Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
April 19, 2020
A group of more than 100 protesters converged on Huntington Beach on Friday in a demonstration against California’s coronavirus stay-at-home rules, part of a series of national demonstrations organized by conservative groups. The protesters — some with Trump banners and American flags — mostly were not wearing masks or practicing social distancing by standing at least six feet apart. And they offered views about the spread of the coronavirus that differed sharply from scientific findings and experts’ recommendations.
One of the first people to trickle into the afternoon’s protest in Huntington Beach was 62-year-old Paula Doyle. The Costa Mesa resident arrived with a hand-held American flag and a “Live Free or Die” sign and was “sick” of social distancing and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s stay-at-home order, which she said was “killing business.” “I don’t think there’s any reason for us to be on lockdown now,” she said shortly after arguing with another Trump supporter who was in favor of quarantine. “We didn’t have any dangers; we have no danger in our hospitals now of overflowing.”
The comments of protesters fly in the face of what California public health officials and other experts have been saying about the coronavirus. California’s relatively quick action to close businesses and order residents to stay home has tamped down the coronavirus pandemic and left many hospitals largely empty, waiting for a surge that has yet to come. The initial success of the unprecedented shutdown of schools, businesses and other institutions has pleased experts and public health officials, prompting calls to keep the restrictions in place at least into May to help cement the progress.
Social distancing will be a critical factor. Lifting restrictions too early would likely lead to dangerous new jumps in cases. Dr. Howard Markel, a professor of the history of medicine at the University of Michigan, said earlier this week deploying stay-at-home measures required a degree of patience not to pull back too early. “If you pull the triggers off too early, not only is there a circulating virus to do what it naturally does, but you will have incurred all the economic and social disruptions of [stay-at-home orders] for nothing,” Markel said in a webinar hosted by the American Public Health Assn. last month.
snip
'Live Free or Die': Protesters march against California stay-at-home rules in Huntington Beach
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-17/protesters-california-stay-at-home-coronavirusA group of more than 100 protesters converged on Huntington Beach on Friday in a demonstration against California’s coronavirus stay-at-home rules, part of a series of national demonstrations organized by conservative groups. The protesters — some with Trump banners and American flags — mostly were not wearing masks or practicing social distancing by standing at least six feet apart. And they offered views about the spread of the coronavirus that differed sharply from scientific findings and experts’ recommendations.
One of the first people to trickle into the afternoon’s protest in Huntington Beach was 62-year-old Paula Doyle. The Costa Mesa resident arrived with a hand-held American flag and a “Live Free or Die” sign and was “sick” of social distancing and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s stay-at-home order, which she said was “killing business.” “I don’t think there’s any reason for us to be on lockdown now,” she said shortly after arguing with another Trump supporter who was in favor of quarantine. “We didn’t have any dangers; we have no danger in our hospitals now of overflowing.”
The comments of protesters fly in the face of what California public health officials and other experts have been saying about the coronavirus. California’s relatively quick action to close businesses and order residents to stay home has tamped down the coronavirus pandemic and left many hospitals largely empty, waiting for a surge that has yet to come. The initial success of the unprecedented shutdown of schools, businesses and other institutions has pleased experts and public health officials, prompting calls to keep the restrictions in place at least into May to help cement the progress.
Social distancing will be a critical factor. Lifting restrictions too early would likely lead to dangerous new jumps in cases. Dr. Howard Markel, a professor of the history of medicine at the University of Michigan, said earlier this week deploying stay-at-home measures required a degree of patience not to pull back too early. “If you pull the triggers off too early, not only is there a circulating virus to do what it naturally does, but you will have incurred all the economic and social disruptions of [stay-at-home orders] for nothing,” Markel said in a webinar hosted by the American Public Health Assn. last month.
snip
April 19, 2020
The humble potato is as Irish as a pint of Guinness. But the Michelin-starred chef and restauranteur JP McMahon, notes in his The Irish Cookbook ($35) that the potato’s association to Ireland only came about within the last 200 years. Missing from the history of Ireland and its cuisine are thousands of years of foraging and cultivating the land for its native provisions. McMahon’s cookbook contains 480 recipes that utilize the bounties of the country’s land. From seafood to wild game, these recipes take a look at Irish recipes of yore, with a nod towards the future of Ireland’s culinary scene. The recipe for beef cheeks, published below, is a braise made with shelf stable vegetables and an uncommon cut of beef.
Beef Cheeks with Barley and Onions
Serves four
Ingredients:
For the beef cheeks:
4 beef cheeks, cap removed and trimmed of sinew
2 tablespoons canola oil
4 carrots, chopped
2 onions, quartered
2 cloves garlic
4 tablespoons butter
A few sprigs of rosemary and thyme
2 cups stout
For the barley and onions:
2 cups beef stock
2 1/2 cups barley
2 onions, halved, skin on
4 tablespoons butter, cubed
sea salt
Preparation:
1. Preheat the oven to 325°F.
2. To braise the beef cheeks, season the cheeks with sea salt. Heat the oil in a large frying pan, add the cheeks and fry for 1-2 minutes on each side until nicely browned. Add the carrots, onions and garlic. After a minute, add the butter and herbs and baste for 2-3 minutes until the vegetables are caramelized.
3. Transfer to an ovenproof dish and discard any excess fat. Pour the stout and stock over the cheeks until completely submerged. Cover the dish with a lid or aluminum foil and put into the preheated oven for 3 hours.
4. Meanwhile, simmer the barley in a large pan of water over a low heat for 40 minutes until tender. Strain and reserve. Strain the sauce from the cheeks and carrots and keep them warm. Allow the fat to settle and skim it off the top. Heat the sauce in a pan over a high heat for about 15 minutes until reduced by half.
5. Put the onions in a dry pan over a medium–low heat and cook for 18–20 minutes until soft to touch and the edges are blackened. Peel into individual pieces, keeping the lobes intact. Remove any large charred pieces.
