Wednesday, September 30, 2020
The development of climate security discourse in Japan - EurekAlert
IMAGE: Summary of the four categories of climate security discourse view more
Credit: NIES
As the level of understanding about climate change has increased, the term "climate security" has been increasingly used in the rapidly growing literature on this subject. Although Japan has officially acknowledged the importance of tackling climate change, discussion of climate security has been almost nonexistent among Japanese governmental officials, politicians, and academics. Our aim was to trace discourses related to climate security in Japan to determine why so little exists in Japan and whether or not such discourse could suggest new areas for consideration to more comprehensively respond to the climate change problem.
Because of different interpretations and uses of the term "climate security" in the existing literature, we first categorized existing approaches to climate security into four types and used this categorization to examine Japan's discourse from these perspectives (Table 1). Two of the approaches, namely "long-term irreversible planetary changes" and "short-term abrupt risks to individuals", had been considered in Japan previously but without specific reference to the term climate security. The other two, "cause of conflict and violence" and "impacts to military and defense organizations", however, had not been used and need to be included in discussions of climate change in Japan.
Some of the topics not discussed in Japan include indirect economic losses of Japanese industries via supply chains, loss of Japan's exclusive economic zone due to sea-level rise, and the potential inflow of refugees resulting from extreme weather patterns outside of Japan.
###
Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.
"discourse" - Google News
October 01, 2020 at 11:02AM
https://ift.tt/34hHKcw
The development of climate security discourse in Japan - EurekAlert
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
'Better to call it a discourse:' Locals react to first presidential debate - KOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA (KOTA) - Tuesday night’s presidential debate received mixed reviews
“What we see for a presidential debate or even a Congressional debate, is almost never anything that looks like what a high school debater once knew and loved," said Mark Vargo, former Stevens High School debate coach. "We call it a debate when perhaps it would be better to call it a discourse.”
Vargo said presidential debates are very different from the traditional debate form.
“It’s confrontational but it also isn’t nearly as rigorous," said Vargo. "In a collegiate or especially a high school debate, we absolutely expect people to be working off of evidence and facts and to argue about what those facts mean, instead and in a presidential debate, we mostly have people talking about opinion.”
Some people felt Tuesday night’s debate went well,
“I think that’s what the American people wanted to hear; cut through it, interrupt if you can and that’s what he did and I think that served him well and Republicans well," said Jeff Holbrook, Pennington County GOP Chairperson.
Others did not.
“Well I watched the entire debate and I really don’t think you can call it a debate, I feel like it was more of a verbal accosting from Trump all through that entire evening and the only real credible content that I received came from Joe Biden," said Pam Cole, South Dakota Democratic Party Executive Director.
Wherever you fall on the political spectrum, Vargo says moving to a more traditional debate form could ease some of the contention.
“Instead of appealing to a variety of emotional triggers and a variety of buzzwords, that those debates really did come back to what you believe and work backward from that to what the facts are that support it," said Vargo. "And that’s something that is absolutely part of every single high school and collegiate debate that is almost always completely lacking in a presidential debate.”
Tuesday night’s debate was the first of three. The other two will happen on October 15th and 22nd.
Copyright 2020 KOTA. All rights reserved.
"discourse" - Google News
October 01, 2020 at 07:00AM
https://ift.tt/2Srd9E9
'Better to call it a discourse:' Locals react to first presidential debate - KOTA
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
L3 plans to train local elected leaders, promote civil discourse - BizWest
A leadership program designed to prepare people for service as local elected officials and to encourage civil discourse has begun in Northern Colorado.
Called L3 — Leveraging Local Leaders — the program is a collaboration between BizWest and the facilitators of L3, Leah Johnson and Tom Lucero.
The nonpartisan program will integrate leadership development, action-based candidate training and comprehensive policy education to create a group of leaders ready to run for office and encourage civil discourse to find solutions to Northern Colorado’s challenges.
L3 seeks to recruit a diverse group of leaders from the region, provide them training and mentorship, educate them on the top public-policy issues and prepare them to run for local office.
“This is an exciting endeavor for BizWest,” said Jeff Nuttall, publisher. “While there are many leadership programs in Northern Colorado, there is not one that focuses on training people to run for office and encouraging folks once they are there to promote civil discourse and solutions. We have to seek and train the leaders we want, and now more than ever, ensuring those leaders have the tools necessary to get there and be effective is critical.”
The program will equip participants with tools and skills to run winning campaigns, provide information on business issues affecting the region, cultivate collaboration to foster new ideas and open-minded public policy that can bridge partisan divides to advance pro-business policies, and eliminate barriers to entry that inhibit participation from business leaders.
“Having been a part of the political system virtually my whole career working on the federal, state and local levels, I cannot stress enough how much the local level matters. I want to invest and focus my time on where we can make the most impact in building bridges and finding solutions,” said co-founder Leah Johnson.
