Bloomberg and Bernie Fight Over Which Communist Dictatorship Is the Least Evil

Democratic presidential hopefuls Mike Bloomberg and Bernie Sanders clashed Tuesday night over which authoritarian communist regimes are worth praising. Both fumbled what should have been straight-forward responses.

Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, was asked about his past praise of Chinese President Xi Jinping. In a 2019 interview, Bloomberg said, “Xi Jinping is not a dictator; he has to satisfy his constituents or he’s not going to survive.” Given a second chance, Bloomberg did find the courage to criticize China’s lack of press freedoms and what he called an “abominable” record on human rights—but then he pivoted, weirdly, to argue that Xi is not a dictator because he “serves at the behest of the Politburo” of the Communist Party of China, the 25-member political committee that runs the country.

That is hardly the same thing as being democratically accountable, of course. It is roughly equivalent to arguing that National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell is accountable to the American people because he is elected to his post by the owners of the league’s 32 teams.

Sanders pounced on the mistake. “The Chinese government is responsive to the politburo, but who the hell is the politburo?” he asked. Yes, that’s a self-described socialist criticizing a government run by a politburo—a thing that is a feature almost exclusively of socialist governments.

But Sanders quickly stumbled over a chance to correct his own record of praising authoritarian regimes. His past praise of longtime Cuban dictator Fidel Castor and his own literal honeymoon in the Soviet Union figure to be fodder for negative ads if he wins the Democratic nomination, and Sanders only made that situation worse for himself on Tuesday by arguing that “when dictatorships, whether it is the Chinese or the Cubans, do something good, you acknowledge that.”

In praising authoritarian foreign governments that refuse to recognize basic human freedoms, both Bloomberg and Sanders have something in common with the man they ultimately hope to unseat from the presidency. President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, said he “loves” Xi, cheered Turkish authoritarian thug Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as “a hell of a leader,” commended Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte for the extrajudicial murder of drug offenders, and just this week partied with nationalist Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

It should be fairly easy to answer these questions, especially for the Democrats who are trying to defeat Trump. Don’t praise dictators. It’s literally that easy.

Sanders’ insistence on finding a silver lining in Castro’s bloody reign over Cuba reads as especially churlish considering he insisted tonight that America has not fully owned its history of propping up dictators around the world. “Occasionally, it might be a good idea to be honest about American foreign policy,” he said, mentioning American-backed coups in Iran and Guatemala during the Cold War. That is a very good idea.

If Sanders can’t find a silver lining in U.S.-backed coups, fair enough. But he should stop proclaiming the upsides of a dictatorship with so many victims that the world’s foremost experts cannot count them all.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3a2bMlZ
via IFTTT

Bloomberg and Bernie Fight Over Which Communist Dictatorship Is the Least Evil

Democratic presidential hopefuls Mike Bloomberg and Bernie Sanders clashed Tuesday night over which authoritarian communist regimes are worth praising. Both fumbled what should have been straight-forward responses.

Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, was asked about his past praise of Chinese President Xi Jinping. In a 2019 interview, Bloomberg said, “Xi Jinping is not a dictator; he has to satisfy his constituents or he’s not going to survive.” Given a second chance, Bloomberg did find the courage to criticize China’s lack of press freedoms and what he called an “abominable” record on human rights—but then he pivoted, weirdly, to argue that Xi is not a dictator because he “serves at the behest of the Politburo” of the Communist Party of China, the 25-member political committee that runs the country.

That is hardly the same thing as being democratically accountable, of course. It is roughly equivalent to arguing that National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell is accountable to the American people because he is elected to his post by the owners of the league’s 32 teams.

Sanders pounced on the mistake. “The Chinese government is responsive to the politburo, but who the hell is the politburo?” he asked. Yes, that’s a self-described socialist criticizing a government run by a politburo—a thing that is a feature almost exclusively of socialist governments.

But Sanders quickly stumbled over a chance to correct his own record of praising authoritarian regimes. His past praise of longtime Cuban dictator Fidel Castor and his own literal honeymoon in the Soviet Union figure to be fodder for negative ads if he wins the Democratic nomination, and Sanders only made that situation worse for himself on Tuesday by arguing that “when dictatorships, whether it is the Chinese or the Cubans, do something good, you acknowledge that.”

