Daily Archives: April 17, 2017

Updated 16 hours ago

Pittsburgh's steel history and its impact on the region will be shared by noted author Ken Kobus during a free program at the Central Presbyterian Church April 24.

How Pittsburgh Became the City of Steel is part of the Tarentum's church's history series for the community.

Kobus will talk about why and how Pittsburgh became known as the steelmaking capital of the world, steel as an efficient industry and the influence of Andrew Carnegie of the Carnegie Steel Co.

Knowledgeable men flocked to Pittsburgh because they wanted to be a part of the evolution of what was probably the most important industry in the world at the time, Kobus says.

Kobus says people should know that technology and innovation, good management and many hard working and dedicated workers made Pittsburgh a great steel center.

Kobus, a retired third-generation steelworker who also worked as a mechanical engineer, says it is important to share the past since it shaped today.

The history of the steel industry in our region is extremely important, Kobus says. We were known to the world as The Steel City.' Why that was so, why that happened here and nowhere else on the planet, at least at that time shaped our local culture.

Kobus says we still have effects of the steel industry due to its impact here on jobs, economy, housing, transportation and other industries.

All of these things and more were affected by the steel industry here, and even though the industry is pretty much gone from our region, we still feel the effects it had here today, Kobus says.

Dave Rankin, a church elder and event organizer, says he would like people to gain a better understanding of the steel industry in this region.

But just as important, I think, we hope that people understand it in the context of how it shaped the lives of the people who worked in it, and how it still has an important impact today on the way we live our lives, Rankin says.

Kobus says Pittsburgh of today has a survivor status among the forlorn Rust Belt communities in the eastern and midwestern United States.

Now it's one of the new places to go, Kobus says. We have a number of quality universities, museums, theaters, a fantastic symphony orchestra, transportation network, beautiful views, etc. almost as though these things just condensed from out of nowhere.

They are here because steel was here, because industries like glass, aluminum, coal, oil, food were here, Kobus says. These industries evolved here. We had the money to establish many of these amenities because great wealth was being generated here.

Debbie Black is a Tribune-Review contributing writer.

Read more here:

Pittsburgh's evolution as a steel industry leader - Tribune-Review

Up until then, anything went. Barrels of arsenic were accepted as a revenue source and thrown in local dumps along with everything else. Old-timers have fond memories of shooting rats at those township dumps, or hunting for antique bottles in rural dumpsites.

Up through the 1960s, rivers that ran through major cities were so polluted with oil and other industrial waste that they regularly caught fire.

The Potomac, as Time Magazine noted at the time, left Washington "stinking from the 240 million gallons of wastes that are flushed into it daily" while "Omaha's meatpackers fill the Missouri River with animal grease balls as big as oranges."

The Cuyahoga River, which famously burst into flames in Cleveland in 1969, was the last American river to catch fire. It was so saturated with sewage and industrial waste that there was no visible sign of any kind of life, and it "oozes rather than flows," Time reported.

Saturday, April 22 is Earth Day, so now is a good time to take a look at where Becker County has been and where it's headed when it comes to getting rid of its garbage.

The ill-fated Becker County Sanitary Landfill was permitted by the MPCA 1972. Cars could dump for 50 cents, pickup trucks were charged $1. Larger trucks were charged more, up to $15 for a semi-load.

But times have definitely changed.

"It's not a dump anymorewe recycle so much out there," said Sandy Gunderson, who (among other things) handles household hazardous waste for the county.

"And of the waste we do send out," added Steve Skoog, director of Becker County's Land Use Department, "75 to 80 percent of it is burned for energy and to reduce its toxicity."

The county landfill had to close in 1991 due to groundwater contamination. It was placed on Minnesota's Superfund cleanup list in 1994.

Rural dumps were closed in 1975, and the county launched its first recycling program with 47 rural sheds in 1987.

The county transfer station was built in 1988, with waste going to the Perham incinerator. In 1993 Becker County waste started going to the Fargo landfill.

Tires were banned from landfills in 1985, major appliances were banned from the waste stream in 1990, yard waste was banned in 1992, fluorescent bulbs were banned from landfilling in 1995, lead batteries were banned in 1998, waste oil and filters were banned in 1999 and all are now handled as separate waste.