“Training pragmatic, solution-oriented people to serve their local communities is the best way I can think of,” she said. “We have to do better, and I believe we can.”
“Finding and recruiting candidates who understand the long-term economic vitality in Northern Colorado is critically important and should be a top priority for everyone,” co-founder Tom Lucero said. “We want leaders who have a 50-year vision for our region and who understand our interconnected economy.”
Johnson and Lucero have both been elected officials from different political orientations. They say that they subscribe to the Tip O’Neill/Ronald Reagan school of politics, that “you can disagree like heck and still be friends.”
Information and registration information can be found at the L3 website.
Applicants for the program need to have:
- Willingness to work across the aisle to develop solutions to the region’s most pressing public policy issues.
- Commitment to creating and advancing pro-business policies that elevate the economic vitality of Northern Colorado.
- Evidence of life experience and leadership skills within their community as a volunteer and/or working professional .
- Desire to acquire knowledge of a variety of industries and a willingness to learn about the issues critical to the region.
- Dedicated to meeting the time requirements of the program and ability to fully engage in the entirety of the program.
- Motivated to engage in vibrant and constructive discourse about issues important to the region’s future.
Applications open Oct. 1 and will remain open until Nov. 20. Applicants will be interviewed; classes begin in January.
"discourse" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 08:10PM
https://ift.tt/3iiatmD
L3 plans to train local elected leaders, promote civil discourse - BizWest
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
Special Q and A - Obstacle Discourse with Davis and Chace - Obstacle Racing Media
Obstacle Discourse with Davis and Chace – A weekly news show with Josh Chace and Matt B. Davis discussing items of the week for Spartan Race, Tough Mudder, and all other OCR related news.
This week’s topics: Your questions!
Show Notes:
Davis and Chace theme music composed by Charmian Lee!
Listen using the player below or the link at the top of this page.
Matt B. Davis
Latest posts by Matt B. Davis (see all)
"discourse" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 08:37PM
https://ift.tt/3n6oh79
Special Q and A - Obstacle Discourse with Davis and Chace - Obstacle Racing Media
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
Tuesday, September 29, 2020
Join the Opinion team for a chat with Mark Kelly - Arizona Daily Star
[unable to retrieve full-text content]
Join the Opinion team for a chat with Mark Kelly Arizona Daily Star"Opinion" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 04:00AM
https://ift.tt/33caog0
Join the Opinion team for a chat with Mark Kelly - Arizona Daily Star
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
How to have conversations with people who have a different opinion than you - WISHTV.com
There is no shortage of topics that bring strong opinions, especially as we get closer to the Presidential election, continue to deal with COVID-19, and navigate working and learning from home. With strong opinions can come difficult conversations.
Lisa Mitchell, Communications Expert & Founder of Power Body Language, shares a few tips to navigating conversations with people who have different opinions than you.
1. Assume Good Intentions
It’s OK that people have strong opinions. It’s OK that their opinion may be different than yours. It doesn’t mean that they are incapable or unwilling to engage in meaningful dialogue so enter into those interactions assuming you both have good intentions for productive conversation. Most people, at their core, really just want to feel seen, heard, and valued.
2. Different Doesn’t Have To Mean Bad
Conversations, by nature, are meant for sharing information and data points. They can drive you towards a common goal or at the least, towards a shared understanding. Sometimes you may find yourself posted up on the polar opposite side of another person’s outlook and that doesn’t mean that either of are wrong or bad, it can just mean that you both are firmly rooted in your beliefs.
There doesn’t have to be a winner and loser, there can just be genuine listening, thoughtful consideration, and respect of each other throughout the interaction.
3. Show appreciation for the person even if you disagree with their opinion or viewpoint.
Sometimes, if the topic is heated enough, it’s necessary to challenge yourself to separate your feelings for the person from your feelings about their opinion of a particular topic. It can be as simple as saying something like, “I don’t think we are going to find common ground on this topic but I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.”
You don’t have to fight every battle on differing opinions and you don’t have to disrespect or discount the person offering the differing opinion when you can’t find common ground.
Visit www.powerbodylanguage.com or connect on Instagram at @lisamitchellindy.
"Opinion" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 12:42AM
https://ift.tt/30hThrl
How to have conversations with people who have a different opinion than you - WISHTV.com
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Trump's Reported Tax Records Spark More Stimulus Discourse - PopCulture.com
Congress can keep their stimulus check... just let Americans pay $750 in taxes like Trump.
— Cleavon MD (@Cleavon_MD) September 28, 2020
prevnextBeyond the $750, let’s not skip over that Trump didn’t pay taxes for ten years straight. None of this is shocking, but it’s infuriating to constantly see that crowd scoff about handouts/stimulus checks, when they are only able to amass their wealth from...shortcuts and handouts.
— đžđŸL E AđžđŸ (@_MissLeandra) September 27, 2020
Trump figured the 1200 dollar stimulus was good enough because it would cover his taxes owed for two whole years.
