Good morning all.

I know no background on Argentina’s nationalizing Repsol. No TV & warm weather keeping me outside & off the internet has blessedly kept me in ignorance of world events.

However, the first thought that comes to mind is that maybe the Argentine are following the U.S. neocon maxim: from time to time you need to pick some shitty country up & smash it against the wall to show whose boss. AKA hittem when they’re down.

WRT U.S. “isolation” at Summit of Americas, I am reminded of the headline in a prominent Brit newspaper: Fog Settles in Channel; Continent Disappears.

Hey, Repsol, Suck.On.This!

Thanks, SD. Using its own resources for its own population in violation of deals made by previous rulers is not the worst way for Argentina to go, but it does make any future negotiations dubious. I’m of two minds about the tactic.

Regarding the first bullet, the 1% world-wide is desperate to show that “growth” can occur along with austerity. We have our own version here called “green shoots.”

Mornin’, pups

I remember back in the day when Allende nationalized copper, without COMPENSATION!!! (Or was it fair compensation?) No mention of the fact that foreign copper corps had earned something like 80% return when they had been doing ‘business’ in Chile.

Really outstanding interview at NC.

It is no good winning the political contest if you simply replace Tweedledum (hardcore neoliberals) with Tweedledee (softcore neoliberals). Likewise, it is no good winning the intellectual contest if you do not win the political contest to implement different economic policy ideas.

Link

Corps dropping ALEC is going to be first segment on democracynow after headlines.

Thanks for the link

I’m enjoying the line ALEC threw out about dropping social policy being generally dismissed as propwash to cover their plummet in donations.

From the sixth bullet and link:

… we may see Jim Kim relegitimizing the World Bank. And all of those activists around the world and all of the ordinary people who understand that the World Bank has been, really, a policeman for Wall Street, for the City of London, for the big banks all around the world …

That’s my fear.

From the link:

Structural Keynesianism links with the work of Michal Kalecki who joined Keynes’ insights about aggregate demand with Marx’s insights about class conflict and income distribution. That means structural Keynesianism overlaps with Marxist sociological and economic analysis. However, classical Marxism views capitalist economies as destined to crisis because of a falling rate of profit. Structural Keynesianism does not.

Heh. Drug testing welfare recipients in FL cost more than it would have cost for the few who were disqualified to receive benefits.

But it’s the principle. We are a moral society. /s

O’s history of appointing people who might have external appearances or a resume that seems slightly leftie, but who have already agreed to the neoliberal agenda seems appropriate to mention here.

First guest on ALEC says that its dropping social agenda is just cover for dramatically expanding its corp agenda.

Indeed, from the link:

Well, I think the danger—the reason I wrote that is the danger is that just like Barack Obama coming to power three years ago and forgetting all of his promises and legitimizing the bailouts of Wall Street and ongoing U.S. militarism and the destruction of the U.S. Constitution, we may see Jim Kim …

Quote by Patrick Bond — the Director of the Center for Civil Society and Professor at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa. Bond is the author and editor of the recently released books, Politics of Climate Justice and Durban’s Climate Gamble.

Color of Change guest on dn falls for the line that voting matters. Sucker.

But this time it will be different. This time O really means it. /s

You can bet that there’ll be “consultants” at their meetings and seminars for nutjob legislators who want to continue along those lines.

But it’s so obvious. I suspect a career move.

Prayer breakfasts, certainly.

Good point.

Good morning, pups! I think the jubilation over the ALEC decision is premature at best. They will redouble their efforts in union busting and their other economic activities; another organization will magically appear to pick up the social issues side. We’re still screwed.

I call it premature ejoyculation.

Morning pups. Trees are blooming up here in Canadaland. Two days ago the temperature pushed 30 celsisus. I went out at 7:30 am to the clinic my family doctor holds between 8 and 9 am, and the trees were bare. By 10:30 they were in bloom. Never seen it happen so quickly. In other news, a 19 year-old girl from here was jailed and then sent back home from Israel for having the affrontry to want to go to Bethlehem to demonstrate for the right of Palestinians there to higher education. Considered a security threat, just like the people who are refused visas to the US because they don’t think US foreign policy is the very greatest thing in the world.

An offshoot, not necessarily a separate organization, more likely imho.
Available by subscription only.

No freezes since February in N.TX. Should be a good year for peaches.

So why did the administration submit a fiscal year 2013 budget that called for a $550 million reduction — an 11 percent cut — in its global AIDS program?”

Just standard operating procedure: talk the talk, but walk the other way as quietly as possible.

