There are two major arguments used by MAGAs to defend Trump. One is that he is keeping his promises. The other is that this is what the people voted for. The promise? First, it’s not entirely true. Lowering prices? Stopping the war in Ukraine the first day? The great new healthcare plan? Second, some of the promises were scary. Keeping such promises do not impress me. He promised to get rid of his political opponents, Since when is not worshipping Trump a reason to fire someone. This is what the people voted for? Since when? He won by a few points. Many did not vote for him. That doesn’t even include many that did not vote. In fact, less than half the country did not vote for him. MAGAs should at least be factual. His supporters voted for him, not the American people. His supporters urge everyone to simply accept the results and support him. Why? Has the First Amendment and the right to dissent gone away? Did MAGAs accept and support Obama or Biden? January 6 would seem to argue otherwise. There’s a lot of hypocrisy taking place.
Good morning Laurence - You are accurate in your statement that Trump did not win a majority of the popular vote as his total represented 49.8% of the total vote (about 2% of the votes went to third party candidates).
And doing so, he increased his vote totals and percentages in virtually every demographic group including blacks, Hispanics, women and especially, among young (18-29) voters. He ran the table in all swings dates, and also increased his vote in virtually every state including blue states. I believe the overwhelming majority of Trump voters such as myself were voting for the policies that he ran on.
He is now indeed following through on his campaign promises. And a recent Marquette University poll reflected a significant majority if Americans support the policies he is undertaking...
60% favor deporting people here illegally
59% support declaring a national emergency at the southern border
60% support expanding oil and gas development
63% support government recognition of only to genders
Both presidents Obama and Biden promised to identify and cut waste in the federal government. However, the federal government continued to grow under their administrations. Now, the Doge efforts have already identified massive fraud and waste including billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers, thousands of people still listed active in the Social Security system whose age would be 130 or more, FEMA sending $59 million to New York City to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels, a $20 billion dollar fund at HHS that has been used to purchase cars, housing and pay off credit card debt for illegal migrants, USAID payments to Gaza that included $313 million for a cement plant that undoubtedly was used to construct the terror tunnels, and a plethora of programs that the overwhelming majority of Americans would strongly oppose. And of course, a significant reduction in workforce is an absolute necessity in reducing the size of government.
I recognize and respect that you and many other Americans do not support Trump's policies, and I look forward to a robust public debate on the merits of his policies and spending cuts. But at this point, all indications are that a solid majority of Americans do support his policies to date. Have a great day, and stay safe and warm in the current wretched winter weather!
It's really not worth my time or energy to respond, David, but your comments represent the poster-child of what we are up against. For fun, here are the facts on just two of your claims:
Social Security fraud discovered by the DOGE young'uns. This is from Wired but also in the Guardian, PolitiFact, Poynter, etc.. In other words, easily debunked:
"While no evidence was produced to back up this claim, it was picked up by right-wing commentators online, primarily on Musk’s own X platform, as well as being reported credibly by pro-Trump media outlets.
Computer programmers quickly claimed that the 150 figure was not evidence of fraud but rather the result of a weird quirk of the Social Security Administration’s benefits system, which was largely written in COBOL, a 60-year-old programming language that undergirds SSA’s databases as well as systems from many other US government agencies.
COBOL is rarely used today, and as such, Musk’s cadre of young engineers may well be unfamiliar with it.
Because COBOL does not have a date type, some implementations rely instead on a system whereby all dates are coded to a reference point. The most commonly used is May 20, 1875, as this was the date of an international standards-setting conference held in Paris, known as the Convention du Mètre."
And FEMA housing immigrants in luxury hotels. This from PolitiFact but also the facts and details can be found in some AP stories, Newsweek, and other outlets if you'd only look. And your guy himself had a hand in distributing this money in his first term (see last sentence). The horror!
"-The Federal Emergency Management Agency awarded New York City money as part of a program Congress created to help states, municipalities and nonprofits provide basic services to immigrants.
-The program uses Customs and Border Protection funding and is managed by FEMA. It does not use money from FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund.
-New York City does not house migrants in luxury hotel rooms. In 2024, it spent an average of $156 dollars per night per hotel room, below the General Services Administration’s rate."