In praising authoritarian foreign governments that refuse to recognize basic human freedoms, both Bloomberg and Sanders have something in common with the man they ultimately hope to unseat from the presidency. President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, said he “loves” Xi, cheered Turkish authoritarian thug Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as “a hell of a leader,” commended Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte for the extrajudicial murder of drug offenders, and just this week partied with nationalist Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

It should be fairly easy to answer these questions, especially for the Democrats who are trying to defeat Trump. Don’t praise dictators. It’s literally that easy.

Sanders’ insistence on finding a silver lining in Castro’s bloody reign over Cuba reads as especially churlish considering he insisted tonight that America has not fully owned its history of propping up dictators around the world. “Occasionally, it might be a good idea to be honest about American foreign policy,” he said, mentioning American-backed coups in Iran and Guatemala during the Cold War. That is a very good idea.

If Sanders can’t find a silver lining in U.S.-backed coups, fair enough. But he should stop proclaiming the upsides of a dictatorship with so many victims that the world’s foremost experts cannot count them all.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3a2bMlZ
via IFTTT

What Will Americans Do If The Democrats Steal It From Sanders Again?

What Will Americans Do If The Democrats Steal It From Sanders Again?

Authored by John Eskow via Counterpunch.org,

 “If Hillary gave up one of her balls and gave it to Obama, he’d have two.”

–James Carville

“Well, you know, James Carville is well-known for spouting off his mouth without always knowing what he’s talking about. And I intend to stay focused on fighting for the American people because what they don’t need is 20 more years of performance art on television. And that’s what James Carville and a lot of those folks are expert at … a lot of talk and not getting things done for the American people.”

–Barack Obama

This is what they’ve got? James freaking Carville?

Yes, twelve years after he mismanaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign into a thoroughly delightful but stunningly unlikely defeat, James freaking Carville is the best footsoldier that MSNBC can muster up in the tireless (and tiresome) war they are fighting against Bernie Sanders, against the will of the voters, and against any chance of progressive change in our lifetimes.

I have no idea how—-or even if—-James Carville is still alive. He seems to be permanently coated in the death-spray of a female praying mantis, some corrosive fluid that’s permeated his brain and turns him more bitter by the millisecond; as you watch him writhe around in his seat among the standard MSBNC crew of failed Democratic Party apparatchiks, Chris Matthews-type mental cases, and ex-CIA bosses with weak-ass gravitas, he seems even more disturbed than the rest of the panel; it seems like he’s about to start consuming his own flesh, live, on national TV.

(Now, I think I speak for a sizable portion of the American public, of all political stripes, on this one: I wish James Carville hadn’t forced me to consider the issue of Hillary Clinton’s balls. It’s, um, distasteful. But when you delve into Carville’s quotes, you discover that they’re nearly ALL distasteful. While proudly fighting to break that glass ceiling and elect the first female president, for example, he said of Pamela Jones—-one of the women sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton—-“this is what you get when you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park.” The guy seems to have some deep psychosexual issues.)

The fact that MSBNC is already so desperate to kill the Sanders’ candidacy in its cradle that they’re willing to exhume poor James Carville, dress him up in his least filthy rugby shirt, stick a baseball cap over his skull to keep the children from shrieking, and prop him up to babble at Joy Reid is one more signal that the fix is in. As if we needed it: for months, MSNBC hacks have been saying that Sanders is a Russian plant, an idiot, someone only “racist liberal whites” and “misfit black girls” could like, and-—when all else fails, simply a guy (Jew?) who “makes my flesh crawl.”

Lets’ spare ourselves months of these subtle, rapier-like rhetorical thrusts and cut, as they say, to the chase: the Democratic Party, with James Carville serving as just one of their low-rent Paul Reveres, is screaming out a warning: it doesn’t matter if Bernie Sanders sweeps all, or most, of the remaining primaries, as he seems certain to do. It doesn’t matter what the plurality of Democrats actually wants: their hopes, their passions, their dreams mean nothing.

They’re simply not going to let him win.

Bloomberg, Biden, god help us Klobuchar, the reanimated corpse of Hubert Humphrey: God knows what human form the Party will assume, but it won’t be Bernie Sanders.