— Myster Jackson (@Sin_Say_TJ) September 29, 2020
prevnextThose who have lost their jobs and filed for unemployment pay more taxes than Trump. The same people the @SenateGOP and @senatemajldr screwed out of UI extension and a $1200 stimulus check. Vote THEM ALL OUT! #TaxFraudTrump
— Monica Fraker (@FrakerMonica) September 27, 2020
My college student son who works independent contractor gigs to help support and put himself through college (and didn’t get anything in stimulus $ or unemployment when his work dried up this year because we claim him) paid more taxes than trump did in ‘16 and ‘17. https://t.co/XHqlVg3HQf
— Susan Vollenweider (@EssephVee) September 28, 2020
prevnextTrump paid less in taxes for two years than the $1200 we got for corona. That’s how you know he doesn’t give a fuck about America; he contributed less than the bullshit insultingly low stimulus checks they cut us while stuffing their own pockets
— Shayne Valencia (@ShayneDoesTweet) September 28, 2020
Someone check my math...but if Trump had paid all his taxes like he should’ve, I think every American could’ve gotten a $1,000,000 stimulus check.
— Jess Bost, RICP (@lady__bost) September 28, 2020
prevnextI can’t believe Trump received a tax refund of $72.9 million dollars. Yet we dont have money for universal healthcare, rent support during a pandemic, stimulus checks, etc... And Trump is just one person. Imagine how much more money the U.S. is handing out to other wealthy folks.
— Jimenez (@cooljays1) September 27, 2020
Congress can keep their stimulus check... just let Americans pay $750 in taxes like Trump.
— Cleavon MD (@Cleavon_MD) September 28, 2020
prevnextThis is disgusting. Millions of Americans are suffering from job lost and struggling to stay afloat but this Mofo pays $750 in taxes. Republicans couldn't even save Americans by giving them another stimulus but have no problem with Trump paying just $750 in taxes.
— Keith (@keith72504) September 27, 2020
FRAUDS!
I think when Trump sent us that stimulus he was kinda like “Ok well let’s send them enough to pay their taxes and like $500 more for a takeout meal”.
— 35 days until election. (@Maire_from_NJ) September 28, 2020
prevTrump thought a one-time $1200 stimulus cheque was more than enough cause that’s more than what he has paid in taxes.
— Kyle Allen (@LiberalCanuck) September 27, 2020
"discourse" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 03:29AM
https://ift.tt/3l4mWfD
Trump's Reported Tax Records Spark More Stimulus Discourse - PopCulture.com
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
Opinion: Is Putin's war in Syria against America a miscalculation? - DW (English)
When Putin sent troops to Syria five years ago, he caught the US napping. But the Middle East is changing fast, and what looked like a success strategy may turn out to be a failure, writes Konstantin Eggert.
At the end of September 2015, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and its allies, the Lebanese Hezbollah fighters, were on their last legs trying to prop up the Assad regime and its forces, which were fighting an increasingly losing battle against Islamists of all stripes, supported by various regional players — Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar — plus the formations of Syrian Kurds. The Kremlin gave Assad and the Iranians what they were sorely lacking — massive air cover. The Russian pilots were soon followed by marines, military advisers, and mercenaries from the so-called Wagner private military company.
Today, it doesn't seem like anyone can dislodge Assad. Vladimir Putin has expanded and modernized Soviet-era Russian naval stations in the Mediterranean towns of Latakia and Tartus, turning them into bases. Though for Russia, which was not, is not and will not be a global naval power, this is probably not the most important acquisition. It is not entirely clear what benefits the Russian regime gained from the exploitation of Syria's natural resources, but the Wagner group's protection allegedly extends to natural resources and oil refineries, which speaks volumes.
Putin's anti-US foreign policy
However, the main reason for the Kremlin's involvement in Syria has been the same as always — to continue a global pushback against the United States that Putin launched with his belligerent 2007 speech at the Munich Security Conference. The Russian elite's recurring nightmare is that one day the US, with its missionary zeal to democratize the world (somewhat weakened by the disengagement policies, first of Barack Obama and later Donald Trump), is still seen as the main threat by the Kremlin. Keeping the US at bay from the post-Soviet space and supporting anti-Western regimes around the globe are the mainstays of what passes for Russian foreign and security policy under Putin.
Read more: Opinion: Putin's power games may get out of hand
DW columnist Konstantin Eggert
In this respect Syria in 2015 is the continuation of Georgia in 2008, Ukraine in 2014, Montenegro in 2016 (where Moscow tried to organize a coup d'etat to prevent the country from joining NATO) and Venezuela in 2019 (where the Kremlin is firmly backing Nicolas Maduro). Belarus in 2020 where the Kremlin has sided with President Alexander Lukashenko against his own people is now in the same category. Putin takes his role as defender of dictatorships around the world very seriously. In his opinion, this makes the US respect, if not fear him.