"FEMA has funded states and organizations that help migrants since Trump’s first term
Since Trump’s first administration, FEMA has given money to help state and local governments and nonprofit organizations that provide immigrants with basic services.
In 2019, as illegal immigration increased, Congress gave FEMA funding to expand its Emergency Food and Shelter Program to include migrant support services to immigrants awaiting court proceedings. The program previously had been used only for people facing homelessness and hunger.
In 2023, Congress directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection and FEMA to create the Shelter and Services Program for migrants, removing immigration grants from the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. The Shelter and Services Program uses money Congress has given Customs and Border Protection, and is administered by FEMA.
In fiscal year 2024, which started October 2023 and ended September 2024, Congress directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection to give FEMA $650 million for the Shelter and Services Program.
Neither program was, or is, funded with money promised to FEMA’s disaster relief work.
"The Disaster Relief Fund has nothing to do with any migrant assistance account because all that spending is from separate funds," Joshua Sewell, a federal budget expert at the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense, told PolitiFact in October 2024.
During Trump’s first administration, he shifted $271 million in FEMA funding, including about $155 million from the Disaster Relief Fund, to address immigration."
Those are the facts related to just two of your twisted claims. Simple searches can untangle the others as well. I don't believe for a minute that you would be able to manage a robust debate ... based on facts. But, I am staying safe and warm in this wretched weather, thank you.
The date, actually Jan. 1, 1875, is a government convention having nothing to do with Cobol except as it was used and misused by the government. I saw an actual ad recently for Cobol programmers in the Tribune classifieds. I was a Cobol programmer during the late 1960s and early '70s and was almost tempted to apply. Good Cobol could be written (e.g., by me), but it usually wasn't.
In addition, the SSA database currently contains over 400 million names, more than the entire US population. SSA doesn't receive notice of every death in the US & also doesn't know if someone leaves the country.
SSA also doesn't pay out any benefits to anyone over the age of 115, so it's impossible for all those alleged ancient people that lunatic Elmo screamed about to be getting any money!
No David, I don’t think we will have future debates. You are far too one sided. You pick and choose the items you wish to point out. You ignore any of his flaws, like appointing himself the sole guardian of government, attempting illegal moves that get courts ruling against him, or making statements that he is above the law if he thinks he’s doing good. No one one elected him king. As far as I’m concerned, you are just another MAGA.
david - as usual, you are mostly correct. and i am all in favor of downsizing the fed govt, especially its expenditures.
however, pls stick to the facts. DOGE has NOT already identified massive fraud and waste including billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers - this is false. Soc Sec Admin has been combing records, culling ineligible recipients for a while now. if you feel you can prove otherwise about DOGE ID'g billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers, pls provide us with a link to a credible source.
'Obama and Biden ... the federal government continued to grow under their administrations' - misleading. yes, it's true - but the fed govt grew more under trump 1.0 than during obama or biden, ignoring extraordinary covid-related expeditures during both the trump & biden admin's.
also, musk & trump are lying about the alleged transparency of DOGE - it's almost totally opaque. why can't the taxpayers know who is working with musk on these raids on govt agencies? not saying they shdn't be allowed to go into and investigate the expeditures of govt agencies - but why flout the law in the process?
and please clarify the alleged transparency of DOGE, accd'g to its website - https://doge.gov/
finally, you're cherry-picking stats. e.g., while i don't doubt that 60%, or more, of americans support deporting felons who are in the USA illegally, i highly doubt that a majority of americans support deporting long-term, law abiding, taxpaying undocumented residents who have raised families in the USA, or the so-called Dreamers.
that's fine that you support pres. trump, his policies [such as they are], and the way he executes what he says he'll do. but i suggest stick you to the facts.
here's the reply from perplexity.ai to the question: what percentage of americans support deporting anyone in the USA illegally?
According to recent polls, approximately 66% of Americans support deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally4. This figure is consistent across multiple surveys, with some variation:
A January 2025 Axios/Ipsos poll found that 66% of Americans support deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally4.
A September 2024 Scripps News/Ipsos survey revealed that a majority of Americans support mass deportation of undocumented immigrants6.
An October 2024 Marquette Law School poll indicated that 58% of registered voters agreed with deporting undocumented immigrants2.
