1. Been excited about @JoeNBC's sustained convo today about @KBAndersen's new book Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America which explains how the Republican Party radicalized OVER ECONOMICS over the past 30 years. It was launched w the radical tax cuts in Reagan's presidency, but
More from Rachel "The Doc" Bitecofer 📈🔭🍌
1. I think so. I don't think the issue are plans. The issue is that the ability of our govn't to function-to create & enact policy- has been seriously abridged the past decade to the point where it can't function. We've seen virtually no legislation this past decade & pretty
2. much none relying on just "regular order." Although the Ds spent almost a year trying w the ACA before giving up & using a procedural trick in the end. Keep in mind, McConnell changed the operation of senate so that all bills, ALL, had to reach 60 vote threshold in the senate
3. That was a MASSIVE change to the legislative filibuster (a massive abuse of it). It creates a super majority requirement for laws that the Framers didn't design. And given the issue of misrepresentation the senate, which is causing a Tyranny of the Minority, its really shut
4. down the federal lawmaking apparatus. If Ds flip these 2 GA senate seats, the legislative filibuster will be right back in the spotlight bc McConnell will use it to lockdown Biden's legislative agenda. And we'll have to see how Biden responds. I agree that Biden needs to give
5. McConnell an opp to change his behavior, but if he doesn't Biden will have to go w EOs or ending the legislative filibuster. Either that, or getting nothing done. The GOP will seek to do to him what they did to Obama- use control of the senate OR the filibuster to prevent
Does anyone in DC have an actual plan that would get the American middle class back on its feet and elevate many more of the poor into the middle class? I mean besides trickle down economics, which has been shown to be a joke?
— John Frost (@JohnFrost) December 30, 2020
2. much none relying on just "regular order." Although the Ds spent almost a year trying w the ACA before giving up & using a procedural trick in the end. Keep in mind, McConnell changed the operation of senate so that all bills, ALL, had to reach 60 vote threshold in the senate
3. That was a MASSIVE change to the legislative filibuster (a massive abuse of it). It creates a super majority requirement for laws that the Framers didn't design. And given the issue of misrepresentation the senate, which is causing a Tyranny of the Minority, its really shut
4. down the federal lawmaking apparatus. If Ds flip these 2 GA senate seats, the legislative filibuster will be right back in the spotlight bc McConnell will use it to lockdown Biden's legislative agenda. And we'll have to see how Biden responds. I agree that Biden needs to give
5. McConnell an opp to change his behavior, but if he doesn't Biden will have to go w EOs or ending the legislative filibuster. Either that, or getting nothing done. The GOP will seek to do to him what they did to Obama- use control of the senate OR the filibuster to prevent
More from Economy
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is analyzing damage due to COVID and projecting further severe consequences if current policies persist. They state “despite involving short term economic costs, lockdowns may lead to faster economic recovery by containing the virus”
1/
Note: This report doesn’t do a dynamic analysis that makes things much clearer, but it does a thoughtful statistical analysis based upon increasingly available data.
https://t.co/5Xmt8y7lCL
A few more quotes:
2/
“The analysis also finds that lockdowns are powerful instruments to reduce infections, especially when they are introduced early in a country’s epidemic and when they are sufficiently stringent.”
3/
“lockdowns become progressively more effective in reducing COVID-19 cases when they become sufficiently stringent. Mild lockdowns appear instead ineffective at curbing infections.”
4/
“The results suggest that to achieve a given reduction in infections, policymakers may want to opt for stringent lockdowns over a shorter period rather than prolonged mild lockdowns...
5/
1/
Note: This report doesn’t do a dynamic analysis that makes things much clearer, but it does a thoughtful statistical analysis based upon increasingly available data.
https://t.co/5Xmt8y7lCL
A few more quotes:
2/
“The analysis also finds that lockdowns are powerful instruments to reduce infections, especially when they are introduced early in a country’s epidemic and when they are sufficiently stringent.”
3/
“lockdowns become progressively more effective in reducing COVID-19 cases when they become sufficiently stringent. Mild lockdowns appear instead ineffective at curbing infections.”
4/
“The results suggest that to achieve a given reduction in infections, policymakers may want to opt for stringent lockdowns over a shorter period rather than prolonged mild lockdowns...
5/
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".