6. When ready to serve, melt the butter in the barley and season with sea salt to taste. Spoon the barley over the plates and add the charred onions. Slice the beef cheeks and lay near the onions. Finish with some sauce.
Note: The cheeks can also be cooked in a lower oven at 250°F for 5 hours for a more tender meat.
Forget Potatoes. Beef Cheek Is the Irish Staple You're Not Making
https://gearpatrol.com/2020/04/16/the-irish-cookbook-beef-cheeks-recipe/The humble potato is as Irish as a pint of Guinness. But the Michelin-starred chef and restauranteur JP McMahon, notes in his The Irish Cookbook ($35) that the potato’s association to Ireland only came about within the last 200 years. Missing from the history of Ireland and its cuisine are thousands of years of foraging and cultivating the land for its native provisions. McMahon’s cookbook contains 480 recipes that utilize the bounties of the country’s land. From seafood to wild game, these recipes take a look at Irish recipes of yore, with a nod towards the future of Ireland’s culinary scene. The recipe for beef cheeks, published below, is a braise made with shelf stable vegetables and an uncommon cut of beef.
Beef Cheeks with Barley and Onions
Serves four
Ingredients:
For the beef cheeks:
4 beef cheeks, cap removed and trimmed of sinew
2 tablespoons canola oil
4 carrots, chopped
2 onions, quartered
2 cloves garlic
4 tablespoons butter
A few sprigs of rosemary and thyme
2 cups stout
For the barley and onions:
2 cups beef stock
2 1/2 cups barley
2 onions, halved, skin on
4 tablespoons butter, cubed
sea salt
Preparation:
1. Preheat the oven to 325°F.
2. To braise the beef cheeks, season the cheeks with sea salt. Heat the oil in a large frying pan, add the cheeks and fry for 1-2 minutes on each side until nicely browned. Add the carrots, onions and garlic. After a minute, add the butter and herbs and baste for 2-3 minutes until the vegetables are caramelized.
3. Transfer to an ovenproof dish and discard any excess fat. Pour the stout and stock over the cheeks until completely submerged. Cover the dish with a lid or aluminum foil and put into the preheated oven for 3 hours.
4. Meanwhile, simmer the barley in a large pan of water over a low heat for 40 minutes until tender. Strain and reserve. Strain the sauce from the cheeks and carrots and keep them warm. Allow the fat to settle and skim it off the top. Heat the sauce in a pan over a high heat for about 15 minutes until reduced by half.
5. Put the onions in a dry pan over a medium–low heat and cook for 18–20 minutes until soft to touch and the edges are blackened. Peel into individual pieces, keeping the lobes intact. Remove any large charred pieces.
6. When ready to serve, melt the butter in the barley and season with sea salt to taste. Spoon the barley over the plates and add the charred onions. Slice the beef cheeks and lay near the onions. Finish with some sauce.
Note: The cheeks can also be cooked in a lower oven at 250°F for 5 hours for a more tender meat.
April 19, 2020
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/feminism-womens-rights-coronavirus-covid19/608302/
Enough already. When people try to be cheerful about social distancing and working from home, noting that William Shakespeare and Isaac Newton did some of their best work while England was ravaged by the plague, there is an obvious response: Neither of them had child-care responsibilities. Shakespeare spent most of his career in London, where the theaters were, while his family lived in Stratford-upon-Avon. During the plague of 1606, the playwright was lucky to be spared from the epidemic—his landlady died at the height of the outbreak—and his wife and two adult daughters stayed safely in the Warwickshire countryside. Newton, meanwhile, never married or had children. He saw out the Great Plague of 1665–6 on his family’s estate in the east of England, and spent most of his adult life as a fellow at Cambridge University, where his meals and housekeeping were provided by the college.
For those with caring responsibilities, an infectious-disease outbreak is unlikely to give them time to write King Lear or develop a theory of optics. A pandemic magnifies all existing inequalities (even as politicians insist this is not the time to talk about anything other than the immediate crisis). Working from home in a white-collar job is easier; employees with salaries and benefits will be better protected; self-isolation is less taxing in a spacious house than a cramped apartment. But one of the most striking effects of the coronavirus will be to send many couples back to the 1950s. Across the world, women’s independence will be a silent victim of the pandemic. Purely as a physical illness, the coronavirus appears to affect women less severely. But in the past few days, the conversation about the pandemic has broadened: We are not just living through a public-health crisis, but an economic one. As much of normal life is suspended for three months or more, job losses are inevitable. At the same time, school closures and household isolation are moving the work of caring for children from the paid economy—nurseries, schools, babysitters—to the unpaid one.
The coronavirus smashes up the bargain that so many dual-earner couples have made in the developed world: We can both work, because someone else is looking after our children. Instead, couples will have to decide which one of them takes the hit. Many stories of arrogance are related to this pandemic. Among the most exasperating is the West’s failure to learn from history: the Ebola crisis in three African countries in 2014; Zika in 2015–6; and recent outbreaks of SARS, swine flu, and bird flu. Academics who studied these episodes found that they had deep, long-lasting effects on gender equality. “Everybody’s income was affected by the Ebola outbreak in West Africa,” Julia Smith, a health-policy researcher at Simon Fraser University, told The New York Times this month, but “men’s income returned to what they had made pre-outbreak faster than women’s income.” The distorting effects of an epidemic can last for years, Clare Wenham, an assistant professor of global-health policy at the London School of Economics, told me. “We also saw declining rates of childhood vaccination [during Ebola].” Later, when these children contracted preventable diseases, their mothers had to take time off work.
