You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Current Events Thread
No spin is necessary. Mitch was blaming Republicans ignorantly for the stalemate. I simply pointed out that the GOP senate tried to hold a vote on legislation, and it was filibustered by Democrats. More Americans blame Pelosi than Trump. That's not spin. Biden just shot down your court packing fantasy. Is that spin too?
I know you guys struggle to stay consistent, with calling the GOP obstructionist for 8 years and continuing to do so even when the GOP controls 2 parts of government. But mandating minorities be hired on executive boards and hundreds of millions for mismanaged Democratic cities isn't something the American people are behind. Trump wants the $1200 or similar stimulus, he wants more loans to businesses. He ordered (illegally imho) extra pay for unemployment. I'm not a Trump fan, but you two don't get to lie about reality because you can't be bothered to read more than two news articles spoon fed to you a day.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Current Events Thread
There you go, Axl S. All the reasons why indefinite lockdowns are bad from the WHO. Tell me what I got wrong there.
Re: Current Events Thread
There you go, Axl S. All the reasons why indefinite lockdowns are bad from the WHO. Tell me what I got wrong there.
Lol it says page cannot be found...perfect...
Too many people are doing whatever they want and dont give a fuck...there's little other analysis that needs to be done. My only hope is that social darwinism deals with them.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Current Events Thread
I have no idea why they keep deleting articles after publishing. I won't speculate, but luckily I still had it open on a window:
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic loss of human life worldwide and presents an unprecedented challenge to public health, food systems and the world of work. The economic and social disruption caused by the pandemic is devastating: tens of millions of people are at risk of falling into extreme poverty, while the number of undernourished people, currently estimated at nearly 690 million, could increase by up to 132 million by the end of the year.
Millions of enterprises face an existential threat. Nearly half of the world’s 3.3 billion global workforce are at risk of losing their livelihoods. Informal economy workers are particularly vulnerable because the majority lack social protection and access to quality health care and have lost access to productive assets. Without the means to earn an income during lockdowns, many are unable to feed themselves and their families. For most, no income means no food, or, at best, less food and less nutritious food.
The pandemic has been affecting the entire food system and has laid bare its fragility. Border closures, trade restrictions and confinement measures have been preventing farmers from accessing markets, including for buying inputs and selling their produce, and agricultural workers from harvesting crops, thus disrupting domestic and international food supply chains and reducing access to healthy, safe and diverse diets. The pandemic has decimated jobs and placed millions of livelihoods at risk. As breadwinners lose jobs, fall ill and die, the food security and nutrition of millions of women and men are under threat, with those in low-income countries, particularly the most marginalized populations, which include small-scale farmers and indigenous peoples, being hardest hit.
Millions of agricultural workers – waged and self-employed – while feeding the world, regularly face high levels of working poverty, malnutrition and poor health, and suffer from a lack of safety and labour protection as well as other types of abuse. With low and irregular incomes and a lack of social support, many of them are spurred to continue working, often in unsafe conditions, thus exposing themselves and their families to additional risks. Further, when experiencing income losses, they may resort to negative coping strategies, such as distress sale of assets, predatory loans or child labour. Migrant agricultural workers are particularly vulnerable, because they face risks in their transport, working and living conditions and struggle to access support measures put in place by governments. Guaranteeing the safety and health of all agri-food workers – from primary producers to those involved in food processing, transport and retail, including street food vendors – as well as better incomes and protection, will be critical to saving lives and protecting public health, people’s livelihoods and food security.
In the COVID-19 crisis food security, public health, and employment and labour issues, in particular workers’ health and safety, converge. Adhering to workplace safety and health practices and ensuring access to decent work and the protection of labour rights in all industries will be crucial in addressing the human dimension of the crisis. Immediate and purposeful action to save lives and livelihoods should include extending social protection towards universal health coverage and income support for those most affected. These include workers in the informal economy and in poorly protected and low-paid jobs, including youth, older workers, and migrants. Particular attention must be paid to the situation of women, who are over-represented in low-paid jobs and care roles. Different forms of support are key, including cash transfers, child allowances and healthy school meals, shelter and food relief initiatives, support for employment retention and recovery, and financial relief for businesses, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. In designing and implementing such measures it is essential that governments work closely with employers and workers.
Countries dealing with existing humanitarian crises or emergencies are particularly exposed to the effects of COVID-19. Responding swiftly to the pandemic, while ensuring that humanitarian and recovery assistance reaches those most in need, is critical.
Now is the time for global solidarity and support, especially with the most vulnerable in our societies, particularly in the emerging and developing world. Only together can we overcome the intertwined health and social and economic impacts of the pandemic and prevent its escalation into a protracted humanitarian and food security catastrophe, with the potential loss of already achieved development gains.
We must recognize this opportunity to build back better, as noted in the Policy Brief issued by the United Nations Secretary-General. We are committed to pooling our expertise and experience to support countries in their crisis response measures and efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. We need to develop long-term sustainable strategies to address the challenges facing the health and agri-food sectors. Priority should be given to addressing underlying food security and malnutrition challenges, tackling rural poverty, in particular through more and better jobs in the rural economy, extending social protection to all, facilitating safe migration pathways and promoting the formalization of the informal economy.
We must rethink the future of our environment and tackle climate change and environmental degradation with ambition and urgency. Only then can we protect the health, livelihoods, food security and nutrition of all people, and ensure that our ‘new normal’ is a better one.
Re: Current Events Thread
There you go, Axl S. All the reasons why indefinite lockdowns are bad from the WHO. Tell me what I got wrong there.
Think we're just caught up on semantics here. Way you were speaking sounded like your takeaway from what you posted was "the WHO are against lockdowns". My takeaway from reading was "the WHO are against lockdowns as the primary method of control". Two different statements with entirely different emphasis. You came of sounding like you thought WHO were flat out against lockdowns and they should never be used. Your attitude comparing this to the flu, and your derision about face coverings as well gave that vibe.
Anyway no doubt lockdowns cause problems. It's why they should only be used when health services are on the verge of being overwhelmed or the loss of life is is potentially unbearable. Catch is you can't wait till you hit those points, you have to act on them ahead of time.
Also depends on what you mean by "lockdown". My understand of that may be different from yours because places in the rest of the world went further than the UK ever did, and the UK itself at one point went further than some places in the US. Everyone's definition of "lockdown" is different.
For reference at one point here we could only travel within a 5km radius of our homes, go outside once for a maximum of one hour of exercise a day and were to work from home at all times; if your work couldn't operate from home your employer was supposed to put you on a government scheme where 80% of your wages were covered. That was all life was for a while: no seeing anyone, no going anywhere, only allowed out once a day. And this wasn't guidance, the police had the powers here to enforce that - although these weren't massively used. Did anywhere in the US ever go as far as anything like this?
I really hope we avoid ever going back that far but it's the only thing that has been proven over here to get the rate of infection back under control once it is out of control. Hopefully we can use a less extreme measure to flatten it this time. From that base we proved we can run a partially open economy for a long period of time - but that still eventually went south.
Re: Current Events Thread
I don't see Graham losing. All the ad buys have been annoying people, especially during football games. And the vast majority of money coming to his opponent was out of state. I don't think progressives can buy that seat.
The long lines in GA was actually normal as it was the first day and with a Holiday.
And if Dems do manage to get the senate, they still wouldn't have the votes to abolish the filibuster.
Re: Current Events Thread
I think ACB has been good. And she's not supposed to speak on hypotheticals.
"It's improper to pre-judge cases, which come to the court with different facts, different procedural postures, and different relevant (and sometimes competing) precedents. Pre-judging cases means recusing from cases."
Her day will look no better or worse than RGB did.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Current Events Thread
So?
Obama could have had three had RGB retired after she turned 80. Hell, Clarence Thomas could have retired and had Trump pick his preferred replacement, but there's a good chance a Democrat does that.
Exactly. If RBG was worried of her philosophy being retained, she should have retired after her first bout with cancer. She chose to cling on to her seat even after she was becoming derelict in her responsibilities.
We’ll see if Breyer steps down if Biden wins, or if his ego keeps him on the court. I’m all for justices to staying as long as they’re mentally and physically capable. But when you spend half your time in the hospital, it’s time to go.
When Congress imposed term limits on itself, we can discuss the judiciary.