What has Russia gained?
But for Russia's long-term national interests, securing Assad's power is a dubious gain, if a gain at all. Moscow is now firmly tied to the fate of the Syrian regime and, even more precariously, of Assad's Iranian patrons. This is happening in an era of dramatic changes in the region. The normalization of Israel's relations with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, carried out with Washington's mediation, marks a historical shift in regional politics. This is an extremely unpleasant surprise not only for the mullahs in Tehran, but also for the Kremlin. Premature belief in the decline of American influence in the Middle East and the inevitability of Iranian hegemony has played a bad trick on both.
Read more: Opinion: Donald Trump's tricky Syria 'gift' to Vladimir Putin
If Sudan, Oman and eventually Saudi Arabia follow the example of the UAE and Bahrain, the Iranian regime will face tough times — even it's collapse could be on the cards soon. Without support from Tehran, Assad will be very vulnerable. Moreover, in such circumstances his desire to reach out to Washington and Riyadh may then turn out to be irresistible. Russia cannot prevent this in any way, and its military presence in Syria will easily become a bargaining chip in Assad's political games.
Putin's strategic shortsightedness has also manifested itself in relations with another regional player — Turkey. The informal understanding on Syria that he reached in 2015-2016 with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been severely undermined. Five years ago, the Kremlin thought it was "chipping away" at NATO's southern flank by wooing Ankara. Today, however, Erdogan finances part of the anti-Assad forces in Syria, has joined the fight against the Kremlin's client Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar in Libya, and now also supports Azerbaijan in its military operations against Armenia — one of Moscow's most reliable and closest allies.
Read more: Opinion: Vladimir Putin rekindles Recep Tayyip Erdogan's lost love for NATO
Five years since the first Russia MiGs appeared in the skies over Syria, the answer to the question "What did Putin's war give the Russians?" is simple — "Nothing." The people feel it and increasingly want the Kremlin to withdraw. Putin's personal prestige has turned out to be different from Russia's national interests. Those who come after him will have to redefine them.
"Opinion" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 02:47AM
https://ift.tt/2GgDxxw
Opinion: Is Putin's war in Syria against America a miscalculation? - DW (English)
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
How Producer Todd Lieberman’s Desire For Political Discourse Beyond Hollywood Consensus Zone Led To Local Cleveland Newspapers – Guest Column - Deadline
Editor’s note: Todd Lieberman, who with David Hoberman co-owns Mandeville Films and Television, has been a prolific producer of films from Beauty and the Beast to The Aeronauts, Wonder, Stronger, The Fighter, The Muppets and The Proposal. Like most in Hollywood, he spends time in the pandemic prepping projects for the cautious rebound in production starts, and discussing presidential politics — sometimes in equal measure. Here he describes how this prompted him to reach back to his Cleveland hometown in search of real discussion about the high stakes of the upcoming election. Since most in the Hollywood community came here from elsewhere, it sounds like a pretty effective way to engage in some real dialogue that isn’t about preaching to the converted on social media.
Several months ago a friend was complaining to me about the state of politics and wondering how we got here — he couldn’t believe that the system allowed for us to get to a place where the division in the country seems insurmountable, and the President himself is the one fanning the flames of that division. He confided that depression was creeping in because of it all, and felt the only answer for him (and the country) was a change in leadership at the top. I asked him what he planned to do about it. “I’m not really a protester,” was his response. That was a lightbulb moment for me, not because I was judging him, but because I was him.
When thinking about a desired change we have a few options. We can let whatever anger and dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs slowly eat away at us. We can ignore it completely and live inside our own safe bubble where the realities of the world don’t exist. Or, we can do something. Historically I have been the “living in a bubble” guy — believing that the system works and desperately clinging to a positive attitude. Sure, I donate to the campaigns I like and participate in organizations I feel have value politically, but I have generally been uncomfortable discussing my views out loud. I welcome a good debate, but absolutely thrive more in peace than discord. If my eyes have been wedged open to anything this year, it’s that the system, although it doesn’t always work, does allow for us to try and make it work better. And within that system we all have the right and, in many cases, the obligation to use our voices.
But if you do that in Hollywood, you will mostly be greeted with a head-nod in the affirmative. While using my voice for political reasons is not innately comfortable for me, that discussion was pushing me toward the uncomfortable. And if I was going to take that step, I was going to do it with people who may feel differently than I do. I wanted real discussion. I toyed with a ton of ideas, spoke to some confidants, and ultimately decided to reach out to my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio, and make a plea directly to my city, asking them to consider my point of view on the election, and most importantly to vote. With that, I took out full-page ads in the local papers [click to enlarge].
Much of what followed was not surprising: messages of support for voicing what many are feeling (family, friends and strangers); messages of pure hate (all strangers…and maybe some bots because I actually didn’t think humans could be that mean!); and a handful of people sending polite responses without saying much (mostly family who likely disagree with my argument). One family friend actually decided to write a letter to the editor to debate my points in print — that one made me smile.