However, it's important to note that support for deportation decreases significantly when specific methods or consequences are mentioned. For example:
Only 38% support using active duty military to find and detain undocumented immigrants4.
Just 34% support deportations that involve separating families or sending people to countries other than their country of origin4.
Only 34% support deporting immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children4.
Additionally, when given alternatives, a majority of voters (56%) believe that most undocumented immigrants should be given the opportunity to apply for legal status rather than being deported
i'm not offering this just to play trump antagonist - it's another example of how stats can differ depending on how, & when & of whom, the Qs are asked.
Good morning Bob - Thanks for this Paul. And you are totally correct, that responses can vary dramatically depended upon how the questions are asked. Push-polling. In political campaigns is a long time technique used to get people to say the favor a particular candidate with questions that in most cases will point them in that direction.
I saw an interview of borders czar Tom Homan the other day, and he said something remarkable. One day earlier this week, total encounters of illegal immigrants at our southern border was 229. Certainly sounds like the border is now finally being controlled, And that was a policy most everyone wanted to see happen.
Trump's tweet is shocking and horrifying, but only because he expressed it openly. It's really just a re-statement of the SCOTUS ruling that granted him immunity for any "official" act. It is also a simple statement of factual reality since every branch of the federal government is firmly under his control. Neither the legislature nor the courts have either the will or the ability to counter any of his acts. So both, de facto and de jure, we are right now living under an autocratic regime, with one person above the law imposing his deranged, ignorant, cruel, petty will on on the entire country.
As much as we may want to measure a teacher’s value by what students learn (victories), measuring growth as we measure wins and losses in sports simply does not fit the realities of our schools or of children’’s individual needs in general. I once had high hopes for the “baseline to end of term” testing — until I watched students 1) tank the baseline to assure growth later 2) perform poorly on test days because of factors beyond their control 3) taking tests that couldn’t possibly measure accurately all of the required learning goals in one sitting. Limited stakes testing can be useful in knowing what a child knows and doesn’t know, but teaching a random selection of young people to learn, individually, is very different from coaching a highly selective and motivated group of athletes to complement each other’s skills to win games together. The comparison is absurd.
My idea from many years ago (which would be nearly impossible to do) was to stop basing grades on homework and only base them on how far the class gets through the material along with scores on mid-term/final exams. The class would only progress if all the students successfully “test out” of the current module. There would still be a chance that some students would tank just to be obstinate, but I think the class would have a better chance of learning and retaining the material.
This sounds logical, but It’s the “all students” part that people outside of day-to-day learning don’t consider. Students have widely varying ability levels, motivations, and needs for learning. As a parent, I really don’t care how the class performs, I need my kid to learn and grow as a person. Mass testing and aggregated results don’t help me. Also, I didn’t see test-tankers as obstinate, I saw them as intelligent — they understand the game and know what matters most — the scores. However, in my experience I saw far more students simply not caring about any of the tests, most of which were out of context with what was happening in the classroom.
I certainly see your point, however, I don’t know of any other objective way to try to measure teacher quality. certainly most of us know it when we see it – the teacher who commands respect and attention in front of the classroom. But even a great teacher can face enormous challenges in a classroom full of challenged kids.
Certainly. My best guess is that teachers must be evaluated in the entirety of their value to the system, otherwise we’re simply seeing them as individual tutors. How do they contribute to the school’s institutional mission and community of learning? For example, if a district values girls athletics, does the teacher coach, attend games visibly, use their students’ interest in the game to enhance classroom work, etc? In progressive-thinking districts (all of them imo) do they frequently update curriculum, mentor younger teachers, keep up with recent studies on best practices in the classroom, etc? Our desire to measure by standardize test scores is really useless unless you’re trying to sort the students, not educate them.
Rick, in my experience those items I mentioned are in fact measured on a rather lengthy teacher evaluation form that generates useful conversations between teachers and admin. What has been controversial is how much student test scores are factored into those evaluations. If your “it” refers to student measures, good teaching requires working with students to set standards and goals in multiple areas (writing, math, problem-solving, project work etc.) that clearly measure growth for each particular student. Tests are one snapshot of that.