At an individual level, the choices of many couples over the next few months will make perfect economic sense. What do pandemic patients need? Looking after. What do self-isolating older people need? Looking after. What do children kept home from school need? Looking after. All this looking after—this unpaid caring labor—will fall more heavily on women, because of the existing structure of the workforce. “It’s not just about social norms of women performing care roles; it’s also about practicalities,” Wenham added. “Who is paid less? Who has the flexibility?” According to the British government’s figures, 40 percent of employed women work part-time, compared with only 13 percent of men. In heterosexual relationships, women are more likely to be the lower earners, meaning their jobs are considered a lower priority when disruptions come along. And this particular disruption could last months, rather than weeks. Some women’s lifetime earnings will never recover. With the schools closed, many fathers will undoubtedly step up, but that won’t be universal.
snip
The Coronavirus Is a Disaster for Feminism
Pandemics affect men and women differently.https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/feminism-womens-rights-coronavirus-covid19/608302/
Enough already. When people try to be cheerful about social distancing and working from home, noting that William Shakespeare and Isaac Newton did some of their best work while England was ravaged by the plague, there is an obvious response: Neither of them had child-care responsibilities. Shakespeare spent most of his career in London, where the theaters were, while his family lived in Stratford-upon-Avon. During the plague of 1606, the playwright was lucky to be spared from the epidemic—his landlady died at the height of the outbreak—and his wife and two adult daughters stayed safely in the Warwickshire countryside. Newton, meanwhile, never married or had children. He saw out the Great Plague of 1665–6 on his family’s estate in the east of England, and spent most of his adult life as a fellow at Cambridge University, where his meals and housekeeping were provided by the college.
For those with caring responsibilities, an infectious-disease outbreak is unlikely to give them time to write King Lear or develop a theory of optics. A pandemic magnifies all existing inequalities (even as politicians insist this is not the time to talk about anything other than the immediate crisis). Working from home in a white-collar job is easier; employees with salaries and benefits will be better protected; self-isolation is less taxing in a spacious house than a cramped apartment. But one of the most striking effects of the coronavirus will be to send many couples back to the 1950s. Across the world, women’s independence will be a silent victim of the pandemic. Purely as a physical illness, the coronavirus appears to affect women less severely. But in the past few days, the conversation about the pandemic has broadened: We are not just living through a public-health crisis, but an economic one. As much of normal life is suspended for three months or more, job losses are inevitable. At the same time, school closures and household isolation are moving the work of caring for children from the paid economy—nurseries, schools, babysitters—to the unpaid one.
The coronavirus smashes up the bargain that so many dual-earner couples have made in the developed world: We can both work, because someone else is looking after our children. Instead, couples will have to decide which one of them takes the hit. Many stories of arrogance are related to this pandemic. Among the most exasperating is the West’s failure to learn from history: the Ebola crisis in three African countries in 2014; Zika in 2015–6; and recent outbreaks of SARS, swine flu, and bird flu. Academics who studied these episodes found that they had deep, long-lasting effects on gender equality. “Everybody’s income was affected by the Ebola outbreak in West Africa,” Julia Smith, a health-policy researcher at Simon Fraser University, told The New York Times this month, but “men’s income returned to what they had made pre-outbreak faster than women’s income.” The distorting effects of an epidemic can last for years, Clare Wenham, an assistant professor of global-health policy at the London School of Economics, told me. “We also saw declining rates of childhood vaccination [during Ebola].” Later, when these children contracted preventable diseases, their mothers had to take time off work.
At an individual level, the choices of many couples over the next few months will make perfect economic sense. What do pandemic patients need? Looking after. What do self-isolating older people need? Looking after. What do children kept home from school need? Looking after. All this looking after—this unpaid caring labor—will fall more heavily on women, because of the existing structure of the workforce. “It’s not just about social norms of women performing care roles; it’s also about practicalities,” Wenham added. “Who is paid less? Who has the flexibility?” According to the British government’s figures, 40 percent of employed women work part-time, compared with only 13 percent of men. In heterosexual relationships, women are more likely to be the lower earners, meaning their jobs are considered a lower priority when disruptions come along. And this particular disruption could last months, rather than weeks. Some women’s lifetime earnings will never recover. With the schools closed, many fathers will undoubtedly step up, but that won’t be universal.
snip
April 18, 2020
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/17/stimulus-unemployment-checks-delays-government-delays/
The national effort to get coronavirus relief money to Americans is at risk of being overwhelmed by the worst economic downturn in 80 years, as understaffed and underfunded agencies struggle to deliver funds. Three weeks after Congress passed a $2 trillion package to lessen the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic, millions of households and small businesses are still waiting to receive all the help promised under the legislation, according to government data and firsthand accounts.
The bulk of the challenges have occurred with three initiatives designed to get cash to struggling Americans: $1,200 per adult relief payments that launched this week, $349 billion in Small Business Administration loans, and $260 billion in unemployment benefits for the more than 22 million people — and growing — out of work. The SBA ran out of money to make small business loans this week, almost no unemployment aid has reached eligible self-employed and gig workers, and a significant number of Americans who were due to receive relief payments this week went on the IRS.gov website only to see this message: “payment status not available.”
Current and former government officials say it would be a tall order for any president to execute massive new programs in a matter of weeks, and tens of millions of Americans did receive direct deposits worth $1,200 or more this week. But the Trump administration’s promise of swift and effective action — President Trump called the small business program “flawlessly executed” this week — is colliding with a federal and state apparatus not well designed to deliver so much money so fast. The technological backbone to much of the relief — including the distribution of relief checks and the unemployment insurance system — requires knowledge of a software programming language not widely used in decades. An administration that had made little priority of keeping senior positions staffed, meanwhile, is struggling now to quickly implement one of the biggest government interventions in history.
snip
The IRS uses a decades-old software — its “MasterFile” software responsible for processing individual and business tax filings was developed in 1962 — and a computer programming language called COBOL. The stimulus program has required multiple coding changes, and the agency has at least 16 other databases with taxpayer information, none of which easily can communicate with the other, said a person familiar with the matter.
snip
WaPo : Stimulus checks and other relief hindered by 1960s technology and rocky rollout
On Friday, Trump hailed the ‘incredible success’ of getting out payments, but millions are still awaiting stimulus checks, unemployment aid and small-business loanshttps://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/17/stimulus-unemployment-checks-delays-government-delays/
The national effort to get coronavirus relief money to Americans is at risk of being overwhelmed by the worst economic downturn in 80 years, as understaffed and underfunded agencies struggle to deliver funds. Three weeks after Congress passed a $2 trillion package to lessen the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic, millions of households and small businesses are still waiting to receive all the help promised under the legislation, according to government data and firsthand accounts.