In all the cacophony of responses it might have been easy to lose the substance. But the most surprising part of all were the messages from people who really wanted to connect. People who truly wanted to know why I feel what I do, and to understand why I am so staunch in my beliefs. I was stunned by how many individuals are so fed up with the system and dislike both candidates that they planned on sitting out the election in protest. They want to do the right thing, but are so overwhelmed with information that they’ve been rendered inert.
Engaging with these people was the most rewarding part of it all. These weren’t anonymous trolling tweets, or posts with no accountability or repercussions; these were real people who wanted to connect, understand and share points of view. And while many of them don’t share my views politically, we were able to find common ground in some other areas (like Cleveland sports!) as we discussed uncomfortable topics in a respectful way. Yes, talking to all these people was awkward, frustrating, time consuming and exhausting; but it was also enlightening and exhilarating.
So when [Deadline co-editor in chief] Mike [Fleming Jr] asked me to write a guest column, my first impulse was that I had already stepped way outside my comfort zone for my hometown, and I wasn’t prepared to do that here. But the passing of RBG reminded me of the urgency of this moment. And I know many of you could use your voice as I did, and reach out to your own hometowns to have those uncomfortable conversations as well. Of the countless people I spoke to, texted with and emailed, half of those who were undecided or planning on sitting out the election ended the conversation by saying they were going to do more research and get back to me. One quarter of the people I spoke with ultimately told me they now intend to vote. The margin between victory and defeat in many states will be unfathomably small. Every single vote matters. And this experience illustrated that while many of us sit with the strength of our convictions, there are still many out there who crave guidance and counterpoints to the dizzying information they are being fed. I recently watched The Social Dilemma on Netflix (a must-watch IMO), and it put into words and images what we all intuitively know — that the amount of disinformation in the world is beyond comprehension, and the ways it metastasizes are petrifying. The disinformation cycles only seem to be thriving more within the isolationist environment we’ve all been living in for the past six months.
So what can we do about it all, and why did I write this column? Lightbulb moment #2. My experience shone the brightest of lights on a heartening truth: there are undecided voters out there. There are people craving the clarity some of us already have in our minds. But it is only human connection that can cut through the haze. And that puts the onus — and, in these concerning stages of our democracy, the obligation — on us to seek them out. As I said in my hometown papers, I believe that what makes our country great is that we can have those discussions while remaining friends and neighbors. I found this to be true, and my hunch is that you will too. Character counts, and civility still exists. You have the power to initiate this dialogue. And having that dialogue with people you grew up with outside of Hollywood is worth the effort. So, with only a few weeks left to determine our future, I urge each of you to use this power, and find comfort in being uncomfortable.
"discourse" - Google News
September 30, 2020 at 01:08AM
https://ift.tt/3ifLOiC
How Producer Todd Lieberman’s Desire For Political Discourse Beyond Hollywood Consensus Zone Led To Local Cleveland Newspapers – Guest Column - Deadline
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
Opinion | Why America Ignored Its Coronavirus Response Plan - The New York Times
A year ago, the United States was regarded as the country best prepared for a pandemic. Our government had spent nearly two decades strategizing for a doomsday scenario. So what went wrong?
How is it that America, which wrote the global playbook for pandemic response, accounts for just 4 percent of the world’s population yet more than 20 percent of the world’s coronavirus deaths?
One of the most important functions of journalism is to provide accountability, so in the video above, we dive deep into an exploration of what went wrong and when, and who’s to blame and why.
Johnny Harris (@johnnywharris) is a video producer.
Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) is an columnist for Opinion.
Adam Ellick (@aellick) is the executive producer of Opinion Video.
"Opinion" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 10:16PM
https://ift.tt/2GeSvEe
Opinion | Why America Ignored Its Coronavirus Response Plan - The New York Times
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Opinion: Don’t believe what Uber and Lyft claim about Prop. 22 - The Mercury News
By now, you’ve probably seen some slick ads for Proposition 22, paid for by Uber, Lyft and other app-based companies. They hope you have because they’re spending $181 million to tell you a story.
These so-called gig companies now are waging the most expensive propaganda campaign in state history. They’ve outspent all other special interests that came before them: Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Tobacco.
They know they must spend big, because it costs a lot to confuse the public about the facts.
Here’s the truth about Prop. 22: It is an initiative that would exempt these gig companies from having to comply with the fundamental employment laws that apply to all other industries — things such as minimum wage, overtime, workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, access to safety equipment and more.
In the case of those TV ads, the fiction is that all drivers do the work as part-time gigs. The ads cite misleading research based on company-provided data to assert that “80 percent of drivers work only a few hours a week” and that drivers support being independent contractors “by a 4-1 margin.”
