US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8550

On August 25 2017 23:48 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, you do know that Trump is protected by his own party and that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one, right?

Because it feels a lot like you're attempting to argue that all that could result from a cocked up natural disaster is unpopularity without realizing that unpopularity is what will get him, if anything does.

On August 25 2017 23:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I could show you a neighborhood in St Louis or Chicago that looks just as bad as New Orleans and it was never hit by a natural disaster. These kinds of places are just ignored altogether.

Coincidentally, these also have a good minority population. I think the 9th ward and other poverty stricken areas should just wait for gentrification. That's their best hope because the city won't fix them.

You didn't ask a question.

On August 26 2017 00:18 Danglars wrote:

To get members of his own party to go against him, there would need to be an actual biggie crime. No Republican would be suicidal enough to remove the voters choice lacking that cause, no matter how unpopular he gets.

And I've heard enough of "this current event will be the end of Trump" in this thread and in my social group of mostly liberal Californians. He'll most likely finish a largely unsuccessful term in 3.5 years. If Bush had been impeached and removed for mishandling TARP or Obama for non-recess appointments or Obamacare non-legislative changes, I might be more willing to concede the likelihood.

On August 26 2017 00:33 ticklishmusic wrote:
t's a Cat2. We just haven't had any sort of significant hurricane landing in the last couple years, so that combined with serious doubts about the current Admin's ability to flush a toilet is what's driving the hysteria. Storms hit, and then stuff gets fixed. Texas will be more than likely fine, any sort of disaster will be in the bungling of the fixes rather than the storm itself.

On August 26 2017 00:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:

You got me. I made no sense. I'll do better.

With trump's historically low polling approval/disapproval ratings, his constant lashing out at GOP leaders, and his ineffectiveness to create anything resembling a plan for legislative governing, he's a lame duck and will be until he is out of office. Include his problems with denouncing white supremacists and their ilk (not being wishy washy on the topic), his need to obfuscate any Russia investigation as best he can, and his failure to make coherent statements/speeches (thankfully we can blame twitter's character limit), and you kind of get the picture of where this is headed. Should he bungle this natural disaster, then I could see it being the end of the trump administration and we welcome in Mike "No Nonsense" Pence to the Oval Office.

Better?

On August 26 2017 00:41 Danglars wrote:

That was my original takeaway. Then I saw the article on catastrophic storm surge, life threatening storm surge, very significant disaster, mass exodus, "Such daunting language hasn't been seen by CNN's experts since Hurricane Katrina, which left more than 1,800 people dead in 2005." How the fuck are you supposed to describe a Cat 5 if this is what a 2 perhaps 3 merits, seriously?

On August 26 2017 00:18 Danglars wrote:

To get members of his own party to go against him, there would need to be an actual biggie crime. No Republican would be suicidal enough to remove the voters choice lacking that cause, no matter how unpopular he gets.

And I've heard enough of "this current event will be the end of Trump" in this thread and in my social group of mostly liberal Californians. He'll most likely finish a largely unsuccessful term in 3.5 years. If Bush had been impeached and removed for mishandling TARP or Obama for non-recess appointments or Obamacare non-legislative changes, I might be more willing to concede the likelihood.

On August 26 2017 00:44 Adreme wrote:


It all depends on where stuff hits honestly. Katrina was bad because it was a bad hurricane in a dangerous location. Rita was just as bad but hit a less severe location. This one could hit a bad location so it could be bad but in general the media will always overhype hurricanes because they grab ratings.

On August 26 2017 01:21 Nevuk wrote:
Gary Cohn, Trump's econ adviser wrote a resignation letter in reaction to Charlottesville but decided against it due to fear of the market reaction, came out in NYT interview earlier.

Brietbart's reaction has been measured and thoughtful.


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/901068333449175041

On August 26 2017 01:28 Plansix wrote:

I like the globes. Very subtle.

On August 25 2017 23:44 KwarK wrote:

Two step process
1) Paint rubble black
2) "I'm so not racist I don't even see colour"

How Free Eyeglasses Are Boosting Test Scores in Baltimore

Three years ago, Johns Hopkins University researchers in Baltimore asked a seemingly simple straightforward question: Could the persistent gap in reading performance between poor students and wealthier ones be closed if they gave the poor students eyeglasses?