At the same time, other material began being accepted by the countyit started recycling concrete in 2005 and began recycling electronic waste in 2007. It recycles asphalt shingles. It had started its household hazardous waste program in 1990, built a new facility for it in 1998, and in 2009 started taking waste pesticides along with household products.

In 2011, recycling kicked into a higher gear when the rural sheds were replaced with 250 10-cubic-yard blue recycling dumpsters. The next year the county recycling program was expanded to businesses.

Along the way recycling programs were started for pharmaceuticals (there's a safe box at the sheriff's office at the courthouse), for household batteries, and and to serve businesses that generate small amounts of hazardous waste.

In 2011 Becker County joined Otter Tail, Todd and Wadena counties in a joint powers agreement to send much of its waste stream to the revamped Perham Resource Recovery facility, which sorts out recyclables and burns garbage (cleanly) to create steam, which is sold to power Perham businesses.

With the help of state bonding money, Becker County built a new transfer station last year, and aims to build a new recycling center at the same site this year. It will go hand-in-glove with the new mixed-recyclable residential curbside pickup program that will start this summer in Detroit Lakes, Frazee, Lake Park and Audubon. White Earth is also participating through mixed-recyclable community dumpster sites.

The new program will accept plastics, metal cans, cardboard, paper andthis is new --cartons, such as milk, soup or juice cartons.

Because broken glass can contaminate cardboard and paper, people will be asked to keep glass bottles out of the mixed recyclable stream, and to continue recycling glass in the big blue dumpsters at the 49 community recycling sites across the county (five sites are in Detroit Lakes) which will all remain open, Skoog said.

The county has ordered 5,592 bins, mostly 95 gallon, but also some 65 gallon and smaller, that waste haulers will distribute to their customers in the cities that are participating in the mixed-recyclables curbside program.

There is no tipping fee for recyclables, and they are not subject to the 18 percent solid waste tax, so residents should not see any increase in their garbage rates, Skoog said.

"We're hoping to see a big jump (in recycling) Gunderson said.

"The volume of commodities (recyclables) shipped out of our transfer station has really changed in the last 3-5 years," added Skoog. "More commodities, less loads of garbage."

It's not just the regular commodities that county acceptsplastics, metals, glass, cardboard and paper, Gunderson said, it's also the special wastetires, scrap iron, appliances, waste oil"years ago it all went into the dump. It's not a dump anymore."

With a demolition landfill, household hazardous waste site, transfer station and recycling center "we're an all-stop shop," Gunderson said. "When you look back at the 1970s, we've come along way."

"The waste has changed," Skoog added, "but the way we handle that waste has changed, too."

Continue reading here:

What on earth...: The evolution of how Becker County has handled its trash - Detroit Lakes Online

As Trent University's Bata Library is set for renovations following exams mid-April, many might wonder: Why the change?

Also, why do we need libraries when everything can be found online?

Trent's library is set to move into the 21st century with renovations beginning in May. While the university has said it will be a good thing in the long run, some students and faculty have voiced concern over the renovation process and the library being closed for a year.

The plan, though, is part of a trend at universities around the province.

Mike Ridley, librarian at the University of Guelph, said that even though more information is now going online, he estimated only 2 per cent of the world's knowledge is actually on the Internet.

"(Librarians) are aware of sources that haven't been digitized and are in collections of various sorts so we can make estimates based on that," said Ridley. "We know of huge collections in libraries that aren't digitized."

Ridley said that statistic includes information in the broadest sense of the word and even includes knowledge contained in private homes and on videos.

Robert Clarke, Trent University's librarian, said libraries first began changing from analog to digital in the late 80s when online, mainframe based catalogues began to be used.

Ridley said the university in Guelph had such a catalogue in 1972 and that a small number of libraries and banks were the only institutions using this technology at the time.

"Libraries didn't simply adapt to the online world, they were actually -in many cases - leaders in using that kind of technology," said Ridley.

Mary Ann Mavrinac, former chief librarian at the University of Toronto and current vice-provost of the University of Rochester in N.Y., said that social changes have also had a big impact on libraries shifting in purpose over the years. She explained that in the '50s and '60s during the postwar economy many learning institutions were built - Trent opened in 1964. During this time, libraries were designed for storage purposes to house large collections.