Independent studies from both ends of the state tell an entirely different story. UC Santa Cruz research concluded: “On-demand ride-hailing and delivery work in San Francisco is performed predominantly by people for whom it is close to full-time work.”
A survey of Southern California drivers by UCLA found that “almost half of the drivers are driving 35 hours or more” a week. In addition, 55 percent said they would prefer to earn a set hourly wage after expenses.
As a ride-hail driver for the last six years, I can attest that Uber and Lyft are desperate to get more work out of existing drivers by offering bonuses to drive more hours. When you try to chase those bonuses, you can fall behind. One year I had five flat tires. I’ve replaced cracked windshields. All those expenses came out of my pocket. My Toyota Prius finally died recently, after 275,000 miles.
Prop. 22 includes promises to improve conditions for drivers, but they are empty promises.
It says drivers will be paid 120 percent of the minimum wage — but they would be paid only for “engaged hours” and never for the time they spend disinfecting cars between rides, waiting for the next call or driving back from some remote drop-off location. The net effect would be a sub-minimum wage.
It says drivers will be paid 30 cents a mile for expenses, but that doesn’t come close to covering the actual cost. In fact, it’s only about half of what the IRS allows truly independent contractors to claim.
It says drivers will receive insurance coverage in the event of an on-the-job injury. But the provision caps the amount of medical expenses and limits the period for which drivers could receive disability pay. There are no such restrictions for employees covered by workers’ compensation insurance.
Drivers should be classified as employees because the facts show that is exactly what they are. Courts in California have consistently held that to be the case.
It is drivers like me who will lose if Prop. 22 passes. We’re grateful for the support we’ve received from labor unions that can be counted on to speak out against exploitation. But we are mismatched against an industry that will spend whatever it takes to preserve a system that impoverishes drivers.
There’s a better way. They could follow the law. Please make them do that. Vote No on Prop. 22.
Edan Alva of Alameda has been driving for Lyft for six years.
"Opinion" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 08:10PM
https://ift.tt/36irv1K
Opinion: Don’t believe what Uber and Lyft claim about Prop. 22 - The Mercury News
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
The Case for Accepting Defeat on Roe - The New York Times
In “Unpregnant,” the HBO bildungsroman released this month, the plot revolves around a 17-year-old heroine who travels from Missouri to Albuquerque — a road trip of 1,000 miles — because that’s the nearest place she can get an abortion without parental consent. Watching it made me recall a conversation with a feminist friend, who shocked the hell out of me last year by saying that progressives were too focused on protecting Roe v. Wade.
Why? The argument is that we currently have the worst of both worlds. We’ve basically lost the abortion fight: If Roe is overturned, access to abortion will depend on where you live — but access to abortion already depends on where you live. At the same time, we have people voting for Trump because he’ll appoint justices who will overturn Roe. Maybe it is time to face the fact that abortion access will be fought for in legislatures, not courts.
I was shocked, but I could see the logic. It’s true that abortion access is already abysmal. The stressful road trip in “Unpregnant” is actually in some ways a best-case scenario; many women seeking abortions aren’t suburban teenagers without economic pressures or family responsibilities. Nearly 60 percent have already had one child and nearly half live below the poverty level; some fear they’ll be fired if they take time off, particularly if they need to make two trips, as they must in the 26 states with mandatory waiting periods.
The argument that the left has already lost the abortion fight reflects the fact that there’s no abortion clinic in 90 percent of American counties. This is the result of the highly successful death-by-a-thousand-cuts anti-abortion strategy, which has piled on restriction after restriction to make abortion inaccessible to as many American women as possible.
Chief Justice Roberts’s concurring opinion this summer in June Medical Services v. Russo — the one that mattered — was hailed as a surprise victory for abortion rights, but not by me. Justice Roberts refused to uphold Louisiana restrictions virtually identical to those the court struck down as unconstitutional just four years earlier, but clearly stated that his reluctance was because of his respect for precedent. Anyone with their eyes open could see the justice signaling to abortion opponents to continue the process of eroding Roe v. Wade’s nigh-absolute protection of access to abortion during the first trimester by inventing new types of restrictions, which they have been remarkably creative in doing.
If Judge Amy Coney Barrett becomes the next Supreme Court justice, Justice Roberts’s vote will be irrelevant, anyway. And if things already looked pretty grim, now they look much worse: Up to 21 states have passed laws banning or limiting abortions in ways that are currently unconstitutional. Many will go into effect immediately if Roe is fully overturned.
So what should we do now? Often forgotten is that R.B.G. herself had decided that Roe was a mistake. In 1992, she gave a lecture musing that the country might be better off if the Supreme Court had written a narrower decision and opened up a “dialogue” with state legislatures, which were trending “toward liberalization of abortion statutes” (to quote the Roe court). Roe “halted a political process that was moving in a reform direction and thereby, I believe, prolonged divisiveness and deferred stable settlement of the issue,” Justice Ginsburg argued. In the process, “a well-organized and vocal right-to-life movement rallied and succeeded, for a considerable time, in turning the legislative tide in the opposite direction.”