So I find myself wondering how those voters will respond to the brazen theft that we’re about to witness. “What happens to a dream deferred?” asked the poet Langston Hughes. How will the young people of America—-the idealistic anti-Carvilles among us-—react on that day, when they see the last pretense of American democracy stripped away to reveal the huge and reeking meat factory that’s owned and operated by the Mike Bloombergs of this world? What about the older ones among us, lying dormant in cynicism for decades, who’ve dared to awaken to at least a flicker of hope?

Will this blatant death-blow to democracy send us, at last, into the streets? Will we finally rain hell down on these monsters?

“Maybe it just sags, like a heavy load,” wrote Hughes, speaking of that dream deferred.

And that would be the most heartbreaking of outcomes…the outcome that James Carville, and Hillary Clinton, and Chris Matthews, and Joy Reid, and the CIA, and Wall Street, are all calmly expecting, as they lie back, smiling in the absolute certitude that they’re always right…

“Or does it explode?”


Tyler Durden

Tue, 02/25/2020 – 22:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/37ZkIXJ Tyler Durden

Hong Kong Embraces Helicopter Money – Govt Gives Every Adult Citizen HK$10,000

Hong Kong Embraces Helicopter Money – Govt Gives Every Adult Citizen HK$10,000

Hong Kong just went full monetary-policy retard.

In a desperate effort to “do something” about the economic collapse that the region is suffering…

Hong Kong’s Financial Secretary Paul Chan Mo-po is set to unveil a HK120 billion relief deal which includes ‘helicopter money’ – giving every Hong Kong permanent resident over the age of 18 a cash handout of HK$10,000 (around US$1,300) to, reportedly, ease the burden on individuals and companies.

As SCMP reports,  Chan has been under intense pressure from lawmakers to dose out a heavier aid to help the city ride out of the economic slump – battered by the coronavirus epidemic and months of anti-government protests, sparked by the now-withdrawn extradition bill.

Hong Kong is suffering an unprecedented slump in consumption, with retail sales having collapsed…

And as we detailed recently, Sun Hung Kai Properties, which is among Hong Kong’s largest mall owners, said on Wednesday it would reduce February rent by up to 50% for most of its tenants, in an effort to stabilize economy and protect employment.

Earlier this month, KPMG urged the Hong Kong government to unleash the helicopter money:

“The Hong Kong government should avoid the temptation to increase taxes or cut expenditures at a time when the city should in fact protect and even step up its domestic support programs,” said John Timpany, partner and head of tax in Hong Kong at KPMG China.

KPMG went on to propose a series of short and long-term spending measures, including:

  • Giving out HK$10,000 electronic consumption vouchers to permanent residents age 18 and older to promote spending at local businesses.

  • Tax relief measures for local businesses such as deferred payments and partial waivers of provisional tax.

  • Extending rent subsidies for Hong Kong Science Park, Cyberport and other public institutions for six to 12 months.

  • Support to working parents as well as allowance on rental expenses for residences.

  • Boost Hong Kong’s long-term competitiveness by adopting bolder tax incentives and lower rates to attract overseas business.

“The reserves are meant to prepare Hong Kong for rainy days, and we should use it timely and wisely to weather the storm we are in now,” said Alice Leung, a partner for corporate tax advisory at KPMG China.

But, the money-drop was first suggested back in December, when the the pro-business Liberal Party proposed that the Hong Kong government should give cash or vouchers to each adult permanent resident in order to stimulate local consumption.

Last Friday, pan-democrats tabled a non-binding motion in Legco urging the government to include a HK$10,000 cash handout in its HK$30 billion aid package.

The motion was voted down by Chow and other pro-government lawmakers who said it would delay passage of the funding application for the package.

And as recently as Sunday, Chan said in a blog post:

“The government’s resources are finite, it is impossible for this budget to completely satisfy demands from everyone.”

But, it seems Chan was able to see past that ‘finite-ness’ and the virus scare was just the right crisis not to waste and will dip into the government’s large fiscal reserves of about HK$1.1 trillion to help the city ride out the economic slump.

The handout will cost HK$71 billion and benefit around 7 million people:

“I have to emphasise that, although the cash payout scheme involves a huge sum of public money, it is an exceptional measure taken in light of the current unique circumstances and will not, therefore, impose a burden on our long-term fiscal position.”