The bulk of the challenges have occurred with three initiatives designed to get cash to struggling Americans: $1,200 per adult relief payments that launched this week, $349 billion in Small Business Administration loans, and $260 billion in unemployment benefits for the more than 22 million people — and growing — out of work. The SBA ran out of money to make small business loans this week, almost no unemployment aid has reached eligible self-employed and gig workers, and a significant number of Americans who were due to receive relief payments this week went on the IRS.gov website only to see this message: “payment status not available.”
Current and former government officials say it would be a tall order for any president to execute massive new programs in a matter of weeks, and tens of millions of Americans did receive direct deposits worth $1,200 or more this week. But the Trump administration’s promise of swift and effective action — President Trump called the small business program “flawlessly executed” this week — is colliding with a federal and state apparatus not well designed to deliver so much money so fast. The technological backbone to much of the relief — including the distribution of relief checks and the unemployment insurance system — requires knowledge of a software programming language not widely used in decades. An administration that had made little priority of keeping senior positions staffed, meanwhile, is struggling now to quickly implement one of the biggest government interventions in history.
snip
The IRS uses a decades-old software — its “MasterFile” software responsible for processing individual and business tax filings was developed in 1962 — and a computer programming language called COBOL. The stimulus program has required multiple coding changes, and the agency has at least 16 other databases with taxpayer information, none of which easily can communicate with the other, said a person familiar with the matter.
snip
April 18, 2020
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/vulture-funds-prepare-to-feast-on-troubled-company-debt-20200417
The world’s biggest distressed debt funds are gearing up to capitalise on the worst market turmoil in decades as they look to snap up the debt of troubled companies at deep discounts. The near shut down of the global economy has left plenty for the vulture funds to feed on – although competition could be fierce. “There are now huge opportunities for distressed debt funds, particularly in the transport, retail and hospitality sectors," Stavros Siokos, managing partner at real estate asset specialist Astarte Capital said. “Even core assets which are supposed to be risk-free, such as infrastructure, are at risk which is something we never expected to see in our lifetime,” he added.
For distressed debt investors and private equity firms with specialist funds, buying the bonds of companies in financial difficulty can lead to better returns as they are compensated for the higher risk they are taking. The hope is that once a company’s financial health recovers and the bond price goes up, they can make a profit. There is no shortage of cash. In the last five years, distressed debt funds have raised $130.6bn across 128 strategies to invest in troubled companies, according to data provider Preqin. And more money is being raised. On April 8, there were 50 funds in the market, looking to raise a total of $34.8bn, Preqin said.
Apollo Global Management, one of the world’s biggest investors, told investors in early April that it had invested $10bn into credit and private equity in March, and that it is looking to raise a new vehicle to find opportunities, WSJ reported. Citing people familiar with the matter, the WSJ also wrote that General Atlantic is teaming up with credit investor Tripp Smith to launch a nearly $5bn fund to provide financing to companies hit by the coronavirus pandemic.
JP Morgan Asset Management launched its first-ever special situations fund in November, raising just over $1bn to invest in stressed, distressed and event driven situations across North American and European private and public credit markets; while private equity firm CVC closed its global special situations fund in June on $1.4bn. Default rates have remained low for ten years, according to managing director Brendan Beer at Oaktree, as companies borrowed and reborrowed, thanks to easy and cheap credit. He says now cyclical default expectations are being pulled forward.
snip
Vulture funds prepare to feast on troubled company debt
Distressed debt funds begin to circle troubled companies hit hard by the impact of the coronavirus pandemichttps://www.fnlondon.com/articles/vulture-funds-prepare-to-feast-on-troubled-company-debt-20200417
The world’s biggest distressed debt funds are gearing up to capitalise on the worst market turmoil in decades as they look to snap up the debt of troubled companies at deep discounts. The near shut down of the global economy has left plenty for the vulture funds to feed on – although competition could be fierce. “There are now huge opportunities for distressed debt funds, particularly in the transport, retail and hospitality sectors," Stavros Siokos, managing partner at real estate asset specialist Astarte Capital said. “Even core assets which are supposed to be risk-free, such as infrastructure, are at risk which is something we never expected to see in our lifetime,” he added.
For distressed debt investors and private equity firms with specialist funds, buying the bonds of companies in financial difficulty can lead to better returns as they are compensated for the higher risk they are taking. The hope is that once a company’s financial health recovers and the bond price goes up, they can make a profit. There is no shortage of cash. In the last five years, distressed debt funds have raised $130.6bn across 128 strategies to invest in troubled companies, according to data provider Preqin. And more money is being raised. On April 8, there were 50 funds in the market, looking to raise a total of $34.8bn, Preqin said.
Apollo Global Management, one of the world’s biggest investors, told investors in early April that it had invested $10bn into credit and private equity in March, and that it is looking to raise a new vehicle to find opportunities, WSJ reported. Citing people familiar with the matter, the WSJ also wrote that General Atlantic is teaming up with credit investor Tripp Smith to launch a nearly $5bn fund to provide financing to companies hit by the coronavirus pandemic.