What Ginsburg called Roe’s “divisiveness” was instrumental in the rise of the American right, which was flailing until Phyllis Schlafly discovered the galvanizing force of opposition to abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment. Schlafly wrote the culture wars playbook that created the odd coupling of the country-club business elite with evangelicals and blue-collar whites. In exchange for business-friendly policies like tax cuts and deregulation, Republicans now allow these groups to control their agenda on religion and abortion. It’s hard to remember now but this was not inevitable: abortion was not always seen as the partisan issue it is today, nor did evangelicals uniformly oppose abortion.
Whether or not R.B.G.’s assessment of Roe was correct, the best tribute we can pay to her is to do what she suggests: open up the kind of dialogue that occurred in Ireland, where young people knocked on grannies’ doors and persuaded them to vote to legalize abortion, which — much to the distress of the Catholic Church — they did. (At the same time, activists galvanized to ensure that, in the absence of a referendum, women throughout the country would have access to and knowledge about medication abortions.)
I don’t want Roe to be overturned, but if that happens, it could bring political opportunity. The emotional heat that surrounds abortion as an issue manages to obscure that the attitudes driving opposition to abortion actually reveal some surprising common ground with progressives on economic issues.
Non-elites often see elites’ obsession with abortion rights as evidence that they are slaves to ambition who don’t see that “family comes first.” But look closer and one can find embedded in this ideology a powerful critique of capitalism: “I think we’ve accepted abortion because we’re a very materialistic society and there is less time for caring,” as one woman told the anthropologist Faye Ginsburg. The feminist historian Linda Gordon agreed: Those against abortion “fear a completely individualized society with all services based on cash nexus relationships, without the influence of nurturing women counteracting the completely egoistic principles of the economy.”
I’m still reluctant to embrace the “overrule and move on” strategy, but moving on may be our only choice. And if abortion stops playing such a role in presidential elections, then Democrats may fare better with the 19 percent of Trump voters who have bipartisan voting habits and warm feelings toward minorities; we know 83 percent of them think the economy is rigged in favor of the rich and 68 percent favor raising taxes on the rich.
Once their presidential vote is not driven by Supreme Court appointments, how many might decide to vote on economic issues? And what greater tribute could there be to R.B.G. than both a legislative restoration of abortion rights, and a new Democratic Party that can win — not just by a hair but by a landslide?
Joan C. Williams is a professor of law at the University of California, Hastings, College of the Law and the author of “White Working Class.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
"Opinion" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 04:00PM
https://ift.tt/3cI56vD
The Case for Accepting Defeat on Roe - The New York Times
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
On abortion, Amy Coney Barrett doesn't speak for American Christians - CNN
"Opinion" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 07:56AM
https://ift.tt/36gglu8
On abortion, Amy Coney Barrett doesn't speak for American Christians - CNN
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Monday, September 28, 2020
Community Platforms Market Future Scope including key players Answerbase, Higher, Discourse - The Daily Chronicle
A new Research Report published by JCMR under the title Global Community Platforms Market (COVID 19 Version) can grow into the world’s most important market which has played an important role in making progressive impacts on the global economy. The Global Community Platforms Market Report presents a dynamic vision for concluding and researching market size, market hope and competitive environment. The study is derived from primary and secondary Research and consists of qualitative & Quality analysis. The main company in this Research is Answerbase, Higher, Discourse, Axero Solutions, Ginger, Centercode, Influitive, Enterprise Hive, DNN Software, Igloo Software, Magentrix Corporation, Mzinga, inSided, Salesforce, Midwest Tape, Lithium(Jive-x), Intranet Connections, OnSemble, Muut, Khoros, Small World Labs, West Corporation, Vanilla, Telligent Systems, Tribe ,
Get Free Sample Report PDF @: jcmarketresearch.com/report-details/1128355/sample
Data sourcing technique we follow: We Used Some Premium Sites to gather data.
| Community Platforms Perception | Primary Research 80% (interviews) | Secondary Research (20%) |
| OEMs | Data Exchange | |
| Supply side(production) | Competitors | Economical & demographic data |
| Raw materials Suppliers & Producer | Company Reports,& publication | |
| Specialist interview | Government data/publication | |
| Independent investigation | ||
| Middleman side(sales) | Distributors | Product Source |
| traders | Sales Data | |
| wholesalers | Custom Group | |
| Product comparison | ||
| Demand side(consumption) | END-users/Custom Surveys/interviews | Custom data |
| Consumer Surveys | Industry Data analysis | |
| Shopping | Case Studies | |
| Reference Customers |
Get Up to 40 % Discount on Enterprise Copy @ jcmarketresearch.com/report-details/1128355/discount
Note: Regional Breakdown & Sectional purchase Available We provide Pie Charts Best Customize Reports as per Requirements.
Research Methodology:
Primary Research:
We interviewed various key sources of supply and demand in the course of the Primary Research to obtain qualitative and quantitative information related to this report. Main sources of supply include key industry members, subject matter experts from key companies, and consultants from many major firms and organizations working on the Global Community Platforms Market.
Secondary Research:
Secondary Research was performed to obtain crucial information about the business supply chain, the company currency system, global corporate pools, and sector segmentation, with the lowest point, regional area, and technology-oriented perspectives. Secondary data were collected and analyzed to reach the total size of the market which the first survey confirmed.
Furthermore, the years considered for the study are as follows:
Historical year – 2013-2018
Base year – 2019
Forecast period** – 2020 to 2029
Some Key Research Questions & answers:
What Is impact of COVID 19 on Global Community Platforms Market?
Before COVID 19 Global Community Platforms Market Size Was XXX Million $ & After COVID 19 Excepted to Grow at a X% & XXX Million $.
Who are the Top Key Players in the Global Community Platforms Market and what are their priorities, strategies & developments?
Lists of Competitors in Research is: Answerbase, Higher, Discourse, Axero Solutions, Ginger, Centercode, Influitive, Enterprise Hive, DNN Software, Igloo Software, Magentrix Corporation, Mzinga, inSided, Salesforce, Midwest Tape, Lithium(Jive-x), Intranet Connections, OnSemble, Muut, Khoros, Small World Labs, West Corporation, Vanilla, Telligent Systems, Tribe ,
What are the Types & Applications of the Global Community Platforms Market?
Application’s cover in these Reports Is: SME (Small and Medium Enterprises), Large Enterprise,
Types Cover in this Research: On-Premise, Cloud-Based, SaaS,
Note: Please Share Your Budget on Call/Mail We will try to Reach your [email protected] Phone: +1 (925) 478-7203 / Email: [email protected]
Enquiry for Segment [email protected] jcmarketresearch.com/report-details/1128355/enquiry
All percent shares, breaks, and classifications were determined using the secondary sources and confirmed through the primary sources. All parameters that may affect the market covered in this study have been extensively reviewed, researched through basic investigations, and analyzed to obtain final quantitative and qualitative data. This has been the study of key quantitative and qualitative insights through interviews with industry experts, including CEOs, vice presidents, directors and marketing executives, as well as annual and financial reports from top market participants.
Table of Content:
1 Report Summary
1.1 Research Scope
1.2 Key Market Segments
1.3 Target Player
1.4 Market Analysis by Type On-Premise, Cloud-Based, SaaS,
1.5 Market by Application SME (Small and Medium Enterprises), Large Enterprise,
1.6 Learning Objectives
1.7 years considered
Place Order to Quick Buy Report @ jcmarketresearch.com/checkout/1128355
2 Global Growth Trends
2.1 Global Global Community Platforms Market Size
2.2 Trends of Global Community Platforms Market Growth by Region
2.3 Corporate trends
3 Global Community Platforms Market shares by key players
3.1 Global Community Platforms Market Size by Manufacturer
3.2 Global Community Platforms Market Key players Provide headquarters and local
3.3 Major Players Products / Solutions / Services
3.4 Enter the Barriers in the Global Community Platforms Market
3.5 Mergers, acquisitions and expansion plans
Continue……………………………………..
About Author:
JCMR global research and market intelligence consulting organization is uniquely positioned to not only identify growth opportunities but to also empower and inspire you to create visionary growth strategies for futures, enabled by our extraordinary depth and breadth of thought leadership, research, tools, events and experience that assist you for making goals into a reality. Our understanding of the interplay between industry convergence, Mega Trends, technologies and market trends provides our clients with new business models and expansion opportunities. We are focused on identifying the “Accurate Forecast” in every industry we cover so our clients can reap the benefits of being early market entrants and can accomplish their “Goals & Objectives”.
Contact Us:
JCMARKETRESEARCH
Mark Baxter (Head of Business Development)
Phone: +1 (925) 478-7203
Email: [email protected]
Connect with us at – LinkedIn
"discourse" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 01:39PM
https://ift.tt/33dkfCd
Community Platforms Market Future Scope including key players Answerbase, Higher, Discourse - The Daily Chronicle
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4
The most important national security question Trump and Biden need to address - CNN
"Opinion" - Google News
September 29, 2020 at 07:18AM
https://ift.tt/2S95iuK
The most important national security question Trump and Biden need to address - CNN
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Postingan Populer
-
Reopening schools is a challenge that is not unique to the US. All over the world shutdowns in spring led to schools being cancelled or...
-
With disturbing regularity, Jews hate on Jews. The most recent example is the jaw-dropping case of Professor David Myers. Last June, the ...
-
Meals on Wheels volunteer Maria Vallejo carries bags of food to her car at the Food Basket in San Jose on March 25. (Randy Vazquez / Bay...