The fear that is promoted in teacher evaluation debates is that good teachers will get low ratings and be driven out. But the purpose of all evaluation systems is to identify and reward strong performers and to identify and eliminate poor performers. This requires reasonable (not perfect) and objective measures in combination with good management. High performance organizations always eliminate the bottom 5 to 10 percent of performers to continuously drive-up average performance.
The CTU does not trust CPS management and is primarily motivated to protect all members. So, they reject any performance evaluation, promote tenure, promote time-in-grade advancement, and pretend that there are no low performing teachers.
Evanston D65, where my kids [Millennials] attended K-8, is an intersting case study. the sociecomics of the kids/families in a school distrcit of 6-7000 students was extremely wide - a significant minority of minority students [large majority black, tho a growing % hispanic] from low income families, and a much larger %-age of students from middle and upper middle income families [vast majority white].
the white kids performed on standardized tests at levels => those of the kids from further up the N shore. the minority kids consistently [mostly] performed at levels below 'meet expections' for grade level, or whatever wording was used.
again, as in my reply to Steve T above, 1] if children can't read, can't write coherently, &/or can't perform 4-function arithmetic, they ultimately can't function as citizens in a democracy. and 2] among the many factors that contribute to student academic achievement #1 is quality of teacher and #2 is quality of teaching
Bob I couldn’t agree more that teachers have an important job and the quality of their teaching is most important in helping students learn. I spent 34 years teaching in the HS classroom and helping my own kids navigate through public school, college, and grad school. I earned my bachelor’s and Masters degrees at Northwestern and taught on the N Shore as a young man, but the majority of my time was spent in a low-income, 80 percent percent minority district. I’ve seen just about every attempt to help students achieve as individuals and as part of aggregated groups that are used to measure schools. The reality is that when you measure student growth by standardized test scores, the only thing you’re showing is that students are getting better at cracking test code. When my district made test scores 50 percent of teacher evaluations, we knew the job — help our kids better understand the logic and language used in the test. The problem is those tests are written to sort students for college admittance, not measure their ability to “function as citizens in a democracy.” The goal for the vast majority of kids in this country is not getting into highly selective college as it is in a few zip codes where 95 percent of students go on to 4-year colleges. Constant high-stakes testing sucks the life out of a positive, interactive school experience. Good teachers cannot be “good” if the presiding value is making numbers go up on tests written by profit-driven companies to help colleges keep their enrollments consistent. I don’t suggest getting rid of all tests - I wrote my own to help know what skills my students needed to improve the most, but your comments suggest that testing is the only sure way to measure quality in students and teachers. I assure you that is simply not the case. As I mentioned in my response to Eric, the best measures for teacher quality should be based on the variety of ways that they help students grow, given the needs and values of the community. And yes, you can measure that growth in many ways besides test-taking.
rick, i believe you're mistaken in your critique of my position on standardized testing.
1] i neither expressed nor implied that standardized ... 'testing is the only sure way to measure quality in students and teachers'. education, and especially socilaization, of children is a shared responsibility of parents, teachers & the community.
quantitative measures of student achievement shd not represent 100% of a teacher's evaluation - but it shd represent some %. it can be discussed/argued/negotiated over what % that shd be.
2] i can't comment of the efficacy or quality of the current standardized testing regimen. but if it/they are a poor measure of student academic achievement, the problem is not standardized testing - it's the quality of the standardized test[s].
i stand by my central argument: teachers of academic subjects shd be held accountable for the academic achievement of their students.
My mainstreamed special ed student would have ruined every class in elementary and middle school if the whole class had to meet the same standards for everyone to pass.
Often a teachers value is determined by the students in hindsight. My 6th grade teacher who moved my desk to the hallway in front of the office discovered my potential by removing the opportunity for distractions. I’ll always be indebted to Miss Meyer’s.
Most of our state-mandated exams measuring progress are online, and they're the same for all students. Testing dates are set by the administration and monitored by the teachers. We do not create or score the tests.
High-achieving kids have no where to go when they score well at the outset so they take a dive, for sure. I did it myself after getting in trouble for not improving when there was nowhere to go after you max out the test right away. I remember my mom losing it with the school because I got a B for not improving by x% from the first test when I got 100% on the first test. It's illogical.
I was already on the top track class, they had nothing else for me. Wouldn't let me skip a grade because I was (a) already one of the youngest in my grade and (b) physically very small. Private schools in the area were no better, just religious based, not academically rigorous. I did a lot of "independent study" to keep from being bored out of my mind.
Sounds like your school did not have effective individualized learning — a form of “placement problem”, or as you said offering nowhere to go given your abilities and needs. I hope you eventually found teachers who met you at your level!
When I was in college (back in the old days) I took an Astronomy survey class (a really neat class for those with inquiring minds). A student's grade was based on 4 hourly exams and the final exam. All of the tests were graded on a fairly strict bell curve. There was one caveat - each student was permitted to "throw out" their worst hourly exam. Having aced the first 3 hourlies, I took a dive (0%) on the last hourly. During the pre-final exam study session with out TA, I asked about the last hourly exam - which had been administered right before study days before the cumulative final exam - so grades for it hadn't been posted. My TA looked at me and said "You!!! - We TAs couldn't figure out how someone had gotten ALL of the answers wrong. Then I took a look at your grade entries. Well done."
i disagree. it's not unreasonable to expect a teacher of academic subjects to increase the overall academic achievement of her/his class of students over the course of an academic year. if a well-trained, well-educated, non-probationary teacher can't raise the academic achievement of their class for most academic yrs - even acknowledging the challeneges you mentioned - then perhaps they are in the wrong profession.
this accountability is not addressed solely to teachers as individuals - teachers at a grade level at a school, principals and administrators [on the academic ladder] are responsible too, and shd be held accountable. granted education is more than reading, writing and 'rithmetic - but if children can't read, can't write coherently, &/or can't perform 4-function arithmetic, they ultimately can't function as citizens in a democracy.
finally [for now], studies show that the highest correlates to student academic achievement - among the many factors that contribute to student academic achievement - are 1] quality of teacher and 2] quality of teaching.
Regarding the price of a stamp, this is a good time to repeat a joke from the very first episode of SNL. “The post office just released a new stamp commemorating prostitution. It’s 10 cents, but if you want to lick it, it’s a quarter.”
If you want to factor in the human cost of delivering mail, you should include that fewer people are using USPS. They're paying bills and other expenses online, emailing needed paperwork, messages, and government documentation (like tax returns). Less mail, higher postage costs as well.
Congress has prevented the post office from expanding into other business formats, as technology has evolved and reduced the need for actual paper documents.
I think while "diversity" and "inclusion" will always be opposed by the hard core MAGA racists, the use of the term "equity" over "equal opportunity" is what helped loose many of those in the middle. About 15 years ago the term "equity"switched to using equal results, not equal opportunities to then determine if something was racist and unfair and that rubbed many people the wrong way. If a minority group suffered worse outcomes on everything from income to health to test scores, to incarceration, that alone was used to show racism, even if they went to the same school system, and had same health options, etc.
No, Johnston is a truly awful place. No fresh water, thousands of miles from anywhere. Contaminated by leftover chemical warfare & a failed A-Bomb test when the bomb didn't properly explode, but just scattered plutonium all over the place.
As Eric stated, the math has flipped for the GAO on the dollar coin, but the issue is more nuanced, even before that, paper dollars were better for people (but not necessarily the government). The coins we hold much more slowly and sit on top of our dresser longer than bills stay in our wallets. Therefore, we would end up holding more currency and not using it if there were dollar coins. That is like giving a free loan to the treasury.
Ah, DEI, you make it sound so simple and easy. I am afraid it is way more complex.
Take an example, you are a boss needing to fill a manager position.
There are 4 qualified candidates: a woman, a black guy, an Asian American of Japanese descent and a white guy.
Now each has a history, the woman is the first woman in her family to finish college and work in the business world, the Japanese American’s family was interned during WW2, the white guy’s dad was drafted and killed in Vietnam and the black guy’s family are naturalized citizens who came to this country from Haiti in the 1970s.
Hmmm…how do we measure the person having the most “injustice” and do we apply it not by person but by appearance?
Making this even more difficult, I may be the boss, but I do not help myself by hiring someone who does not “fit” and thus leaves the job early to go elsewhere. Having to replace and hire new managers costs the company money and does not help my resume.