With the passage of time Kalecki is looking better and better. Have to say that in the 60s he was still on Tobin’s macro reading list at Yale. The flow-based economics got wiped out in the 70s, when theorists present-valueized the whole economy. It may have been the worst thing that ever happened to theoretical economics, because it shifts the entire weight of policy to manipulation of expectations, and opened the door to the game theorists, for whom analysis of that manipulation is their stock in trade.

It’s also made for the MBA-preferred strategy of ‘take the money and run’, since the present value of expected flows is so much bigger than the flow itself. One (not me) could write a decent book on the convergence of these theoretical trends, the rise of mass advertising and ‘branding’, and the shifting focus from the present to the future. The thing about the the future is that it is the ultimate arena for fear and greed.

From the NC link:

This shaping of economic arrangements was obviously driven by political forces acting on behalf of corporate and financial elite interests, but economic ideas also played a critical role. First, the ideas of mainstream economists provided justification for the re-shaping of the economy in ways that elite interests wanted. Second, mainstream economists put forward additional ideas that were picked up and incorporated into the policy project of corporate and financial elites. Third, the monopoly capture of economic discourse by mainstream economics served to exclude other competing economic ideas from making it on to the policy table, into classrooms, and into the public debate. The implication of this view is the crisis is at a deep level the product of a flawed economic policy paradigm derived from a set of flawed economic ideas. Escaping the crisis means replacing that policy paradigm and the ideas from which it derives.

Thomas Palley

LOL!

And now the media rush moves from Hilary Rosen to Ted Nugent, while other major issues are ignored. Look, a new shiny object!!

Very well put!

I am still sick and disheartened by Glenzilla’s column about our separate justice system for Muslims.

Odd. I edited to add the link and it’s not showing up.

I’m still looking for the final accounting of W’s $15 billion for global AIDS in 5 years. (And for the $20 billion pledged to NYC after 9/11.)

Aloha, SD and early morning pups…!

Promising development, shareholders attempt to take back the company from executives milking profits and leaving them the hulk that’s left;
‘Analysts said that shareholders were not happy with the fact that the bank was increasing compensation to its top executives while investors were losing out.’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17751810

of course, the vote is not ‘binding’, but its a beginning.

AHA. I figured out my error.

Personalizing civil liberties abuses.

In discussing the Dan Rather “memogate” fiasco, marymccurnin said

As I recall, we all knew the crap about Rather was bullshit. We knew that one way or another, he had been had. Didn’t it have something to do with the person who gave him the goods? That person gave him corrupted material? Or that is what us tidy liberals thought.

I am so tired of being right only to be proved right years later.

I suspect that she states exactly how most of us here feel about almost everything now going on in our country.

Global AIDs assistance, as I understand it, was siphoned off to faith-based charities, went to abstinence programs.

Good morning, Bear Country and pupses. Thank you, SD.

I heard a Public Radio segment about that a while back. The rationale is that they will reduce the waste and inefficiency in the existing program. You can do more with less! Cutting taxes increases revenue.

Slimy bastards.

I feel that way all the time with our failed Foreign Policy, BC…! 8-(

The United States is to relax some financial sanctions against Burma.

Good news.

To be sure. But how much was dispensed in total? I’m guessing a small fraction of what hit the headlines.

Anyhow, my general point stands. None of these pledges are ever accounted for after the fact, let alone your point about who got them and assessment of their effectiveness.

Ditto pledges to aid to aid to countries experiencing disasters. Haiti comes to mind. The nice thing about being a Bill Clinton is never being accountable.

Mary Mapes wrote about this, too;
http://cabdrollery.blogspot.com/2007/04/questions-and-answers-unexpurgated.html

I have been out-of-touch for a few days; a last minute trip and busy. I missed reading a lot at the Diner and commenting. I get to see much good analysis here. I just don’t think the the msm actually has the same high level of analysis. It is either because they are really not very bright or too in-the-pocket of the money supplier who wants a certain slanted view.

Just read it. Haven’t gone through the comments yet. He’s absolutely right about the journals, and the disease is now beginning to affect my own marginal field (economic history). When we have Krugman here on May 19, I am going to try to engage him on this.

It was never about cost. The GOPers would spend millions to remove even one person from the rolls whom they feel shouldn’t be there.

But if we’re going to drug test, we ought to drug test EVERYONE who received a government check. Contractors. Senators. Governors. Legislative aids. Judges. Prosecutors.

Boxturtle (And remember, corporations are people too!)

Speaking of executive compensation, I learned the other day that at my University, total executive compensation rose 180 percent over the last six or seven years, while total teacher pay rose 70 percent. University of course complaining that they don’t have enough resources to support teaching and research t the level they deserve.