Notably, Bloomberg’s Iain Marlow points out that Chan noted he needs to get the approval of the Legislative Council for the “exceptional” cash handout.

Given that LegCo has been paralyzed as a result of opposition filibustering, I wonder whether it will be delayed or stopped – or whether the pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong will think standing in the way of a cash handout at this time would be political suicide.

However, Chan says Hong Kong’s economic growth this year will be between negative 1.5 per cent and positive 0.5 per cent.

“It is hard to be optimistic on this year,” Chan says.

If the city’s economy contracts this year, it would mean gross domestic product has shrunk two years in a row, something which has not happened since Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule in 1997.

So Hong Kong is about to unleash the mother of all stagflations on its people – who were already on the brink of massive social unrest before the virus forced lockdowns. Supply chains have collapsed, therefore there is no supply of goods or services, but demand is about to soar (thanks to free money drops from the government)…What happens to prices we wonder?


Tyler Durden

Tue, 02/25/2020 – 22:23

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3c8sXUC Tyler Durden

The Real Meaning Of Red Scare 3.0

The Real Meaning Of Red Scare 3.0

Authored by Nicholas Klein via Counterpunch.org,

The US corporate media, who had such a long run as relative monopolizers of truth, have been discrediting themselves in serial fashion since 9/11. Their lapdoggery to the Bush regime backfired on them during the WMD lie operation and the resulting war of aggression. Then came their participation in the fraudulent business reporting leading up to the 2007-2009 Wall Street crash, and their big lies afterward that “no one could have imagined.” The next big rupture arrived in 2015-2016, their million-minutes spent on preemptive coronations of Trump as one candidate and Clinton as the other, and their responsibility for the unexpected result, which they have tried ever since to blame daily on a vague, ever-present “Russia.”

In the last few years, it is true that a few million mostly well-meaning people have partaken in the fandom and breaking-news rituals of the Extended Maddowverse. A similar number have bought into the sorry fantasies of Murdochworld, in which a heroic manly Trump is always about to drain the swamp that spawned him. These groups are like the devoted audiences of Game of Thrones or Star Wars, but smaller. Of course it’s a far more serious matter, because they don’t distinguish between their favorite shows and reality, and they are politically influential people, relatively speaking. A third minority, meanwhile, also small if growing, reject both sides of the #Russiagate coin.

Meanwhile 90-95% of everyone else in this country just aren’t following it, don’t know, don’t care. The QAnon Volk call them sheeple, and the committed Hamiltonian liberals of the Russia-Ukrainegate priesthood want to condemn these vulgar Americans for their supposed toleration of Trump’s constitutional outrages. (The latter are the ones who assured that toleration, when they cheered on a ridiculously narrow impeachment, one bound to lose and based on the least atrocious of Trump’s many crimes, and proclaimed that “all roads lead to Russia.”)

But it’s okay. It is okay that most working people are worried about work and wages and health care and debt, and bills and university and maybe ending the endless wars, and don’t have a fucking clue who Oleg Deripaska or Lev Parnas are. Those people have their priorities straight. Or, at least, their priorities are set more by the realities of having to get by and make a living, and perhaps just a little bit less by flickering shadows on a cave wall.

In short, the more the corporate media and the mercenary-intellectual complexes (of private “think tanks” and “analysts”) continue to act openly as adjuncts of the alphabet-agencies and assert the hegemony of the new #Russiagate creed (or its flipside, on Fox and Co), the less they are believed.

The more exposed they are.

This is a big story: the decline of the corporate media’s power to persuade, an upheaval in what Guy Debord described as the Society of the Spectacle. It is why these outlets have become so fervent in condemning social media, as if people sharing bullshit on Facebook — problematic as it can be, although it should be noted that most of this bullshit is also corporate media product — is somehow inherently more pernicious than the activities of the cable news networks and the pronouncements of their “unnamed sources” at the blood-drenched State Department, Pentagon and natsec agencies.

The corporate media have effectively joined the campaigns calling for Internet censorship. I don’t know if that will work, given the confluence of crises, the way all the inevitable disasters of capitalism, its wars and its ecocides might allow for sudden new repressive measures. But the corporate media’s credibility keeps setting new lows, and they keep grasping for the same increasingly blunted instrument of blaming the All-American shitshow on Russia. This week, apparently, Russia is why Sanders is winning.


