45% of SRSC, and there is a very real possibility that he will get no recovery.

Unlike Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S., where the company/management still has almost complete control of the bankrupt company, in Canada the monitor has a major voice in the bankruptcy process. One can only speculate to conclude that Lampert has finally decided an in-court process is the better way to deal with operations that burn cash, especially since in Chapter 11 he is able wipe out unsecured creditors, shareholders, and certain pension liabilities, while using his and Bruce Berkowitz's secured debt as means to own a large portion of a "new" Sears Holdings.

Some investors are taking the opposite opinion on the SRSC filing. They assert that not proposing to liquidate, but instead to continue operating and selling just some stores, demonstrates Lampert's willingness to pursue his turnaround plans. This could explain the pop in SHLD shares on the day SRSC filed. The reality is that the above extremely low cash burn projections are unrealistic. The company was burning C$20 million per week, but now, all of sudden, this is forecast to improve. This is just another example of Lampert's unrealistic retail expectations. FTI Consulting, as monitor, decides if the operations continue or if the company liquidates going forward, and not Lampert. FTI was retained by Sears Canada last November as consultant, and its reputation as Licensed Insolvency Trustee now as appointed court monitor would dictate its need to be prudent in supervising the cash flow, and it would be quick to inform the Superintendent of Bankruptcy that a liquidation of assets is necessary to protect creditors instead of continuing to operate.

Vendors are the Achilles' Heel for SHLD. The SRSC bankruptcy filing tore this tendon. There is a very real possibility that vendors will now be even less likely to deal with SHLD after SRSC filed for protection. I would assume that many vendors supply both companies, and now they are not getting paid for goods they delivered to SRSC that were not paid for prior to June 22, because the CCAA prohibits the payment for any goods or services provided before the filing date. The unpaid vendors now need to file a claim and may get less than the full amount. Those goods delivered after the bankruptcy filing will, however, be paid (This is the same as under Chapter 11 in the U.S.)

Why would vendors deliver goods now and risk getting only partial payment under the Chapter 11 claims procedure? Why not wait until after SHLD files for Chapter 11 and get paid the full amount as a priority claim under Chapter 11. After SHLD files for Chapter 11, many vendors will be eager to do business with the company again because they know they will be paid in full.

Other Recent News

Sears is closing 20 more stores. Some view this as a positive move to reduce negative cash flow. Others view it as a negative because there are fewer stores trying to support the same amount of debt. Barron's posted an article with an interesting title: "Fraudulent Conveyance Rules May Pave Way for Sears Bankruptcy in July". An article I wrote about Sears in April had the same idea.

Conclusion

Eddie Lampert's unwillingness to lend SRSC cash as the "lender of last resort" and the bankruptcy filing of SRSC could signal that he finally realizes SHLD also needs court protection to stop the cash bleeding. At least in the U.S. under Chapter 11, he does not have to cede power to a court-appointed monitor, which will mostly likely not be easy for his ego to accept. While the current plan is for the Canadian operations to continue with a modest reduction in number of stores, continued cash flow issues could force SRSC into a formal liquidation.

Sears's real problem in the near future is vendors, and this filing has made that problem acute. The reality is that the best way to deal with these issues is to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in early July, so that vendors will deliver the needed Back to School and Fall merchandise. I still expect to see a Chapter 11 filing, and therefore, rate all SHLD securities a Sell.

Disclosure: I am/we are short SHLD.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: I am naked SHLD call options.

Editor's Note: This article covers one or more stocks trading at less than $1 per share and/or with less than a $100 million market cap. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.

Read the original post:

How Sears Canada's Bankruptcy Impacts Sears Holdings Corp. - Seeking Alpha