Some of my best friends run major universities.

“here” being where you are or here at the Lake?

It’s just a cover, period. Those social goals are just as important to ALEC as the business goals. They’re trying to preserve thier funding stream until this blows over.

Boxturtle (they see what happened to Susan Komen foundation)

I know it isn’t about cost. It’s just fun to point out the reality from time to time.

I recall reading that your proposal to test everyone has been introduced in a couple of places and the requirement to drug test welfare recipients has been hastily withdrawn.

And that’s the BETTER part of the media. The majority of the media is concerned with gossip anymore.

Boxturtle (I see the name kardashian and I just want to scream)

And Ohio has now voted to defund Planned Parenthood. I should switch my one-time donation to PP to a monthly one.

OmAli, I wonder if you would come here and grab my email address? I want to share some news with you. Thanks in advance. ;o)

wd

Travesty, really, the decorations in the admin. offices are valued more than the education offered at the moment. I watched some one trying to get a chair endowed designed for the designer to fill, with right wing, dispoved economics, the subject matter to be taught. Luckily, the courted donor didn’t go that far.

Have to get some things done, thanks for good company.

Guess they didn’t want to give her the opportunity to get RachelCorey’d. At least she wasn’t sent home in a box.

Book Salon — next month I think.

Going to the link now…

Off to swim in the great capitalist cesspool.

US KIA Afghanistan: 1,938

Afghan, Iraki and Pakistani casualties: estimates vary to over 1.5M

US MBS 2012: 13,392 and counting

Candidacy

No war but class war

Be good to yourselves, and all other living things

Namaste

Never. Give. Up.

Book Salon, May 19th, here!

They’re part of the 1% — at least in spirit.

Looks like it’s been the week of a little UNASUL/UNASUR shock and awe to the global north.

Hou boy, that oughta be a barn burner.

It’s be more difficult to fight that than it was to fight SB5, alas. The Pro-life folks are probably powerful enough here to keep a revoke off the ballot here.

Boxturtle (If only Obama was smart enough to use PP as a campaign issue)

Yes, maybe there should be a pre-Salon. LOLOL

He is smart enough. He’s just not courageous enough.

Just sent you an email…

Gotta stay away from that one.

x2

Get our ducks in a row.

Hey, Paul, those of us who aren’t economists have learned a lot since the last time you were here. You be in trouble, big boy. LOL

Heh, I’m gonna try to be there.

With rings on me fingers, bells on me toes and a bone through me nose ho ho.

Hope everyone saw that our beloved Moustache of Wisdom was crowned One True Wanker of the Decade by Atrios.

We don’t want him to think we’re a bunch of Marxists — or, even worse, MMTers.

Now whatever would give him that idea? *g*

But, but, that’s what ya is…! ;-)

eCAHN, you’ve got to be there to ask your insightful questions. You would be shortchanging the FDL pups if you don’t come. econobuzz, the same for you. I certainly hope to lurk around the fringe.

Of course those pundits are correct. Just look at how well the economy has done with the bush tax cuts.

Actually, I don’t think there are a large large number of either here.

Good morning, folk. Please read Jon Walker’s piece on supersecret Obama plus comments before it disappears. I think it is an important conversation for progressives to be having. {Grabbing a stickybun and upreading.}

Thanks for the link. I do think that Mapes spoke a little too soon to say that the strong two-party system was back.

But they can be noisy — myself included. Need to exercise some self discipline.

You can’t guilt me out. I’ve done my civic duty wrt to Krugman 2X over. Been there, done that.

If it’s pouring with rain, I don’t have any good books to read, and I am fortified with 2 martinis (one gives me a pretty good buzz), I might change my mind.

BTW, as I said, I’ve been out of touch lately. In the little lurking that I have been able to do, I haven’t seen DW’s signature on any comment. Have I missed something?

As long as the discussion is about the book, it may all be fine. I think we need to be courteous always. (Note to self)

FWIW, I largely agree with KThug on most short term policy prescriptions. The rest, not so much.

I hope we’re all civil and polite to Krugman, even if we disagree with him on some things. It makes me really unhappy when we trash someone here because we aren’t 100% in agreement with every word uttered. (Rachel Maddow and Charlie Pierce come to mind.)

I read Krugman every day. I don’t understand enough economics to suss out when he’s wrong, but I have learned a lot from him, as I have from others like Yves Smith, Dean Baker, etc.

You’re right and I’d like to have him discuss his objections to either without it turning into a fiasco.

Man, doesn’t give us a lot of time to read his new book.