Once the shift from analog to digital took place starting as early as the '70s, libraries shifted from being a storage place of knowledge to generators of knowledge, said Mavrinac.

But it's nothing new for libraries.

"In some cases we're returning to that model of the Alexandrian library - scholars came and they gathered together to create knowledge," said Mavrinac comparing modern changes to a wonder of the ancient world over 2000 years ago.

New technologies have posed unique challenges as well.

"The algorithms for Google will have (most viewed sources) at the top and that doesn't necessarily mean it's the best," said Mavrinac.

Ridley explained that with the rapid acceleration of technology, budgets for university libraries have had to change over the years.

"Libraries are never wealthy organizations," said Ridley. "Typically (costs) came from money spent on buying collections or even sometimes on paying staff."

Ridley also said the nature of ownership with knowledge has changed with the switch to digital as well. When you buy a book, he said, you have right of ownership - it belongs to you until you choose to get rid of it. In the digital world, information is often "leased" on a subscription basis, he said.

Maintaining access to digital information has become an increasing challenge for librarians as well, said Ridley.

"There's a phrase you sometimes hear called the digital dark age and the concept is that we're going to lose a lot of contemporary information because it's either going to disappear or be inaccessible," he said.

Ridley explained that due to rapidly changing formats - for instance floppy disc to CD-ROMs - there is always a danger that digital information may get lost in technological translation.

Knowledge preservation - in both physical and digital form - has always been an important aspect of a library, said Ridley.

Mavrinac said there is also a growing trend of collaboration in libraries with students, faculty and staff.

"Now we are very much involved in the creation of knowledge. So we've moved upstream and we work with students and researchers in the activities of research," she said.

Bata Renovations

Go here to read the rest:

Renovations are part of evolution of Bata Library at Trent University in Peterborough - Peterborough Examiner

Campaign posters of the 11 candidates in the French election. Left, right and centre can seem pretty blurred in 2017 France.

France is heading to the polls on April 23 for the first round of its presidential election. This election holds particular importance for the European nation, which finds itself at a crossroads, with its whole political system in question.

From abroad, the situation seems puzzling to many commentators. According to the newspaper China Daily, for instance, the election is particularly messy (because its confusing).

While five candidates appear to have emerged as favourites from the 11 who qualified to stand for election, their platforms, the values they promote and their political affiliations (except for a few) are not very obvious.

Indeed, France is witnessing a political blur, in which the clash between left- and right-wing ideologies seems long gone. Just ahead of the first round of the polls, 42% of French people have declared that they still havent made up their minds.

The second round of voting will take place on May 7.

Left and right are old labels, dating back to the French Revolution. In 1789, the National Constitutive Assembly met to decide whether, under Frances new political regime, the king should have veto power. If so, it queried, should this right should be absolute or simply suspensive, for a period of time.

When voting, supporters of the absolute veto sat on the presidents right, the noble side. According to Christian tradition, it is an honour to be seated at the right side of God, or to the right of the head of the family at dinner. Those who wanted a highly restricted veto were seated on the left.

Thus, the layout of the room took on political significance: to the right, supporters of a monarchy that sought to preserve many of the kings powers; to the left, those who wished to reduce them.

In the 19th century, this vocabulary was increasingly used to describe the political leanings of members of the French parliament.

The great advantage of these labels is their simplicity: they reduce complex political ideas to a simple dichotomy. It also makes it easy for people to identify the right side, to which they belong, and the wrong side, which they condemn.

From the 19th century onward, sub-categories quickly developed, aimed at placing every politician on a kind of spectrum from left to right. In this way, political parties can be said to be more or less left wing, or more or less right wing, in relation to one another.

Soon, people were talking about right-wing coalitions, left-wing blocks, centre-right, centre-left, far-right and far-left, and the like.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the left-right divide essentially distinguished supporters of an absolute monarchy from those of a constitutional monarchy.

It would later set monarchists against republicans, then conservative republicans against the modernists who implemented the major social reforms of the Third Republic that included the freedom of the press, freedom of association, the right to belong to a trade-union and divorce, among other things.

At the turn of the 20th century, the left-right debate essentially covered the divide between the defenders of Catholicism and advocates for the separation of church and state. This shift, which took place in 1905, would often be referred to as the clash of two Frances Catholic and anticlerical.