JP Morgan Asset Management launched its first-ever special situations fund in November, raising just over $1bn to invest in stressed, distressed and event driven situations across North American and European private and public credit markets; while private equity firm CVC closed its global special situations fund in June on $1.4bn. Default rates have remained low for ten years, according to managing director Brendan Beer at Oaktree, as companies borrowed and reborrowed, thanks to easy and cheap credit. He says now cyclical default expectations are being pulled forward.
snip
April 18, 2020
https://www.penews.com/articles/us-coronavirus-stimulus-offers-taxpayer-cash-to-buyout-firm-companies-20200416
Private equity firms won a victory in getting access to stimulus funds intended to blunt the economic pain of the coronavirus, after missing out on their first effort to secure government cash for their businesses. The Federal Reserve last week detailed plans to fund $2.3tn in aid to companies affected by the virus, with few restrictions on private equity firms seeking assistance for companies they own, according to analysis by experts and lobbyists.
But while the Fed’s plan has few roadblocks for private equity, taking advantage could come with risks—from both a business and a reputational standpoint. Private equity groups praised the Fed’s planned intervention, with the American Investment Council, the largest industry lobbying group, calling it “a step in the right direction.”
The Fed plans to backstop the markets for large companies’ debt, and to fund $600bn in loans to midsize businesses. The interest-deferred loans can be for as much as $25m. Groups critical of private equity practices slammed the Fed’s plans for lacking safeguards against misuse. The AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers were among more than a dozen groups that last week signed a letter warning that allowing private equity firms access to stimulus money would mean giving a “taxpayer subsidy” to a “predatory business model”.
Private equity is likely to have “almost unlimited access” to the Fed’s loan program, said Marcus Stanley, policy director for Americans for Financial Reform, a progressive group that advocates for stricter regulations on Wall Street. “For somebody with a bunch of lawyers and a lot of money you have to be sitting there drooling looking at this,” he said.
snip
US coronavirus stimulus offers taxpayer cash to buyout firm companies
Private equity appears to have won access to federal stimulus funds through the Federal Reserve- with strings attachedhttps://www.penews.com/articles/us-coronavirus-stimulus-offers-taxpayer-cash-to-buyout-firm-companies-20200416
Private equity firms won a victory in getting access to stimulus funds intended to blunt the economic pain of the coronavirus, after missing out on their first effort to secure government cash for their businesses. The Federal Reserve last week detailed plans to fund $2.3tn in aid to companies affected by the virus, with few restrictions on private equity firms seeking assistance for companies they own, according to analysis by experts and lobbyists.
But while the Fed’s plan has few roadblocks for private equity, taking advantage could come with risks—from both a business and a reputational standpoint. Private equity groups praised the Fed’s planned intervention, with the American Investment Council, the largest industry lobbying group, calling it “a step in the right direction.”
The Fed plans to backstop the markets for large companies’ debt, and to fund $600bn in loans to midsize businesses. The interest-deferred loans can be for as much as $25m. Groups critical of private equity practices slammed the Fed’s plans for lacking safeguards against misuse. The AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers were among more than a dozen groups that last week signed a letter warning that allowing private equity firms access to stimulus money would mean giving a “taxpayer subsidy” to a “predatory business model”.
Private equity is likely to have “almost unlimited access” to the Fed’s loan program, said Marcus Stanley, policy director for Americans for Financial Reform, a progressive group that advocates for stricter regulations on Wall Street. “For somebody with a bunch of lawyers and a lot of money you have to be sitting there drooling looking at this,” he said.
snip
April 18, 2020
Truth: MAGATs want to re-open because this pandemic disproportionally kills PoC, the old, & the poor
It's a greedy RW white nationalist's and a RW oligarch's wet dream.
They want to fuck up the deep blue states to lessen their population so they can steal back Electoral College votes via reduced House seats, plus make the pinkish and purple states whiter. It is a balancing act, as they do not want to kill off too many in deep red states, just enough so that the State House and State Senate seats can become even more Rethug. They also are hoping that the deep blue states have thinned out herds to the point that there is an above-average movement to them from pink/purple's more left wing types as opportunities open up via deaths. Again that is a balancing act as they do not want too many to move so that it undercuts the red states' House districts and EV and also does not replace the blue stats populations to the point they do not lose House districts/EV's.
They also want less on the dole and on Medicare and Social Security overall.
Make no mistake, there are millions of younger Rethugs who are already spending their grandparents or parents estate money in their heads. I guarantee that there have been millions of rushed, cajoled 're-write or write out for the first time' will shenanigans going on. Probably a shedload of life insurance fraud too.
I put NOTHING past these fucking monsters. NOTHING.
April 16, 2020
I get it: We all must vote by mail—or we die. There is really no other safe choice. But there is much to fear, especially for minority and young voters, with a switch to all-mail voting–unless our broken absentee ballot system is fixed. Here’s what the “Go Postal” crowd doesn’t tell you: In 2016, 512,696 mail-in ballots —over half a million– were simply rejected, not counted. That’s official, from the federal Elections Assistance Commission (EAC). But that’s just the tip of the ballot-berg of uncounted mail-in votes. A study by MIT, Losing Votes by Mail, puts the total loss of mail-in votes at a breathtaking 22%. Move to 80% mail-in voting and 25 million will lose their vote. And not just anyone’s mail-in ballots are dumped in the electoral trashcan. Overwhelming, those junked are ballots mailed by poorer, younger, non-white Americans.
Senator Amy Klobuchar’s proposed bill takes baby steps to expanding vote-by-mail protection but will barely bite into the 22% loss of votes especially among minorities. Columbia Law professor Barbara Arnwine, founder of the Transformative Justice Coalition, says that a move to mail-in voting is, “really, really dangerous to the Black vote.” Millions of low-income voters who rarely vote absentee will now have fill out multi-step forms for the first time, which, “will lead to disaster,” says Arnwine. Vote by mail is not as simple as “pick and lick”–picking candidates and licking the envelope. Eight states, including the swing states of Wisconsin, North Carolina and Klobuchar’s Minnesota, require a mail-in voters to have the ballot signed by a witness. The required double-verification is a nightmare—it requires breaking the lock-down–and an invitation to challenges.