They knew that poorer students were less likely to have glasses than wealthier white children, but data were limited on whether simply helping children better focus on the page in front of them might improve their ability to master a skill essential for early learning. They screened several hundred second- and third-graders, gave two pairs of eyeglasses to the ones who needed them (about 60 percent of the group, based on a uniquely liberal prescribing standard) and then they tracked their school performance over the course of the year. The outcomes were notable even with the small sample size—reading proficiency improved significantly compared with the children who did not need eyeglasses. In late 2015, a conversation between Dr. Leana Wen, the new Baltimore City health commissioner, and Johns Hopkins President Ronald Daniels about areas of potential collaboration quickly focused on students’ eyesight. Vision screening by the health department had already identified an unmet need for thousands of children; the research seemed to confirm the value of addressing it in the school setting.

In May 2016, the Baltimore Health Department assembled a public-private coalition made up of the city’s public school system, Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Education, eyeglass retailer Warby Parker, and a national nonprofit called Vision To Learn.
The three-year program, called Vision for Baltimore, plans to visit 150 schools over the course of the study and screen 60,000 students, making it the biggest study of its kind. The data officials expect to glean could radically alter how school systems across the country approach one of the most difficult and consequential problems in modern education. It may well be that the solution to the persistent gap in reading proficiency is not instructional, but a simple health issue that could be addressed with a pair eyeglasses that could cost a couple of hundred dollars at the mall.

“We know, based on common sense, that giving glasses for kids is important for education [and] health,” said Dr. Wen.

As of mid-August, Vision for Baltimore has performed nearly 18,000 screenings and distributed nearly 2,000 pairs of glasses for free. That’s on schedule of the program’s goal to give out 8,000 glasses before the end of the study. They estimate that just 20 percent of screened children who need glasses subsequently get them, leaving as many as 20,000 children citywide staring fuzzily at the board in their classrooms.

Experts attribute the glasses gap to Maryland law, which requires screening only or pre-K, first-and eighth-graders. A child who develops eyesight issues in second grade could wait years before being examined again, falling further behind peers. But even with mandatory screening, parents may not follow through. Parents might not be able to afford the glasses if they don’t qualify for Medicaid. (Maryland’s Medicaid system covers one pair of eyeglasses for minors per year, and will replace them in some cases.) The consequences of not addressing eyesight problems early can be dire and compounding. Studies over the past decade suggest that students who perform badly in school are misdiagnosed with behavioral disorders or special education needs when the culprit was their poor eyesight.

The solution was deceptively simple: If kids can’t get to the doctor, bring the doctor to the kids. Under the Vision for Baltimore program, a mobile clinic shows up to the school for about a week during the school year to determine whether a child may need glasses. In Baltimore, the city health department conducts the screening, which requires checking distance vision, depth perception and eye alignment. If the child fails the screening test, he is given a parental consent form for an optometry exam on the school campus. Two weeks later, an optician comes to the school to fit the glasses, which the child picks himself. Each student gets one pair.

...

On August 26 2017 01:43 IyMoon wrote:



Just to be sure, the globes are calling him Jewish right?

On August 26 2017 01:56 KwarK wrote:

((())) is Jewish. Globes are for globalist. Although the far right believes globalists are part of the Jewish conspiracy because they think nations are the enemy because apparently Jews are responsible for international communism and the Trotskyist continuing revolution, along with also controlling international banking. Only by creating an autarkic ethnostate can the globalists be defeated. Or something.

There is broad consensus, according to five sources familiar with the behind-the-scenes talks, on some of the best ways to pay for cutting both the individual and corporate tax rates.

The options include capping the mortgage interest deduction for homeowners; scrapping people's ability to deduct state and local taxes; and eliminating businesses' ability to deduct interest, while also phasing in so-called full expensing for small businesses that allows them to immediately deduct investments like new equipment or facilities.

One idea quietly being discussed would be taxing the money that workers place into their 401(k) savings plans up front: an idea that would raise billions of dollars in the short-term and is pulled from the Camp plan. This policy idea is widely disliked by budget hawks, who consider it a gimmick; the financial services industry that handles retirement savings; and nonprofits that try to encourage Americans to save.