From the 1930s onward, the economic divide came to the fore, with the left advocating for socialism and the right calling for economic liberalisation.

By the 1970s, the liberalisation of social mores had become a key issue, with continuing debates on abortion, divorce, homosexuality, marriage equality and euthanasia. The same is true of immigration and openness to the world, which stood in opposition to cultural, social and economical protectionism.

In France, the divide grew in several political realms. In his famous work, The Right Wing in France, political historian Ren Rmond defined three separate right-wing currents: the legitimist and counter-revolutionary right, the liberal right, and the Bonapartist right, authoritarian and conservative.

Whether or not these divisions still exist today is open to debate. What is certain is that there is still a significant difference between the conservative, more authoritarian right that favours an economy in which the state plays a regulatory and protective role, and the liberal right that favours deregulation, less restrictive labour laws and more entrepreneurship.

Todays French Republican party represents the latter position well, from former prime minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin to former president Nicolas Sarkozy.

The Bonapartist right often identified to Gaullism after the former French president Charles de Gaulle (1959-1969) can now be partially identified with Marine Le Pens National Front, which prizes a strong leader, order and patriotism.

In truth, for each overarching area of political debate, there are at least two right wings and two left wings. Concerning family values and gay marriage, for instance, a minority on the right are open to increased tolerance, while a minority on the left are rather reluctant.

The same can be said of immigration. Not everyone on the right is convinced by restrictive immigration policies, while open immigration policies are far from universally approved of on the left.

Centrist positions are often difficult to pin down. Those who self-identify as centrists sometimes occupy the middle ground on certain main political issues but stand to the left on one issue and to the right on another.

Early 20th century radicals, often characterised as defenders of secularism and basic freedoms, were also economically liberal, and generally considered as having their heart on the left but their wallet on the right. Centrists from the Christian Democratic tradition, who favoured social protections, dialogue between workers and management, and oppose unchecked economic liberalism, were also conservative on family issues.

While it is possible to identify broad schools of thought that can be classified as right, left or centre over the long term, policies vary greatly over time. We cannot ascribe unchanging, universal content to these categories.

These days, we cannot even say that the right is for the status quo or that the left wants change, as has sometimes been claimed. When it comes to the welfare state, people on the right clamour for reform, whereas those on the left want to defend social protections.

Still, in each era, centre, left and right have served as signposts, allowing us to classify political parties, politicians and the ideas they promote.

In the right- and left-wing primaries that took place a few weeks ago, French parties selected candidates who clearly illustrated their ideological differences.

But this process also revealed more left- or right-leaning positions within each camp, as demonstrated by the second-round primary between Franois Fillon and Alain Jupp, on the right, and, on the left, between Benot Hamon and Manuel Valls.

Its likely that the majority of those who watched the first televised debate on March 20, prior to the first round of voting, would have similarly placed candidates on the spectrum of left to right.

Jean-Luc Mlenchon, the candidate for La France insoumise (the rebellious France), embodies a type of social protest. He refuses any alliance with the current left-wing government and takes more radical stands on institutions, Europe and economics than the Social Democrat Benot Hamon.

Emmanuel Macron, the former economy minister responsible for a large share of President Franois Hollandes economic policy, is running on a centrist platform. A strong proponent of liberal economic policies, he also supports a certain social safety net and the integration of immigrants while opposing discrimination against minorities. He is trying to attract moderates from the left and the right.

In other words, Macron seeks to build an electorate comprised of Socialists who find Benot Hamon too lefty and of Republicans or centrists who find Franois Fillon too far to the right. That marks a clear difference between this mainstream right and the populist, protectionist, anti-European extreme right represented by Marine Le Pens National Front.

So why is the belief that there is no real difference between left and right so commonly held?

This view can be traced back to opinion surveys from the 1980s. A growing number of people now claim that the concepts of left and right have lost all meaning. Yet these same people, in the same surveys, happily self-identify on a continuum of left to right and define their political identity in these dichotomous terms.

They also respond differently to a variety of political issues, as compared to their self-established position on that scale.

This apparent paradox can be explained. Many people who personally feel more left wing or right wing according to their convictions also believe that governments tend to implement similar policies when in power. They therefore expect clear political platforms that can be summarised as left wing or right wing but are ultimately disappointed by the outcomes.