Three states, including swing state Missouri, require the ballot to be notarized. (Alabama requires a notary or two witnesses.) All but six states “verify” your signature against your registration signature. Partisan officials decide if there is a “match.” No less than 141,000 ballots were rejected as “unmatched” in 2016. Why? To prevent vote fraud, someone stealing your ballot and voting in your name. President Trump warns, “Mail ballots are very dangerous for this country because of cheaters.” Except, Mr. President, let’s not mix fruit-cake theorizing with the facts. Rutgers Professor Lorraine Minnite found just six verified cases of voter impersonation over 12 years of voting nationwide. The Election Law Journal reported that, “the proportion of the population reporting voter impersonation is indistinguishable from that reporting abduction by extraterrestrials.”
The CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project report, Whose Absentee Votes are Counted?, shows rejection rates higher for Democrats than Republicans, higher for younger than older voters, and higher for non-English ballots. Surprised? Plus, some states require all or first-time voters to mail in a copy of their ID; another hurdle for the poor, those without driver’s licenses or those who may have the wrong ID and not know it. Wisconsin Elections Commissioner Ann Jacobs told me that 182,000 state university students have photo IDs—which cannot be used to vote. Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by less than 23,000 votes. Nationally, over 100,000 absentee ballots were deep-sixed because they are missing a signature—in many cases, the second voter signature required in some states. In California, Asian-American voting rights activist Hyepin Im was horrified to find that Korean-American absentee ballots were tossed because the Korean language ballots ask for the voters signature in Korean. Not surprisingly, the voters signed with Korean characters, disqualifying their mail-in ballot. And another 100,000 ballots are lost in presidential elections because of postage due.
Going Postal............
snip
61 Forms of Voter Suppression
By Barbara R. Arnwine
President & Founder
Transformative Justice Coalition
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5761d5cb414fb55c5ea1d412/t/5d7959ddde9619151f963571/1568233949433/61+Forms+of+Voter+Suppression_with+website.pdf
1. Strict voter photo ID laws
2. Closing of DMV’s in strict voter ID law states
3. Failure to accept government-issued state university and college student ID’s
4. No early voting
5. Early voting cuts
6. No Sunday Souls to the Polls Early Voting
7. Harsh requirements/punishments for voter registration groups
8. Tough Deputy Registrar Requirements
9. Harsh voter registration Compliance Deadlines
10.Failure to timely process voter registrations
11.Cuts to Election Day (Same Day) registration
12.Polling place reductions or consolidations
13.Polling place relocations
14.Inadequate or poorly trained staffing at polls
15.Inadequate number of functioning machines, optical scanners or electronic
polling books
16.Running out of ballots at polling sites
17.No paper ballots
18.Failure to accept Native American tribal IDs.
19.Barring Native American voters through residential address requirements for
Native American lands which have PO Boxes
20.Failure to place polling sites on Native American lands
21.Refusal to place polling sites on college campuses
22.Lack of available public transportation to polling sites
23.Excessive Voter purging
24.Disparate racial treatment at polling sites
25.Student voting restrictions
• Residency
26.Ex-felon disenfranchisement laws
27.Requiring Payment of Fines or Fees As Condition of Vote Restoration
28.Failure to Inform Formerly Incarcerated Persons of Their Voting Rights or
Eligibility to Vote
29.Excessive Use of Inactive voter lists
30.No Public Outreach or Notification to Voters Placed on Inactive Lists
31.Language discrimination
• Failure to accommodate
32.Lack of language-accessible materials
33.Failure to accommodate voters with disabilities
34.No disability accessibility
35.No curbside Voting
36.Not enough disability accessible voting equipment
37.Barriers to assistance by family members or others for voters
38.Deceptive practices
• Flyers
• Robocalls
39. Voter intimidation
• Impersonating law enforcement personnel or immigration officers
40.Police at polling places
41.Racial gerrymandering
42.Creating polling place confusion by splitting Black precincts
43.Partisan gerrymandering
44.Barriers for homeless voters to voter registration
45.Voter caging
• Use of One-Time Post cards/Mailers
46.Voter challengers at polls
47.Voter challenges to voter registration lists
48.Use of Suspense lists
49.Absentee Ballot Short Return Deadlines
50.Exact match requirements for signatures or other information
51.Complicated Absentee Ballot Requirements
52.Proof of Citizenship Laws
53.Out-of-precinct = no vote counted requirements
54.Failure to pre-register 17 year olds
55.Restrictions on straight-party voting
56.Interstate voter registration Crosscheck system
57.Jailed persons’ preconviction: denied right to register and/or vote
58.DOJ demanding voter records
59.Employers not providing time off or enough time
60.Failure to assist or accommodate voters displaced by natural disasters
61.Long lines
snip
https://twitter.com/barbs73/status/1245532270364102656
Rush to Vote-by-Mail Could Cost Dems the Election and Puts Millions of Minority Ballots at Risk
https://www.gregpalast.com/rush-to-vote-by-mail-could-cost-dems-the-election/I get it: We all must vote by mail—or we die. There is really no other safe choice. But there is much to fear, especially for minority and young voters, with a switch to all-mail voting–unless our broken absentee ballot system is fixed. Here’s what the “Go Postal” crowd doesn’t tell you: In 2016, 512,696 mail-in ballots —over half a million– were simply rejected, not counted. That’s official, from the federal Elections Assistance Commission (EAC). But that’s just the tip of the ballot-berg of uncounted mail-in votes. A study by MIT, Losing Votes by Mail, puts the total loss of mail-in votes at a breathtaking 22%. Move to 80% mail-in voting and 25 million will lose their vote. And not just anyone’s mail-in ballots are dumped in the electoral trashcan. Overwhelming, those junked are ballots mailed by poorer, younger, non-white Americans.
Senator Amy Klobuchar’s proposed bill takes baby steps to expanding vote-by-mail protection but will barely bite into the 22% loss of votes especially among minorities. Columbia Law professor Barbara Arnwine, founder of the Transformative Justice Coalition, says that a move to mail-in voting is, “really, really dangerous to the Black vote.” Millions of low-income voters who rarely vote absentee will now have fill out multi-step forms for the first time, which, “will lead to disaster,” says Arnwine. Vote by mail is not as simple as “pick and lick”–picking candidates and licking the envelope. Eight states, including the swing states of Wisconsin, North Carolina and Klobuchar’s Minnesota, require a mail-in voters to have the ballot signed by a witness. The required double-verification is a nightmare—it requires breaking the lock-down–and an invitation to challenges.
Three states, including swing state Missouri, require the ballot to be notarized. (Alabama requires a notary or two witnesses.) All but six states “verify” your signature against your registration signature. Partisan officials decide if there is a “match.” No less than 141,000 ballots were rejected as “unmatched” in 2016. Why? To prevent vote fraud, someone stealing your ballot and voting in your name. President Trump warns, “Mail ballots are very dangerous for this country because of cheaters.” Except, Mr. President, let’s not mix fruit-cake theorizing with the facts. Rutgers Professor Lorraine Minnite found just six verified cases of voter impersonation over 12 years of voting nationwide. The Election Law Journal reported that, “the proportion of the population reporting voter impersonation is indistinguishable from that reporting abduction by extraterrestrials.”
The CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project report, Whose Absentee Votes are Counted?, shows rejection rates higher for Democrats than Republicans, higher for younger than older voters, and higher for non-English ballots. Surprised? Plus, some states require all or first-time voters to mail in a copy of their ID; another hurdle for the poor, those without driver’s licenses or those who may have the wrong ID and not know it. Wisconsin Elections Commissioner Ann Jacobs told me that 182,000 state university students have photo IDs—which cannot be used to vote. Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by less than 23,000 votes. Nationally, over 100,000 absentee ballots were deep-sixed because they are missing a signature—in many cases, the second voter signature required in some states. In California, Asian-American voting rights activist Hyepin Im was horrified to find that Korean-American absentee ballots were tossed because the Korean language ballots ask for the voters signature in Korean. Not surprisingly, the voters signed with Korean characters, disqualifying their mail-in ballot. And another 100,000 ballots are lost in presidential elections because of postage due.
Going Postal............
snip
61 Forms of Voter Suppression
By Barbara R. Arnwine
President & Founder
Transformative Justice Coalition
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5761d5cb414fb55c5ea1d412/t/5d7959ddde9619151f963571/1568233949433/61+Forms+of+Voter+Suppression_with+website.pdf
1. Strict voter photo ID laws
2. Closing of DMV’s in strict voter ID law states
3. Failure to accept government-issued state university and college student ID’s
4. No early voting
5. Early voting cuts
6. No Sunday Souls to the Polls Early Voting
7. Harsh requirements/punishments for voter registration groups
8. Tough Deputy Registrar Requirements
9. Harsh voter registration Compliance Deadlines
10.Failure to timely process voter registrations
11.Cuts to Election Day (Same Day) registration
12.Polling place reductions or consolidations
13.Polling place relocations
14.Inadequate or poorly trained staffing at polls
15.Inadequate number of functioning machines, optical scanners or electronic
polling books
16.Running out of ballots at polling sites
17.No paper ballots
18.Failure to accept Native American tribal IDs.
19.Barring Native American voters through residential address requirements for
Native American lands which have PO Boxes
20.Failure to place polling sites on Native American lands
21.Refusal to place polling sites on college campuses
22.Lack of available public transportation to polling sites
23.Excessive Voter purging
24.Disparate racial treatment at polling sites
25.Student voting restrictions
• Residency
26.Ex-felon disenfranchisement laws
27.Requiring Payment of Fines or Fees As Condition of Vote Restoration
28.Failure to Inform Formerly Incarcerated Persons of Their Voting Rights or
Eligibility to Vote
29.Excessive Use of Inactive voter lists
30.No Public Outreach or Notification to Voters Placed on Inactive Lists
31.Language discrimination
• Failure to accommodate
32.Lack of language-accessible materials
33.Failure to accommodate voters with disabilities
34.No disability accessibility
35.No curbside Voting
36.Not enough disability accessible voting equipment
37.Barriers to assistance by family members or others for voters
38.Deceptive practices
• Flyers
• Robocalls
39. Voter intimidation
• Impersonating law enforcement personnel or immigration officers
40.Police at polling places
41.Racial gerrymandering
42.Creating polling place confusion by splitting Black precincts
43.Partisan gerrymandering
44.Barriers for homeless voters to voter registration
45.Voter caging
• Use of One-Time Post cards/Mailers
46.Voter challengers at polls
47.Voter challenges to voter registration lists
48.Use of Suspense lists
49.Absentee Ballot Short Return Deadlines
50.Exact match requirements for signatures or other information
51.Complicated Absentee Ballot Requirements
52.Proof of Citizenship Laws
53.Out-of-precinct = no vote counted requirements
54.Failure to pre-register 17 year olds
55.Restrictions on straight-party voting
56.Interstate voter registration Crosscheck system
57.Jailed persons’ preconviction: denied right to register and/or vote
58.DOJ demanding voter records
59.Employers not providing time off or enough time
60.Failure to assist or accommodate voters displaced by natural disasters
61.Long lines
snip
https://twitter.com/barbs73/status/1245532270364102656
April 16, 2020
Experienced politicians know there is a right way to answer questions about pursuing higher office. Be demure. Redirect. Convey vague interest while insisting never to have given it serious consideration. But Stacey Abrams does not give the expected answer when I ask if she would accept an offer from former vice president Joe Biden to serve as his 2020 running mate. “Yes. I would be honored,” Abrams says. “I would be an excellent running mate. I have the capacity to attract voters by motivating typically ignored communities. I have a strong history of executive and management experience in the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. I’ve spent 25 years in independent study of foreign policy. I am ready to help advance an agenda of restoring America’s place in the world. If I am selected, I am prepared and excited to serve.”
