Today, politics is a rich man’s game. Look no further than the 2012 elections and that season’s biggest donor, 79-year-old casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. He and his wife, Miriam, shocked the political class by first giving $16.5 million in an effort to make Newt Gingrich the Republican presidential nominee. Once Gingrich exited the race, the Adelsons invested more than $30 million in electing Mitt Romney. They donated millions more to support GOP candidates running for the House and Senate, to block a pro-union measure in Michigan, and to bankroll the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative stalwarts (which waged their own campaigns mostly to helpRepublican candidates for Congress). All told, the Adelsons donated $94 million during the 2012 cycle — nearly four times the previous record set by liberal financier George Soros. And that’s only the money we know about. When you add in so-called dark money, one estimate puts their total giving at closer to $150 million.
via Billionaires Now Own American Politics | Alternet.
Quick update on two topics I’ve been posting about recently…what a d-bag Ted Cruz is, and how d-bags are trying to use Immigration Reform to destroy the domestic IT industry*. Those two themes came together yesterday in a jarring display of douche-baggery.
“A number of Tuesday’s amendments were H-1B related, including one from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), which sought to raise the H-1B cap to 325,000.”I think high-tech immigrants are an unambiguous good for our economy and our country,” said Cruz.Cruz called the immigration’s bill plan to raise the cap to as high as 180,000, “a half measure.” The amendment had little support and failed. The longer discussion was around Grassley’s “good faith” amendment.”
This should be still be quite alarming…as the current “compromise” of 180,000/yr is still a 300% increase, and is just enough foreign workers to cover all the new jobs (expected to be about 120,000/yr for the next decade or so). Leaving pretty much none for Americans who did the “right thing” and got a STEM degree in college…only to graduate and realize they are competing for jobs with 1,000,000 foreign workers who don’t have any student loan debt.
* Currently the limit is 65,000/yr, and as such, foreign workers make up 25-40% of IT staff. If you increase that limit to 300,000/yr, there will be no market for domestic IT workers, as all the new jobs expected to be created over the next decade will be filled by this hugely increased pool. Wages will also plummet, as is obvious to anyone who knows what happens to price (wages) when supply is increased by 500%.
This guy, I like. A new DSM is coming out defining mental diseases. One thing that still lacks a definition; “mental disease.”
What are the important changes made in the new DSM, and how will they affect patients?
It’s going to cause a lot of trouble when Asperger’s Syndrome disappears. It may cause some trouble when the bereavement exclusion disappears. That’s a good example of why the APA’s going to be in trouble. It was so unnecessary, so stupid. They’ve made the absurd statement that they know the difference, two weeks after someone’s wife dies, whether that person is “depressed,” or just “in mourning.” Come on! Who are these guys?
Lots of examples and explanations on this pseudo and how it *could* one day become real science.
Not me. I will not be bullied into silence simply because what I’m saying is nonsense.
I oppose fluoridation because it is too risky. More than two-thirds of the country already does it, and it’s been going on for more than half a century, and doctors and scientists have actual data showing that it helps improve oral health in the communities that have it.
In other words, the jury is still out.
What if the health risks of adding a microscopic amount of fluoride to drinking water don’t manifest themselves until the SECOND half-century of doing it? What if the only people able to recognize the damage it does aren’t doctors and scientists but conspiracy theorists and people on Facebook?
Nailed that one there.
NEW YORK: The 500 largest US companies scored near-record profits last year and retailer Wal-Mart replaced ExxonMobil as the biggest revenue maker on the annual list, Fortune magazine said Monday.
Apple cracked into the top 10 companies for the first time, vaulting into sixth place from the prior year’s number 17 slot.
The combined earnings of the Fortune 500 came in at $820 billion in 2012, slipping from the all-time high of $824.5 billion in 2011.
Missed it by a “small fortune”.
I am terribly curious to see how the whole 3D printing tech can shake things up. Printing your own little thing is a lot cooler and cheaper than having it shipped halfway around the whole.
The U.S. solar company posted a net profit of $59.1 million, or 66 cents per share, for the first quarter. This compares with a loss of $449.4 million, or $5.20 per share, in the year-ago period, which included $444 million in restructuring charges and costs in excess of normal warranty.
Excluding items, First Solar earned 69 cents a share, below the 75 cents expected on average by analysts, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.Revenue rose 52 percent to $755.2 million, above Wall Street expectations of $725.3 million.
via First Solar posts profit, backs 2013 view | Reuters.
I’m pretty sure Fox (and by their nature, Republicans) only think one solar company ever existed or got government help in the history of the country. Pointed out that others both and exist and are doing o.k. makes minds melt, and is therefore considered some kind of lie.
What, after all, do people want from economic policy? The answer, it turns out, is that it depends on which people you ask — a point documented in a recent research paper by the political scientists Benjamin Page, Larry Bartels and Jason Seawright. The paper compares the policy preferences of ordinary Americans with those of the very wealthy, and the results are eye-opening.
Thus, the average American is somewhat worried about budget deficits, which is no surprise given the constant barrage of deficit scare stories in the news media, but the wealthy, by a large majority, regard deficits as the most important problem we face. And how should the budget deficit be brought down? The wealthy favor cutting federal spending on health care and Social Security — that is, “entitlements” — while the public at large actually wants to see spending on those programs rise.
via The 1 Percent’s Solution – NYTimes.com.
And this is the disconnect. When you ask people, it’s a pretty uneven polling about what we want to do. When you multiply those opinions by net worth, the calculation comes a lot closer to being balanced.