Political Randomness

[Moliere]

What’s Behind the Jacked-Up Egg Prices and Shortages?

The flu outbreak has killed off more than 48 million chickens in the first half of the year. It contributed to eggs reaching a record high price of $2.57 a dozen in June. Prices are expected to go up again in the fall.

But the flu outbreak isn’t the only factor reducing egg availability and driving up prices. At the start of the year, Proposition 2 in California went into effect. That ballot initiative requires chicken farmers to increase the size of chicken cages so that the hens could move around more. The rules aren’t restricted to California farms, either. Farmers in other states that want to sell their eggs to California also have to comply, a demand that has prompted lawsuits from outside states. So far a federal judge in California has ruled that the states lacked standing to sue on behalf of the farmers within those states.
...
It’s easy to imagine that those who have pushed so hard for this regulation either don’t consume eggs for moral reasons or live comfortable enough lifestyles that they can afford to be more discerning ethical consumers of what they put in their bodies. But obviously the people being most harmed by this price spike are the poor who discover a basic food staple is now consuming more of their limited budgets. The impact of the flu would have resulted in a spike anyway, but at least that’s just temporary.

[Isgrimnur]

I find it ironic humorous that most of the flu vaccine that is produced for humans comes from an egg process.

[malchior]

Really Pakistan? How bad is our intelligence if we don't even know that the leadership of our enemy has been dead for 2 years.

*Assuming he is really dead this time - 'natch!

[hepcat]

In their defense, the Taliban HAD been doing a pretty good "Weekend at Bernies" with the guy for those two years.



They tried to interrogate him during a border crossing at one point. But the guy on his left did a great job of making it look like he was shaking his head yes and no at times. Heck, he even raised his hand and waved at one point. They're only human, for god's sake!

[malchior]

Though it was a little weird he had sunglasses on over his eyepatch...

[Isgrimnur]

Philly Rep indicted

The U.S. attorney in the eastern district of Pennsylvania on Wednesday announced the indictment of Rep. Chaka Fattah Sr., a Democrat whose congressional district includes Philadelphia, along with four other people with connections to his political career and his 2007 mayoral campaign.
...
Of course, it's important to say up-front that the following comes from the federal indictment detailing the case against Fattah and others, as well as published news reports. Fattah, 58, faces 29 charges ranging from bribery and money laundering to falsification of records, and multiple counts of bank fraud. Indicted along with him were Bonnie Bowser, 59, a long-time Fattah aide and chief of staff in Fattah's district office; Karen Nicholas, 57, Fattah's one-time director of constituent services; Herbert Vederman, 69, a lobbyist; and businessman Robert Brand, 69.

[Moliere]

Beijing Chosen to Host 2022 Winter Olympics

The International Olympic Committee on Friday awarded the 2022 Winter Games to Beijing, in a joint bid with Zhangjiakou, a nearby city abutting mountains with ski resorts. Their sole rival was the remote Central Asian city of Almaty, Kazakhstan, and the decision made Beijing the first city to host both winter and summer competitions, following the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
...
According to the Beijing 2022 Bid Book and state media:

Beijing will become the first city in history to host both a Summer and Winter Games
Total budget: $3.9 billion ($1.98 billion for operations, $1.92 billion for infrastructure)
Not included in the budget: A new 108-mile high-speed train line linking Beijing with mountain venues
Number of venues: 12, half recycled from the 2008 Summer Games
Average snow depth at alpine skiing venue in February: 5.3 inches

Let the Chinese bankrupt themselves running these boondoggles.

[ImLawBoy]

Not included in the budget: A new 108-mile high-speed train line linking Beijing with mountain venues

I can totally see excluding that from the budget. It'll practically build itself, I assume.

[GreenGoo]

Not included in the budget: A new 108-mile high-speed train line linking Beijing with mountain venues

I can totally see excluding that from the budget. It'll practically build itself, I assume.

America knows where you can import railway workers, cheap!

[Isgrimnur]

[Isgrimnur]

Oh, and...

In British Columbia, government contractors hired workers from China, known as "coolies". .... In 2006 the Canadian government issued a formal apology to the Chinese population in Canada for their treatment both during and following the construction of the [Canadian Pacific Railway].

[Teggy]

Oh, and...

In British Columbia, government contractors hired workers from China, known as "coolies". .... In 2006 the Canadian government issued a formal apology to the Chinese population in Canada for their treatment both during and following the construction of the [Canadian Pacific Railway].

yeah GG, and your momma's fat too!

[Isgrimnur]

It's all that poutine.

[GreenGoo]

Oh, and...

In British Columbia, government contractors hired workers from China, known as "coolies". .... In 2006 the Canadian government issued a formal apology to the Chinese population in Canada for their treatment both during and following the construction of the [Canadian Pacific Railway].

yeah GG, and your momma's fat too!

No one would have gotten the joke if I'd said Canada.

Well, except Isgrim, I guess.

For the record, that is literally why I said America and not Canada. Know your audience as they say.

[Isgrimnur]

No worries. I just had my interest piqued to see if the Canadian railroads had a similar story.

[Pyperkub]

Was thinking on the way into work today that we should have a tax penalty on CEOs who layoff American workers. Say CEOs who have an income (including stock/options/bonuses/etc.) over 1m/yr in a company of over 500 employees who layoff 5% or more of the workforce.

Let there be a bit of financial incentive to treat employees better.

[Moliere]

Was thinking on the way into work today that we should have a tax penalty on CEOs who layoff American workers. Say CEOs who have an income (including stock/options/bonuses/etc.) over 1m/yr in a company of over 500 employees who layoff 5% or more of the workforce.

Let there be a bit of financial incentive to treat employees better.

Wow, that sounds like a horrible idea. Sometimes companies need to layoff workers as a response to industry and or technological changes. Look at the announcement for oil industry layoffs and the mining industry laying off workers. Are companies never supposed to reduce their workforce? Who are you to decide when BP should layoff workers in response to the drop in oil prices?

[GreenGoo]

Was thinking on the way into work today that we should have a tax penalty on CEOs who layoff American workers. Say CEOs who have an income (including stock/options/bonuses/etc.) over 1m/yr in a company of over 500 employees who layoff 5% or more of the workforce.

Let there be a bit of financial incentive to treat employees better.

Wow, that sounds like a horrible idea. Sometimes companies need to layoff workers as a response to industry and or technological changes. Look at the announcement for oil industry layoffs and the mining industry laying off workers. Are companies never supposed to reduce their workforce? Who are you to decide when BP should layoff workers in response to the drop in oil prices?

They aren't killing the CEO, they are just hitting him in the pocket book. Something they can afford, so it's not like they would suddenly be homeless or eating ramen noodles.

Anyway, I'm thinking it's a bad idea too, just not because the CEO takes it in the checkbook.

Mostly, because free enterprise.

[Pyperkub]

Was thinking on the way into work today that we should have a tax penalty on CEOs who layoff American workers. Say CEOs who have an income (including stock/options/bonuses/etc.) over 1m/yr in a company of over 500 employees who layoff 5% or more of the workforce.

Let there be a bit of financial incentive to treat employees better.

Wow, that sounds like a horrible idea. Sometimes companies need to layoff workers as a response to industry and or technological changes. Look at the announcement for oil industry layoffs and the mining industry laying off workers. Are companies never supposed to reduce their workforce? Who are you to decide when BP should layoff workers in response to the drop in oil prices?

And it's the CEO's responsibility to be prepared for that, why shouldn't he feel some of the pain he inflicts? IMHO, it's a sign of poor management if they aren't prepared.

[AWS260]

Was thinking on the way into work today that we should have a tax penalty on CEOs who layoff American workers. Say CEOs who have an income (including stock/options/bonuses/etc.) over 1m/yr in a company of over 500 employees who layoff 5% or more of the workforce.

Let there be a bit of financial incentive to treat employees better.

Wow, that sounds like a horrible idea. Sometimes companies need to layoff workers as a response to industry and or technological changes. Look at the announcement for oil industry layoffs and the mining industry laying off workers. Are companies never supposed to reduce their workforce? Who are you to decide when BP should layoff workers in response to the drop in oil prices?

And it's the CEO's responsibility to be prepared for that, why shouldn't he feel some of the pain he inflicts? IMHO, it's a sign of poor management if they aren't prepared.

What do you mean by "be prepared"? If a CEO sees troubled waters ahead for her company, she'll take action by, among other things... laying off workers.

[Pyperkub]

And I'm saying that perhaps he needs to shoulder a bit of that load.

FWIW, I'm not talking about some huge burden, just something like making all of the CEO's income that tax year subject to the payroll tax and not just the first 100k.

[Isgrimnur]

Texas Atty Gen indicted:

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been indicted on three charges by a grand jury in Collin County, two people close to the case told NBC 5 on Saturday.
...
The grand jury and two special prosecutors have been investigating whether Paxton committed a securities crime by acting as a broker without being licensed.

Paxton admitted he was not registered and paid a $1,000 civil fine last year. He has said he thought that the fine ended the matter.

[noxiousdog]

And it's the CEO's responsibility to be prepared for that, why shouldn't he feel some of the pain he inflicts? IMHO, it's a sign of poor management if they aren't prepared.

So should the opposite be true? Should they get tax breaks when they hire people?

The practical implication of this would be you'll see less employees and more contractors. And while I agree with you it's a sign of poor management to not foresee some of it coming, many large infrastructure projects are measured in years where price spikes/drops are measured in months. It's just not possible to have a steady state employee level.