As a result, candidates make promises to attract votes without taking into account how difficult they may be to implement. But selling right- or left-wing ideas during an election campaign also serves to make people dream capturing hearts and minds at the expense of considering the realities that elected governments must face.

Translated from the French by Alice Heathwood for Fast for Word.

Go here to read the rest:

The evolution of France's left and right politics, from the 1789 French Revolution to this year's election - The Conversation AU

President Donald Trumps about-face in his approach to Russia, NATO, Syria, the Export-Import Bank and China to name just a few may be the result of influential moderate advisers, discussion with business leaders (who prefer predictable, sane policy), early defeats (on the travel ban and health care reform) and/or plunging poll numbers.

Perhaps Mr. Trump, who craves approval, has figured out that the people whose respect he has chased after his whole adult life (elites in media, business and politics) applaud him when he reverts to mainstream policy choices. His most successful decision, picking a respected Supreme Court justice vetted by others, suggests that the more policy he outsources to subject-matter experts, the better.

Mr. Trumps predilection for inconsistency and emotional reaction to provocations provide a cautionary tale: Some or all of his newly arrived-at positions may vanish just as quickly as they appeared. Nevertheless, his obvious lack of attachment to any ideology, campaign promise or set of supporters suggests that there is no limit to the policy reversals he might undertake. And in the case of the GOP, badly in need of intellectual reform and reinvigoration, that presents an opportunity on at least three fronts.

First up is immigration. No, seriously. No one can doubt Mr. Trumps commitment to border security and law and order. Soon he should be able to declare victory (before he arrived, net migration to Mexico exceeded net migration to the United States). He then can proceed to exactly what Jeb Bush and others recommended: Reform of our legal immigration system to address demand for high-skill workers and a path to legal status for those who pay back-taxes and a fine, learn English, remain employed and commit no crimes.

That approach garners wide, bipartisan support. (A recent CNN/ORC poll showed that a policy that offers citizenship to those immigrants who are living in the U.S. illegally but hold a job, speak English and are willing to pay back taxes is immensely popular, with 90 percent behind such a plan. Thats consistent across party lines, with 96 percent of Democrats, 89 percent of independents and 87 percent of Republicans behind it. Thats citizenship, not merely legal status.) Nothing would confound Mr. Trumps political opponents more or help transform the GOPs image.

Second, Mr. Trump should revisit his opposition to entitlement reform. Slashing domestic discretionary spending and enacting big tax cuts for the rich are politically unattainable, besides being policy errors. Instead, Mr. Trump should undertake a bipartisan reform of Social Security and Medicare, with everything on the table (including, but not limited to, a gradual raising of the retirement age).

Like President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Tip ONeill, Mr. Trump will need bipartisan cooperation. If he can promise not to enact changes for those retiring within the next 15 years and to preserve benefits for the less well-off, he can gain some credibility with Democrats. Former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels would be an ideal figure to head an outside commission that could make recommendations to the White House and Congress.

Third, now that he has discovered that China is not a currency manipulator (nor has it been stealing our jobs, he may find out) and allies such as Japan and South Korea strongly desire to ward off Chinas regional aggression and to develop closer economic ties with the United States, Mr. Trump should return to the Trans-Pacific Partnership. He never articulated specific objections, but there are tweaks that could be made (e.g., trimming back the investor-state dispute settlement system, which right-wingers worry will encroach on our legal sovereignty, and easing the process for revisions). Mr. Trump said he is not against free trade, only stupid deals. With some limited but politically adroit fixes, the president could reclaim a deal that his predecessor could not pass.

How could Mr. Trump possibly become an advocate of amnesty, entitlement reform and trade deals? Well, it sounds a lot less far-fetched now that he has reversed himself on a whole slew of other issues. Moreover, all of these are sound economic moves within the mainstream of what we used to consider center-right policy. The moves are pro-growth and, in the case of trade and immigration, would serve diplomatic interests as well.

An elected leader concerned about consistency and political loyalty would find it impossible to swallow these reversals. But this president, weve seen, prides himself on flexibility. If anyone can execute these policy turnarounds, its Donald Trump.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Washington Post (Twitter @JRubinBlogger).

View original post here:

Jennifer Rubin: The evolution of a president - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette