Political Discussion

RenegadeMonster said:
It amazes me how slow government agencies are to respond at times.

In MA, the state inspection center was attacked by malware bringing down their computers on March 23. This also resulted in the inspection computer systems being down at every shop that does inspections meaning that anyone trying to get their car inspected was SOL.

The computer systems remain down as of this morning and the latest update is they don't expect them to be back up until at least Friday at the earliest. It makes me wonder, was this a ransomware attack? What could take down computer systems for 2 to 3 weeks :unsure:

In addition to taking forever to resolve the situation, it wasn't until late yesterday that they announced that police would be giving everyone with an expired inspection sticker from March a free pass until April 30th. The same applies for anyone who bought a new car on March 23 or later as they are legal required to get a inspection sticker on it within a week of purchase.

This change in policy comes after people were complaining police were pulling them over and fining them for expired inspection stickers earlier this month. Their complaint was they couldn't get their car inspected so why should they be fined.

This whole situation is affected me currently as well. I really haven't been driving anywhere other than the grocery store still because of COVID. I had noticed my inspection sticker expired in March last week and went to get it inspected only to be told their computers are down. Same story everywhere I tried.
Click to expand...
This happened to the City of New Orleans a year ago. Though they never came out and said it, I think they paid off the hacker to get the city systems back. I think this is going to be the new normal for a lot of city governments.

www.forbes.com

New Orleans Declares State Of Emergency Following Cyber Attack

The City of New Orleans has suffered a cybersecurity attack. Mayor LaToya Cantrell has declared a state of emergency.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.wfsb.com

Local News

WFSB- Connecticut News
www.wfsb.com www.wfsb.com


MA and CT governors are working together to try to control prescription drug prices within their states. They are looking to cap the price increase of prescription drugs to the rate of inflation. About 2%.

As expected, the pharmaceutical companies are pushing back bigtime. Their go to scare tactic is to say that they will not be able to fund research and development of new drugs if laws go into place to cap price increases.
Click to expand...
Yeah, like all that research that went into creating mRNA vaccines....oh wait, that research was funded with public money. Big pharma just cashed in after several of the researchers that contributed to the science the vaccines are based on asked that their discovery be shared with the world at no cost.
 
nolalady said:
This happened to the City of New Orleans a year ago. Though they never came out and said it, I think they paid off the hacker to get the city systems back. I think this is going to be the new normal for a lot of city governments.

www.forbes.com

New Orleans Declares State Of Emergency Following Cyber Attack

The City of New Orleans has suffered a cybersecurity attack. Mayor LaToya Cantrell has declared a state of emergency.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...


They are not saying much at all about it. They are just being vague with "malware" attack. There also really has been no news coverage or information released about this until yesterday.

The computer systems were already down for a week when I went to get my car inspected and I had no idea. There was no information out there for me to expect the computer systems being down statewide.

It really didn't gain any attention until people started getting fined for having expired inspections. That started bringing in media attention, and not long after the state announced it would give a pass for people who had inspection stickers expire in March until April 30th. Not much more info than that has been released other than they are not expecting the computers to be restored until Friday at the earliest.

Apparently Georgia uses the same software for their emissions tests and are down as well due to the same malware attack.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
They are not saying much at all about it. They are just being vague with "malware" attack. There also really has been no news coverage or information released about this until yesterday.

The computer systems were already down for a week when I went to get my car inspected and I had no idea. There was no information out there for me to expect the computer systems being down statewide.

It really didn't gain any attention until people started getting fined for having expired inspections. That started bringing in media attention, and not long after the state announced it would give a pass for people who had inspection stickers expire in March until April 30th. Not much more info than that has been released other than they are not expecting the computers to be restored until Friday at the earliest.

Apparently Georgia uses the same software for their emissions tests and are down as well due to the same malware attack.
Click to expand...
This is largely how it went down in NOLA. They finally came out and said something a few days to a week after the attack once they realized that they did not have the computer person that could reverse it. I think that a lot of these municipalities are having to pay off hackers, but they aren't advertising it because it would just open a floodgate.
 
Chucktshoes said:
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Initial Actions to Address the Gun Violence Public Health Epidemic | The White House

Let the games begin.
Click to expand...
I don't see anything they propose helping much with gun violence except for the jobs proposal. The real way to stem crime is to make the system equitable--more jobs with a living wage and benefits--so people don't feel as if they have to turn to crime. Sure there will still be criminals, but the vast majority would be de-incentivized.

My favorite is the "red flag" law. While I think it's coming from a good place, this isn't going to stop domestic violence. I'm not sure how someone could ever bar someone from accessing their already owned fire arms. It makes as much difference as getting a restraining order against someone.
 
And this is going to be it for me today, as I will be descending into data shortly, but it looks like this infrastructure bill is not going to fly since corporate leaders are definitely against it.

Groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable have largely rejected the plan, saying the tax hikes that Biden is proposing to pay for it would crush American competitiveness.


Top executives of companies who in the past have given speeches about the need for infrastructure spending are mostly silent, opting to complain privately that Biden’s plan is too expensive, too partisan, too laden with unrelated social policy and not at all what they had in mind. Jeff Bezos, CEO of online retailing behemoth Amazon, put out a statement on Tuesday that seemed at first glance like an endorsement of Biden’s plan.
Except it wasn’t.
Bezos, like other CEOs, nodded toward acceptance of a higher top corporate tax rate — though he actually put his name behind it. But he stopped well short of explicitly backing Biden’s infrastructure proposal and instead called for a “balanced solution” to boost U.S. competitiveness. Underneath the surface, the corporate world generally despises Biden’s plan in its current form and is fixated on its defeat.
www.politico.com

Corporate America tears down Biden's infrastructure plan

Executives at some of America’s largest companies complain much more bitterly in private about the White House approach.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

As for me, I think that if he wants to be bipartisan, he needs to strike the social stuff from the bill. I think we also need more social spending, but I find that social spending is much easier to do when people have jobs and are able to pay their bills. I would rather get some jobs out of a pared down infrastructure bill that can be passed quickly rather than dragging our feet over social support spending. If you want to help people with things like elder care and child care, this needs to be done with M4A and an expansion of Medicaid services, as well as an early childhood education bill that pays for PreK. What's being put into the infrastructure bill isn't going to go far enough to truly help, because it isn't M4A. I want us to have the expanded care that this bill provides, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.
 
nolalady said:
I don't see anything they propose helping much with gun violence except for the jobs proposal. The real way to stem crime is to make the system equitable--more jobs with a living wage and benefits--so people don't feel as if they have to turn to crime. Sure there will still be criminals, but the vast majority would be de-incentivized.

My favorite is the "red flag" law. While I think it's coming from a good place, this isn't going to stop domestic violence. I'm not sure how someone could ever bar someone from accessing their already owned fire arms. It makes as much difference as getting a restraining order against someone.
Click to expand...
Bingo. 2/3rds of deaths related to firearms are suicides. We will set that aside for the moment.

Of the other third, an overwhelming majority of them take place in two percent of counties. Those counties all share some similar demographic traits. They are poor, inner city communities. The issue of gun violence is a socio-economic one. Its solutions will be socio-economic in nature.

That’s a much harder lift that if dealt with honestly forces everyone to look at how their policies helped contribute to the situation. That ain’t gonna happen, so “ban stuff” will always be the cry.
 
nolalady said:
And this is going to be it for me today, as I will be descending into data shortly, but it looks like this infrastructure bill is not going to fly since corporate leaders are definitely against it.

Groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable have largely rejected the plan, saying the tax hikes that Biden is proposing to pay for it would crush American competitiveness.


Top executives of companies who in the past have given speeches about the need for infrastructure spending are mostly silent, opting to complain privately that Biden’s plan is too expensive, too partisan, too laden with unrelated social policy and not at all what they had in mind. Jeff Bezos, CEO of online retailing behemoth Amazon, put out a statement on Tuesday that seemed at first glance like an endorsement of Biden’s plan.
Except it wasn’t.
Bezos, like other CEOs, nodded toward acceptance of a higher top corporate tax rate — though he actually put his name behind it. But he stopped well short of explicitly backing Biden’s infrastructure proposal and instead called for a “balanced solution” to boost U.S. competitiveness. Underneath the surface, the corporate world generally despises Biden’s plan in its current form and is fixated on its defeat.
www.politico.com

Corporate America tears down Biden's infrastructure plan

Executives at some of America’s largest companies complain much more bitterly in private about the White House approach.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

As for me, I think that if he wants to be bipartisan, he needs to strike the social stuff from the bill. I think we also need more social spending, but I find that social spending is much easier to do when people have jobs and are able to pay their bills. I would rather get some jobs out of a pared down infrastructure bill that can be passed quickly rather than dragging our feet over social support spending. If you want to help people with things like elder care and child care, this needs to be done with M4A and an expansion of Medicaid services, as well as an early childhood education bill that pays for PreK. What's being put into the infrastructure bill isn't going to go far enough to truly help, because it isn't M4A. I want us to have the expanded care that this bill provides, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.
Click to expand...

They all say they support it until it's actually time to support it. Then it's too expensive. Compared to every other developed country we are spending far less on infrastructure. The more we wait, the more expensive it will get. Investing in our country does not make us less competitive. It just cuts back corporate taxes. Companies moving to developing nations for cheap labor are still going to whether or not we raise corporate taxes and fund infrastructure.

The corporate tax rate increase really should not be unexpected. I don't feel like it goes far enough as it only cuts Trump's tax cut in half.

Despite covid, corporate America is still making huge profits. It's the small and local places that are hurting.
 
Financial engineering is part of why we are in the current mess we're in. Too many people at the top are worried about "shareholder value" and it's crippling our ability to be economically competitive. Business leaders are funneling money to buy back shares and other financial manipulations of capital instead of creating value by investing in new facilities, research and development of new technology, and retaining top talent. If Biden wants to move forward in a meaningful way, he must address stock buy backs.

“Biden is open to the buyback issue,” Lazonick notes, “but with the exception of a few people, like Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, who has called for a ban on stock buybacks, few advisers around him truly understand the problem.” Lazonick adds that the Biden administration ought to put down some rules for companies it partners with on any infrastructure and climate plan. As he sees it, if they are going to get taxpayer money, then they shouldn’t be doing buybacks while they have a government contract, period. Furthermore, there should be a ban on company insiders selling their stock as long as they are getting subsidized, because it creates conflicts of interest. “You don’t get to cash out during the duration of the contract,” Lazonick explains.

Large government projects face plenty of hurdles moving from conception to construction and operations. Making sure that the taxpayers get their money’s worth out of the large companies the government must partner with to design, produce, and implement various parts of the plan is one of them. In Lazonick’s view, it’s time to blow the whistle on stock buybacks that waste resources and do not reflect sound business practices.

You can’t achieve a great leap into the future with billions in buybacks dragging you down.

Stock Buybacks Stand in the Way of Biden’s Infrastructure Plan

Hedge fund managers are pushing American firms to play Wall Street games instead of investing in technologies of the future. China doesn’t have that problem.
www.ineteconomics.org
 
nolalady said:
Financial engineering is part of why we are in the current mess we're in. Too many people at the top are worried about "shareholder value" and it's crippling our ability to be economically competitive. Business leaders are funneling money to buy back shares and other financial manipulations of capital instead of creating value by investing in new facilities, research and development of new technology, and retaining top talent. If Biden wants to move forward in a meaningful way, he must address stock buy backs.

“Biden is open to the buyback issue,” Lazonick notes, “but with the exception of a few people, like Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, who has called for a ban on stock buybacks, few advisers around him truly understand the problem.” Lazonick adds that the Biden administration ought to put down some rules for companies it partners with on any infrastructure and climate plan. As he sees it, if they are going to get taxpayer money, then they shouldn’t be doing buybacks while they have a government contract, period. Furthermore, there should be a ban on company insiders selling their stock as long as they are getting subsidized, because it creates conflicts of interest. “You don’t get to cash out during the duration of the contract,” Lazonick explains.

Large government projects face plenty of hurdles moving from conception to construction and operations. Making sure that the taxpayers get their money’s worth out of the large companies the government must partner with to design, produce, and implement various parts of the plan is one of them. In Lazonick’s view, it’s time to blow the whistle on stock buybacks that waste resources and do not reflect sound business practices.

You can’t achieve a great leap into the future with billions in buybacks dragging you down.

Stock Buybacks Stand in the Way of Biden’s Infrastructure Plan

Hedge fund managers are pushing American firms to play Wall Street games instead of investing in technologies of the future. China doesn’t have that problem.
www.ineteconomics.org
Click to expand...


I consider the CEO of the company I work for to be very progressive. And a lot of business decisions she makes are very progressive and reactions to current events and ahead of most every other company. For example, last year during the black lives matter protests we were encouraged to participate and got the day off with pay. Not to mention or work pushes for inclusion and push our clients in that direction in their marketing.

However, when it comes to shareholders. They still come before employees.

During the heart of covid last year, we laid off 15% of salaries, which amounted to a lot more than 15% of staff. And her reasoning behind it was we are a business. While she would do everything possible to keep employees. The business and its shareholders must come first. It is her responsibility as CEO to keep the business profitable and hit our profit margins for our shareholders.

So, if we lose business due to covid, we have to make up for that somewhere. And sadly, often the only option is layoffs. She talked about the need to react fast and not wait it out to see how things pan out. Also about how strong and financially stable we are and how we lucked out that most of our clients did not cut back work because of covid.


But why is it that way. Why is guaranteeing shareholders their profit margins more important than keeping people employed?
 
RenegadeMonster said:
But why is it that way. Why is guaranteeing shareholders their profit margins more important than keeping people employed?
Click to expand...
Because that's the way that business is structured. There are other enterprise structures where that isn't the case -- non-profits come to mind as an alternative, for example. But by explicitly structuring it like that, that's what they said they were going to do.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
But why is it that way. Why is guaranteeing shareholders their profit margins more important than keeping people employed?
Click to expand...

Because workers are human resources to be extracted to maintain systems of privilege and power. Shareholders are an aspect of the "bank" and the bank (financial institutions, markets) is the system that derives the fuel (workers) to power itself. There are more workers than bankers. This is why pitting worker against worker in various cultural, identity, and political wars is one of the tools that is used to maintain the systems.

It really is that straightforward.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top