[Moliere]

Anarchy in Canada! Government dissolved by Prime Minister trying to become a dictator. Are our OO Canadian members safe?

[LordMortis]

http://robertreich.org/post/125702366950

Don’t confuse this for the public’s typical attraction to candidates posing as political outsiders who’ll clean up the mess, even when they’re really insiders who contributed to the mess.

Amen. Thanx Obama.

It makes me sad that the Tea Party embodied by Trump are the anti establishment right. I'd much rather be on the conservative end of an anti establishment movement but ah well. Bernie's my man for better and worse.

[Moliere]

Since today is a civic holiday in Canada I feel the need to report on even more anarchy from America's Hat. Children are openly defying a cease and desist order from the Mayor about selling worms to fisherman.

[Rip]

The Obama administration has signaled it may intervene next week in a civil lawsuit in which 11 American families won a potential billion-dollar judgment from the Palestinian leadership over a series of bombings and shootings that killed or wounded dozens of U.S. citizens, a move that critics say would find the government siding with terrorists over its own citizens.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08 ... inians-in/

Well, isn't that special?

[LordMortis]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ml?hpid=z6

“Look at the American revolution, the anti-slavery movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the civil rights movement,” Koch said. “All of these struck a moral chord with the American people. They all sought to overcome an injustice. And we, too, are seeking to right injustices that are holding our country back.”

He probably even believes it.

[GreenGoo]

The Obama administration has signaled it may intervene next week in a civil lawsuit in which 11 American families won a potential billion-dollar judgment from the Palestinian leadership over a series of bombings and shootings that killed or wounded dozens of U.S. citizens, a move that critics say would find the government siding with terrorists over its own citizens.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08 ... inians-in/

Well, isn't that special?

Get back to me when they do it and then get back to me again when a statement of interest means anything at all in court.

Lastly, aren't you ever interested in why the administration does what it does? I mean, they aren't operating in a vacuum and presumably aren't using a dart board to make these decisions.

I ask because I'm extremely curious. I don't think it's special, I think it's odd and would like to know their motivation.

[GreenGoo]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ml?hpid=z6

“Look at the American revolution, the anti-slavery movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the civil rights movement,” Koch said. “All of these struck a moral chord with the American people. They all sought to overcome an injustice. And we, too, are seeking to right injustices that are holding our country back.”

He probably even believes it.

Does he mention what those injustices are? Presumably it's not wealth distribution.

[El Guapo]

The Obama administration has signaled it may intervene next week in a civil lawsuit in which 11 American families won a potential billion-dollar judgment from the Palestinian leadership over a series of bombings and shootings that killed or wounded dozens of U.S. citizens, a move that critics say would find the government siding with terrorists over its own citizens.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08 ... inians-in/

Well, isn't that special?

Get back to me when they do it and then get back to me again when a statement of interest means anything at all in court.

Lastly, aren't you ever interested in why the administration does what it does? I mean, they aren't operating in a vacuum and presumably aren't using a dart board to make these decisions.

I ask because I'm extremely curious. I don't think it's special, I think it's odd and would like to know their motivation.

The judgment, which the Palestinians are appealing, would equal nearly a third of the Palestinian Authority’s annual operating budget.

It's such a mystery as to why the branch of government in charge of foreign policy would take an interest in this case.

[GreenGoo]

It's such a mystery as to why the branch of government in charge of foreign policy would take an interest in this case.

Of course they're interested. I wanna know why they want to get involved.

a) Palestine is obviously not going to pay.
b) a private lawsuit against a foreign government (sorta) is still a private matter. It's not like the US military will be used to collect.
c) Foreign relations would be hurt? Given the state of that relationship currently, I don't think it much matters.
d) There is the potential to be politically hurt at home by getting involved. What's the pay off?

[El Guapo]

It's such a mystery as to why the branch of government in charge of foreign policy would take an interest in this case.

Of course they're interested. I wanna know why they want to get involved.

The United States government, via the federal courts, is currently in the position of ordering a quasi-sovereign involved in one of the most important and sensitive foreign policy issues to pay a crushing $1 billion+ judgment. If they pay the judgment that could cripple their ability to govern the West Bank (which could then have all sorts of unintended consequences, such as potentially opening the door to a Hamas takeover of the West Bank). If they don't pay the judgment I imagine that Palestinian authority leaders would be in legal peril anytime that they go to the United States (such as to meet with the President or conduct business at the UN).

So, unsurprisingly they might want to get involved in order to tell the courts that they're potentially about to step into a foreign policy shitstorm which is outside of their typical expertise. They might not want to do that (the judgment would also create a deterrent incentive for the Authority to refrain from engaging in terrorism), but it would seem like an extreme dereliction of duty for them to not even consider getting involved.