Abrams’s direct response betrays ambition, makes verifiable claims, and establishes outcomes to which she could later be held accountable. By normal political rules, it is the wrong answer. But as Abrams and I talk in March in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis, it is clear that normal political rules no longer apply. I’m asking her about an unknown political future even as the future itself is frighteningly unknowable: schools closing, businesses shuttering, and Americans sheltering against a raging virus we can barely fathom. Amid this chaotic unpredictability, Abrams’s candor is disarming and comforting.
Into the Unknown
In the March 15 televised debate, Biden committed to choosing a woman as his running mate. Less than a week later, the progressive strategy network Way to Win released survey data indicating Stacey Abrams was Biden’s strongest potential lieutenant. A graduate of Spelman College, the LBJ School of Public Affairs at UT Austin, and Yale Law School, Abrams made history as the first woman to lead a political party in Georgia’s General Assembly and the first African American to lead the Georgia House of Representatives. In 2018, she pursued history again, mounting an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to become America’s first black woman governor. Her defeat came amid election irregularities and allegations of voter suppression. Abrams refused to concede the close race to her Republican opponent, Brian Kemp. “I’m supposed to say nice things and accept my fate,” Abrams writes in the preface to her New York Times best-seller, Lead From the Outside. “I refused to be gaslighted into throwing away my power, diminishing my voice.”
The loss was not her end. The political star that is Stacey Abrams has continued to rise. On the heels of her defeat, she founded Fair Fight, a national organizing effort to ensure fair elections. This was followed by Fair Count, which works to achieve a fully accurate and representative census. Then, late last year, Abrams launched the Southern Economic Advancement Project to promote equitable economic and social policy for all races, classes, and genders across the region. She did all this while crisscrossing the country, giving lectures, supporting local Democratic candidates, and even becoming the first black woman to deliver the official Democratic response to President Trump’s State of the Union in 2019.
snip
Stacey Abrams On Voting Rights, COVID-19, And Being Vice President
https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a32132819/stacey-abrams-on-voting-rights-covid-19-and-being-vice-president/Experienced politicians know there is a right way to answer questions about pursuing higher office. Be demure. Redirect. Convey vague interest while insisting never to have given it serious consideration. But Stacey Abrams does not give the expected answer when I ask if she would accept an offer from former vice president Joe Biden to serve as his 2020 running mate. “Yes. I would be honored,” Abrams says. “I would be an excellent running mate. I have the capacity to attract voters by motivating typically ignored communities. I have a strong history of executive and management experience in the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. I’ve spent 25 years in independent study of foreign policy. I am ready to help advance an agenda of restoring America’s place in the world. If I am selected, I am prepared and excited to serve.”
Abrams’s direct response betrays ambition, makes verifiable claims, and establishes outcomes to which she could later be held accountable. By normal political rules, it is the wrong answer. But as Abrams and I talk in March in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis, it is clear that normal political rules no longer apply. I’m asking her about an unknown political future even as the future itself is frighteningly unknowable: schools closing, businesses shuttering, and Americans sheltering against a raging virus we can barely fathom. Amid this chaotic unpredictability, Abrams’s candor is disarming and comforting.
Into the Unknown
In the March 15 televised debate, Biden committed to choosing a woman as his running mate. Less than a week later, the progressive strategy network Way to Win released survey data indicating Stacey Abrams was Biden’s strongest potential lieutenant. A graduate of Spelman College, the LBJ School of Public Affairs at UT Austin, and Yale Law School, Abrams made history as the first woman to lead a political party in Georgia’s General Assembly and the first African American to lead the Georgia House of Representatives. In 2018, she pursued history again, mounting an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to become America’s first black woman governor. Her defeat came amid election irregularities and allegations of voter suppression. Abrams refused to concede the close race to her Republican opponent, Brian Kemp. “I’m supposed to say nice things and accept my fate,” Abrams writes in the preface to her New York Times best-seller, Lead From the Outside. “I refused to be gaslighted into throwing away my power, diminishing my voice.”
The loss was not her end. The political star that is Stacey Abrams has continued to rise. On the heels of her defeat, she founded Fair Fight, a national organizing effort to ensure fair elections. This was followed by Fair Count, which works to achieve a fully accurate and representative census. Then, late last year, Abrams launched the Southern Economic Advancement Project to promote equitable economic and social policy for all races, classes, and genders across the region. She did all this while crisscrossing the country, giving lectures, supporting local Democratic candidates, and even becoming the first black woman to deliver the official Democratic response to President Trump’s State of the Union in 2019.
“I’ve learned that failure is not permanent,” Abrams tells me. “My responsibility is to not let failure dissuade me from my core obligations. Sometimes we pursue a challenge thinking it is about our victory, but we don’t know the true purpose until later. Not becoming governor of one state gave me the opportunity to launch a national network in 20 states [to fight for fair elections]. We are helping reform democracy in places where it was broken and battered. We are fixing access to a census that the president of the United States tried to destroy.” She continues, “I may not have won the office, but what I was able to earn for the causes I serve has been extraordinary, and beyond anything I could have imagined. Apparently, I’m a really good loser.”
snip
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,498