Tyler Durden

Tue, 02/25/2020 – 22:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32xZoHN Tyler Durden

Biden Suggests Bernie Sanders Partially Responsible for 150 Million Gun Deaths, Argues for Renewed Assault Weapons Ban

Former Vice President Joe Biden touted his record on gun control and massively exaggerated the impact of gun violence during a clumsy attack on Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) at tonight’s Democratic debate.

“I’m the only one who ever got it done nationally,” Biden said in response to a question about why voters should trust him to tackle an alleged “gun crisis” in America. “I beat the NRA twice. I got assault weapons banned. I got magazines that could not hold more than 10 rounds, I got them eliminated.”

Biden also noted his support for the Brady Act, which mandated a waiting period for firearm purchases and established the federal background check system.

This was all a wind-up for Biden’s attack on Sanders, who he faulted for voting in favor of legislation that prevents gun makers from being sued should their products be used by third parties to commit crimes.

“My friend on my right and others have given into gun manufacturers absolute immunity,” said Biden, before engaging in some characteristic rambling. “150 million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability. More than all the wars, including Vietnam.”

There were a couple of things wrong with that statement. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, to which Biden was referring, was passed in 2005, not 2007.

Even going by that earlier date, 150 million Americans (a little under half the country’s current population) have not, in fact, been killed as a result of gun violence. Biden likely meant 150,000 people have been killed in gun homicides in the 15 years since Sanders’ vote, which is roughly accurate.

Sanders responded by stressing that he had a ‘D’ rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA), and that he was in favor of increased background checks and closing the much-ballyhooed “gun show loophole,” a reference to the fact that people do not need to undergo federal background checks when buying a firearm from a private seller in the same state.

Biden touting his support for the federal assault weapons ban obscures the fact that researchers have found the law likely had no impact on crime rates and that violent crime rates have been steadily declining for decades.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2TeBnkS
via IFTTT

Bloomberg Supports Charter Schools, Deeply Vexes Sanders and Warren

Since entering the 2020 presidential race, Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg has been the odd man out, something glaringly obvious as his fellow contenders zero in on him during the debates. Tuesday’s sparring match was no different, although the former New York City mayor did delineate himself in at least one positive way: He appeared to be the only candidate to support school choice.

“We’ve cut the gap between the rich and the poor,” Bloomberg said, noting that different regions of the country might require varied educational approaches. “We’ve made an enormous difference in all the options that parents have.”

Under Bloomberg, who was in office from 2002 to 2013, New York City’s charter sector grew by more than 1,000 percent, increasing from 18 to 183 schools and from 4,442 to 71,422 students. 

The effect of that growth has been “unambiguously positive,” according to a study by Marcus A. Winters of the center-right Manhattan Institute. Per the data, New York’s charter students perform “much better” on math tests and “somewhat better” on English language assessments. 

The remaining candidates declined to support school choice initiatives.

“Public dollars should stay in public schools,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), repeating the same flawed argument that she has made repeatedly on the campaign trail. Charter schools are public schools.

They are, however, privately managed, and as such, able to adhere to less burdensome and more innovative educational models that may help explain why their students consistently perform better.

That couldn’t be clearer in Warren’s home state. Charter school students in Massachusetts urban areas categorically outperform their counterparts at traditional public schools. And, to Warren’s point, they save taxpayers money: Boston spends $2,900 less per charter pupil compared to public school attendees.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) accurately honed in on what’s at stake here. “Kids’ education should not depend on the zip code in which they live,” the democratic socialist noted. But he then pivoted to promises of free college, universal free childcare, and teacher salary minimums. Such plans do nothing to address a system which traps students in subpar public schools solely based on where they live and often on where they are born. Perhaps that’s why the majority of black and Hispanic Democrats have expressed their support for school choice: they positively impact the very same vulnerable communities which make up the Democratic voter base. 

This seems to be something Bloomberg understands. “The only way to solve the poverty problem is to get people a good education,” he said Tuesday. “And rather than just talk about it in New York, we actually did it.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2SXMsb6
via IFTTT

Biden Suggests Bernie Sanders Partially Responsible for 150 Million Gun Deaths, Argues for Renewed Assault Weapons Ban

Former Vice President Joe Biden touted his record on gun control and massively exaggerated the impact of gun violence during a clumsy attack on Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) at tonight’s Democratic debate.