[El Guapo]

It's such a mystery as to why the branch of government in charge of foreign policy would take an interest in this case.

Of course they're interested. I wanna know why they want to get involved.

a) Palestine is obviously not going to pay.
b) a private lawsuit against a foreign government (sorta) is still a private matter. It's not like the US military will be used to collect.
c) Foreign relations would be hurt? Given the state of that relationship currently, I don't think it much matters.
d) There is the potential to be politically hurt at home by getting involved. What's the pay off?

Most of that I happened to post about while you were editing, but it's not a purely private matter. The U.S. government is involved because the federal courts are a part of the United States government. So the U.S. government is in the position of ordering the relief, which can be awkward for the foreign policy branch of the U.S. government.

[Pyperkub]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ml?hpid=z6

“Look at the American revolution, the anti-slavery movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the civil rights movement,” Koch said. “All of these struck a moral chord with the American people. They all sought to overcome an injustice. And we, too, are seeking to right injustices that are holding our country back.”

He probably even believes it.

Does he mention what those injustices are? Presumably it's not wealth distribution.

The only policy bit I found after googling was this:

Mark Holden has been traveling across the nation to educate people on why criminal justice reform is good for business and the economy. He serves as general counsel for Koch Industries, one of the nation’s largest private companies and a leading advocate for criminal justice reform. At the top of its agenda is the Ban the Box campaign to remove questions related to prior criminal history from job applications

Actually something I think all Americans could work together on.

From the original article:

The network is looking at other policies related to poverty, he said, such as “a failing educational system.”

IMHO, if the focus isn't Union-busting or casting half the nation as enemies of America, and is a more constructive approach, then great - I welcome a constructive approach to limiting government.

If this is just a facade for the old scorched-earth policies of old however, then it would be rather typical of their previous behavior.

[LordMortis]

If this is just a facade for the old scorched-earth policies of old however, then it would be rather typical of their previous behavior.

My trust goes about >< far with any Koch related fund raising/donation given the political adds I've seen them sponsoring during election cycles. Actually that trust may even be less.

I was reading the piece and trying to find out what is holing us back and the best I could find from the piece, which may have an axe to grind for all I know, was that the injustice is most Americans aren't supporting libertarian values as defined by those wealthy enough to be able to push for them through the republican party platforms.

"A failing educational system" without further explanation could be an agenda for anything. I've never seen the Koch's advertisements once push for better education. Though I have seen their advertisements push for diverting more funds in my state.

[El Guapo]

There is a shocking amount of bipartisan support for criminal justice reform at the moment. So it wouldn't be surprising if the Koch brothers supported it, especially since they lean libertarian as I understand it.

[Moliere]

Obama Turns 50 Despite Republican Opposition
What will this Muslim foreigner President do next?

[LawBeefaroni]

There is a shocking amount of bipartisan support for criminal justice reform at the moment. So it wouldn't be surprising if the Koch brothers supported it, especially since they lean libertarian as I understand it.

New reform or continued reform?

US Prosecution of White Collar Crime Hits 20-Year Low: Report

“The decline in federal white-collar crime prosecutions does not necessarily indicate there has been a decline in white-collar crime,” Syracuse researchers note. “Rather, it may reflect shifting enforcement policies by each of the administrations and the various agencies.”

Underscoring that assertion is a recent study by researchers at George Mason University tracking the increased use of special Justice Department agreements that allow corporations -- and often their executives -- to avoid being prosecuted. Before 2003, researchers found, the Justice Department offered “almost no” such deals. The researchers report that from 2007 to 2011, 44 percent of cases were resolved through the deals -- known as deferred prosecution agreements and non-prosecution agreements.

...

Similarly, in 2013, Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, told congressional lawmakers that when it comes to banks, “I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult to prosecute them.” He said there is an “inhibiting impact” on the Obama Justice Department’s willingness to prosecute a bank when bringing a criminal charge "[would] have a negative impact on the national economy.”

Holder’s 2013 comments were foreshadowed by a 1999 memo he wrote as Deputy Attorney General during the Clinton Administration. In it, Holder recommended that prosecutors consider “[c]ollateral consequences, including disproportionate harm to shareholders and employees not proven personally culpable” before attempting to convict corporations for wrongdoing. Holder’s recommendations to career prosecutors were rewritten in 2003 by the Bush Justice Department, which viewed Holder’s memo as too friendly towards corporate cultures of misconduct.

[El Guapo]

Huh? No, criminal justice reform typically is used to refer to sentencing, parole, and other post-conviction issues, which is a different matter than the vigorousness of white collar prosecutions. Though I am confident that the Kochs are for less vigorous white collar prosecutions as well.