End This Depression Now!

I think it’s fair for the FDL host to outline the major points in his book and ask commenters to stay on those topics until the discussion is exhausted — and only then bring in other “considerations.” I’m all for freedom of expression, but if — IF — there is agreement on the major points, it would be nice to establish that up front.

But YMMV

Thanks for the link. I guess that my missing the diary is evidence that I just don’t have time or energy to read everything every day. Good work.

When you invite someone to do something, as Krugman has been invited to participate in the Book Salon, you owe them civility.

I think civility includes allowing them some opportunity to state their position, before attacking, even if the attack is done in a civil manner.

And, generally speaking, with a few exceptions, most folks are civil to the authors who participate in Book Salon.

Every once in awhile I read the blog roll of ‘friends’ of the blogger. I noticed that on Pierce’s roll, Pam and TBogg are listed, but FDL is not. On Glenn’s roll FDL is there.

I agree. It reminds me of a consultant I once hired who, for every question about current policy I asked, he would say: “Start with a clean piece of paper.” Not helpful.

I was sort of serious about this. Maybe someone could do a short constructive summary of KThug’s book between now and the event — to make sure everyone knew what it said and didn’t say. But maybe that would not suit the folks who do the Salon.

Just a thought — or brain fart, take your pick.

Charlie Pierce is a big fan of TBogg and links to his posts frequently. But TBogg’s blog was separate from FDL for a lot of years before he came “into the fold” so I suspect the omission of FDL is not necessarily deliberate.

EDIT: PHB was a separate entity also until recently — sometime in the past year.

I agree. I’ve ordered the book and hope to have it finished in time. We’ll only have a little over 2 weeks to read it.

Release date is 4/30. He won’t have reasonable expectations that anyone except host (who is that btw) will have read the book bef 5/19.

As a general comment on civility, I sometimes listen to Thom Hartmann on the radio. On Tuesday he had a guest on that is a professor at a California college. The man said that he was with a group that was trying to bring a better education to college students because they don’t read, think, or reason well, and have little understanding of the American political history or current status. Personally, I think he was stating the obvious very well. Thom jumped on him because his group got funding from a conservative source. The man tried to explain that the funding had not influenced the outcome of the study. Thom accused him of saying that liberal professors had corrupted the students. The man said no he didn’t say that and wanted Thom to listen to him and discuss his points. Thom kept interrupting and saying things that he hadn’t said. Thom said that it was this study that santorum had quoted in a speech in California. The man said santorum was totally wrong in his interpretation and the study in no way supported any santorum position. It was silly and Hartmann sounded like a fool as far as I’m concerned. He has allowed others with stupid statements to go on and on. He is always saying how the liberals are much more civil and fact oriented. Not in this case.

Krugman’s policy prescriptions re: ending the “depression” are pretty well known. I venture to say that most at FDL will largely agree with most of them — with some reservations — but some may think they don’t go nearly far enough. So, logically (but subtly) separating the Salon into:

(a) what does the book actually say?
(b) do we agree with the major premises?
(c) are there important exceptions?, and
(c) what of importance is left out?

would seem logical. But, again, YMMV and the choice is up to those who run the Salon.

Was there any pushback? I have never listened to him, so I don’t know if there are multiple callers who can react or a comments section on a blog or something.

I understand that is the case. FDL has been around for as long as either of those two, and was closer to his outlook politically when Jane and Christy Hardin Smith were writing more; especially Jane after Christy retired. I just think that is odd.

Usually he doesn’t take callers when he interviews people. He will try to point out problems with what the person is saying, but in a soft way. This was really harsher than he usually is. He is a big 0bot, so I don’t pay much attention. I only listen when I’m driving and bored with whatever else is on and I won’t have time to put in a disc of music (I’m not an ipod user). You can find him at Truth-out.

The man tried to explain that the funding had not influenced the outcome of the study.

IMHO, this is NEVER true. That’s the first question I ask. If it’s conservative money, I can predict the conclusions 99% of the time.

Edit: To be fair, also true of neoliberal money — like Gates.

Thank you oldgold and msmolly about the need to be civil with a guest in our house.

FDL (especially some of the commenters) sorta went off the deep end against Obama. I am not saying this as a criticism, just an observation. It can drive some people away. Charlie is plenty critical of the Obama administration, but also more even-handed, and maybe that’s why (although some of PHB is pretty critical, too).

But a few of FDL’s commenters just outright attack and fling ugly things at anyone who isn’t rabidly anti-Obama, and that puts people off. It puts me off, sometimes, and I’m no Obama fan.