“I’m the only one who ever got it done nationally,” Biden said in response to a question about why voters should trust him to tackle an alleged “gun crisis” in America. “I beat the NRA twice. I got assault weapons banned. I got magazines that could not hold more than 10 rounds, I got them eliminated.”

Biden also noted his support for the Brady Act, which mandated a waiting period for firearm purchases and established the federal background check system.

This was all a wind-up for Biden’s attack on Sanders, who he faulted for voting in favor of legislation that prevents gun makers from being sued should their products be used by third parties to commit crimes.

“My friend on my right and others have given into gun manufacturers absolute immunity,” said Biden, before engaging in some characteristic rambling. “150 million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt the gun manufacturers from liability. More than all the wars, including Vietnam.”

There were a couple of things wrong with that statement. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, to which Biden was referring, was passed in 2005, not 2007.

Even going by that earlier date, 150 million Americans (a little under half the country’s current population) have not, in fact, been killed as a result of gun violence. Biden likely meant 150,000 people have been killed in gun homicides in the 15 years since Sanders’ vote, which is roughly accurate.

Sanders responded by stressing that he had a ‘D’ rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA), and that he was in favor of increased background checks and closing the much-ballyhooed “gun show loophole,” a reference to the fact that people do not need to undergo federal background checks when buying a firearm from a private seller in the same state.

Biden touting his support for the federal assault weapons ban obscures the fact that researchers have found the law likely had no impact on crime rates and that violent crime rates have been steadily declining for decades.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2TeBnkS
via IFTTT

Bloomberg Supports Charter Schools, Deeply Vexes Sanders and Warren

Since entering the 2020 presidential race, Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg has been the odd man out, something glaringly obvious as his fellow contenders zero in on him during the debates. Tuesday’s sparring match was no different, although the former New York City mayor did delineate himself in at least one positive way: He appeared to be the only candidate to support school choice.

“We’ve cut the gap between the rich and the poor,” Bloomberg said, noting that different regions of the country might require varied educational approaches. “We’ve made an enormous difference in all the options that parents have.”

Under Bloomberg, who served as mayor of New York City from 2002 to 2013, the city’s charter sector grew by more than 1,000 percent, increasing from 18 to 183 schools and from 4,442 to 71,422 students. 

The effect of that growth has been “unambiguously positive,” according to a study by Marcus A. Winters of the center-right Manhattan Institute. Per the data, New York’s charter students perform “much better” on math tests and “somewhat better” on English language assessments. 

The remaining candidates declined to support school choice initiatives.

“Public dollars should stay in public schools,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), repeating the same flawed argument that she has made repeatedly on the campaign trail. Charter schools are public schools.

They are, however, privately managed, and as such, able to adhere to less burdensome and more innovative educational models that may help explain why their students consistently perform better.

That couldn’t be clearer in Warren’s home state. Charter school students in Massachusetts urban areas categorically outperform their counterparts at traditional public schools. And, to Warren’s point, they save taxpayers money: Boston spends $2,900 less per charter pupil compared to public school attendees.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) accurately honed in on what’s at stake here. “Kids’ education should not depend on the zip code in which they live,” the democratic socialist noted. But he then pivoted to promises of free college, universal free childcare, and teacher salary minimums. Such plans do nothing to address a system which traps students in subpar public schools solely based on where they live and often on where they are born. Perhaps that’s why the majority of black and Hispanic Democrats have expressed their support for school choice: they positively impact the very same vulnerable communities which make up the Democratic voter base. 

This seems to be something Bloomberg understands. “The only way to solve the poverty problem is to get people a good education,” he said Tuesday. “And rather than just talk about it in New York, we actually did it.”

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2SXMsb6
via IFTTT

Mapping Coronavirus In The Middle East: 9 Countries Hit As Alarm Raised Over Vulnerable Refugee Camps

Mapping Coronavirus In The Middle East: 9 Countries Hit As Alarm Raised Over Vulnerable Refugee Camps

Unprepared countries across the Middle East are scrambling to respond as they’ve begun recording more and more coronavirus cases.