Hiya, AC2. No subbing today, I assume?

The thing that bothers me about the serial Obama bashers is it’s all they have. Ten lines of rant over shit we all know about and not one word of constructive anything.

FWIW, some on FDL — including myself — believe that Obama enablers, those who don’t push him from the left to keep his promises but rather cover for him, are as bad as it gets. I try to keep that under control myself. But it is a very visceral reaction that is not ameliorated by telling me how bad the Rs are. I didn’t vote for an R.

Good morning msmolly. Subbed the last two days both in Special Ed. I really like those kids. So ready to learn and listen to what you have to say.
How are you doing? It is supposed to get up to 70 today before the bottom drops out and I really need to do my third cutting of the lawn.
Right now, just waiting to leave for a dr. appt. and was just going to lurk until you and oldgold hit the nail on the head about being civil to our guests.

Big AMEN to that. It gets tiresome. And yes, push from the left. But that’s a far cry from what goes on here in the comments sometimes.

In my opinion, and it is just that, MY opinion, is that the ugly stuff just reflects very poorly on the commenter, and does nothing to convince me of the validity of the position.

It’s creeping up to 70 here today, too. I’m hoping to get in another good bike ride before the “bottom drops out” again. Although layered up properly I can ride when it’s in the mid-50s. Below that, I don’t. Weather wuss.

I understand about the usual influence of funding on the outcome of a study, and I don’t think anyone here would accuse me of being conservative. My point is that the things he said were not particularly controversial. He also said that political activism in the classroom is a no-no because activists don’t want the students to think, whereas the true teachers, whether liberal or conservative want the students to think for themselves. Again, I don’t see anything controversial there. He kept asking Hartmann to listen to him and discuss the points he made, not put words in his mouth and keep interrupting to dispute the words Hartmann said. A reasonable request and a plea for civility if you have a guest.

A reasonable request and a plea for civility if you have a guest.

Oh, I agree. My narrow point was about the influence of funding on viewpoint. In my experience I find a one-to-one match.

For me, and me only, I don’t listen to anyone who starts out by blaming the victim. That includes students and teachers.

On edit: I mean “major” or “primary” funding source — for an organization or study.

Nah, not a Weather wuss, just smart. I can cut the grass being layered up too so as long as it is not raining, we can both get things done.
I better get going but it was good to see you this morning.
Have a great day!

Well it would have been a fun read to see eCAHN and econobuzz tangle with Krugman.

I’m not defending the professor or his study. I never got to hear enough of him/it, to know how I felt about the whole thing. I certainly think that if a guest says something out of line or wrong, the host should point that out and call the guest on it. My point is that if you invite a guest, then let him or her make a point. If you then want to push back, do so. To invite a guest and continually interrupt so the guest can’t make a point to be accepted or debated annoys me as much a not responding to correct something that is wrong. My making this comment was just to show how civility should work and didn’t in a very recent incident. I can’t point to a rightwing example because I don’t listen to them, even when driving. Maybe I should occasionally.

You’re correct on that. Often I pass on making a comment because I realize that I would not be adding anything. In fact, I don’t have many constructive comments because I feel that there is nobody in power that cares what outcome I want to see happen. I don’t see voting as a real way to affect anything because the machines are too easily hacked or even pre-set. I also can’t see anyone following me politically to make any change. When someone tells me to run for office, I have, school board, and I take the position very seriously, but, beyond that, I don’t see much.

NAH, it would just raise your blood pressure!!

EDIT: supposed to be a reply to #118.

SD and anyone interested, you might want to read this tribute to Levon Helm, who is dying of cancer.

Whip to Grave: Levon Helm, the Real Voice of America

School boards, soil and water commissions, and planning commissions (unless the city or county councils rule with exceptions) are the most significant offices to hold right now. And have to answer the most phone calls and emails with no bureaucratic screening mechanism.

And mostly without compensation (at least for school boards).

Compensation? That’s for the cigar chompers, not for the folks who actually listen to people.

And listen, and listen…and listen. My ex was on the school board, and it was a very important and thankless job.

I campaigned for my orthopedic surgeon who ran for City Council, and I kept telling him he didn’t know what he was biting off, that every crank in South Bend would think they owned him. He seemed to be OK with that. Haven’t talked to him for awhile and I wonder how it’s going.

O/T I received my coffee today hank you.

Freezing in here. I’m turning the heat up.

Caffeine. The Real Reason Squirrels Move So Fast.

Deacon Blues

Brrrrr.

Hey there, Mr. Coffee :)

Hey got your email and will try and call tomorrow. Thanks for the info.