While official government figures across the region likely fall short of the true number — for example hard hit Iran may have already seen 50 deaths according to one lawmaker in the city of Qom despite the Health Ministry denying this high figure and confirming only 12 deaths to date — it’s deeply alarming that Covid-19 has been confirmed in multiple corners of the Middle East, from Egypt to the Gulf to Iran.

Notice also that the United Arab Emirates now has at least 13 confirmed cases, in a worrisome sign in could hit the gulf region hard, given also it’s a major international transport hub straddling east Asia and the West. 

The WHO is especially concerned of an outbreak among refugee populations in war-torn regions of Iraq and Syria. 

“Refugees and internally displaced populations across Iraq and Syria have been identified as the most vulnerable groups in the region, should the spread of the virus become a pandemic,” The Guardian reports of recent statements. 

“Health officials in both countries remain under-equipped to deal with such a a reality that seems more possible with each passing day,” the report added.

Sprawling and densely packed “tent cities” of refugees along the border areas of Syria remain the most vulnerable. 

Refugee camp in northwest Syria, via the AP.

Official government numbers of infected in the region are as follows:

  • Bahrain (17 cases)  
  • Egypt (1 case) 
  • Iran (61 cases)  
  • Iraq (5 cases)  
  • Israel (2 cases)  
  • Kuwait (3 cases)  
  • Lebanon (1 case)  
  • Oman (4 cases) 
  • UAE (13 cases)

The below includes excerpts of Middle East Eye’s brief summary report on confirmed coronavirus cases in each country. 

* * *

Bahrain (17 cases)

Bahrain’s health ministry announced on 25 February that a total of 17 people have been infected with the coronavirus.

The ministry reported its first case of the coronavirus on 24 February after a “citizen arriving from Iran was suspected of having contracted the virus based on emerging symptoms”…

Egypt (1 case)

The WHO confirmed on 19 February that a man identified a week earlier was recovering and no longer a carrier of the illness, but would remain in quarantine for the mandated 14 days. 

Iran (61 cases, 16 dead)

Iran is the worst-hit country outside of China, with at least 16 people dead due to the coronavirus. Several countries in the region confirmed their first patients had all previously been in Iran.

The country’s deputy health minister, tasked with heading the country’s response, was also infected by the virus, a health ministry announcement confirmed on Tuesday 25 February…

On 24 February, an Iranian MP accused the government of “lying” about the extent of the virus’s spread in Iran, claiming 50 people have been killed by it in the holy city of Qom alone. 

Iraq (5 cases)

Iraq confirmed four new cases of the coronavirus on 25 February in an Iraqi family returning from Iran to the city of Kirkuk. 

Baghdad reported its first case of the coronavirus on 24 February. Health officials said the patient was an Iranian theology student living in the southern city of Najaf. 

All students studying at the same religious seminary were quarantined, while one of the city’s most important religious sites was temporarily closed to pilgrims while it was disinfected. 

Israel (2 cases)

An Israeli woman tested positive for the virus after returning from a heavily affected cruise ship, Israel announced on 21 February. 

The country later sent 180 South Korean tourists back home and closed travel to and from South Korea. According to Israeli media, the government is considering quarantining another 200 South Koreans at a military base. 

Kuwait (3 cases)

The Kuwaiti health ministry reported its first cases of coronavirus on 24 February. 

In a statement posted on Twitter, the ministry said: “Tests conducted on those coming from the Iranian holy city of Mashhad showed there were three confirmed cases of the coronavirus (COVID-19).”…

Lebanon (1 case)

The first confirmed case in Lebanon involved a 45-year-old woman who had travelled from Iran and was quarantined.

She had arrived on a plane from the Iranian city of Qom, where authorities have said Iran’s outbreak started.  

Oman (4 cases)

Oman reported two more cases of coronavirus from individuals who had just travelled to Iran, according to the country’s health ministry Twitter account.  

The health ministry reported the first two cases of coronavirus infections in the country on 24 February, Oman TV said.

The two Omani women diagnosed with the illness had visited Iran, it said. They are in a stable condition…

UAE (13 cases)

The UAE banned all travel to Iran and Thailand over fears about the spread of the virus, state news agency WAM reported on 24 February. 

It recorded the first of its 13 cases when four members of a Chinese family were diagnosed on 28 January.


Tyler Durden

Tue, 02/25/2020 – 21:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2VnkFT9 Tyler Durden