I got 4 folks that can do the job, this DEI injustice argument does not really help leaving me with other criteria to insure I hire someone who stays with the company. My “criteria” may be somewhat sexist, racist or perhaps unfair. What do I do?
So 4 people who can do the job but you want to make sure you get someone who Jells with the team and won't leave the company too soon (or ever)? Ask yourself what would make anyone leave the company? No one quits a job because they are too happy (or overpaid).
This is typical of hiring managers in Corporate America. They are risk adverse and don't want to get it wrong because it's an indictment of their ability instead of just an Opps. There is no magic bullet and sometimes it just doesn't work out.
Assuming a healthy, not too dysfunctional workplace, you have to take a chance and go with your gut. As long as your gut doesn't default to "well with all things being equal, let's automatically go with the White Guy".
To be clear, you can pick the White Guy if you honestly feel that he is the best fit. But you have to also own it if he doesn't work out and the other three find jobs somewhere else.
So does my “gut” replace DEI considerations? And do you consider the examples “equal”?
Is best fit from my perspective then the way to go?
And the white guy has faced some injustice, the government drafted his dad which resulted in his death. So there is an direct injustice argument there.
Should I use the criteria of who needs the job financially the most?
The question, "why would any new hire quit" is a key, usually overlooked question in this discussion. Had a long convo with a friend last night who's spent decades in organizational development and *REALLY* understands DEI. She said the thing that bothers her most about the way people talk about it is that's it's only thought of in hiring, and never about the rest of the work experience or opportunities going forward.
I saw an example of this a lot when I was starting in the legal/corporate world. Management would had being criticized for the lack of women in senior positions. First, they'd make the few women there do extra work (serving on hiring committees, sitting in on all interviews with women candidates, etc) that was uncompensated, unbillable, and not considered in advancement reviews. They'd push back by saying, "We hire women but they all choose to leave when they have babies and don't come back." But they'd have crappy health insurance plans, offer no or minimal leave options, force women to breast pump in bathroom stalls, and have zero flexibility on hours.
Righting historical injustice is only an implied goal of DEI programs, it is not the guiding criteria. The guiding criteria is representation. In your example if the company has a diversity program they would give preference to the person whose gender or racial background was underrepresented in the company - if there are too few women managers, the preference would go to the woman, too few African Americans - to the Black guy, etc. Assuming they are both equally qualified. Perceived past personal suffering of each is irrelevant.
I would guess there is a diversity officer at the company who monitors and sets guidelines for representation relative to general population. Women are about 50% of the general population. If the company only has 5% women managers, it means a qualified woman should have priority for a manager opening.
As I mentioned already, this is assuming that everyone qualifies equally. If there are no qualified women candidates, then they shouldn't be hired.
Diversity officer sets the guidelines, he is not doing the hiring. The hiring manager will need to follow company policy and guidelines just as he does in every other decision he makes.
If multiple groups are underrepresented at the company and multiple qualified minority candidates are available it could be up to the hiring manager to decide who gets priority, he can flip a coin if he prefers or request additional guidance from diversity officer or his higher ups or other people involved in the process.
Regardless of our status in this country, home ownership remains a key to being a comfortable, valuable member of society. I will always err on the side of awareness of our deeply unfair system when it comes to hiring decisions that allow people to achieve and keep that home/property investment. Recent studies are pretty clear that the financial system cheats minority members out of hard-earned money, status, and safety.
Trump's statement is a stunning assertion of monarchy. The ancient Greeks used the word "irresponsible" to describe the monarch/tryant, i.e., untethered from any constraint, unbounded, and answerable to no one. Is this pronouncement Trump's scariest? Perhaps. But I found his quest for immunity equally shocking. The nerve simply to pursue it was galling. That the Supreme Court granted it was dumbfounding. Yet here we are.
Fun Fact: money in the form of coins rather than notes is called Specie.
Another Fun Fact: I swear the teacher who taught me that in high school had it the other way around, which might say something about CPS even in the late 80s.
Trump and the GOP congress should hang for breaking their oaths to defend the constitution and instead enabling their unitary executive to impose authoritarianism on our liberal government.
People need to understand that everything that Trump is doing with regards to firing people from and changing agencies and departments created by law are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, Article II, Section 2:
"...he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices..."
That's it. Congress makes law, including that which created those agencies and departments, and thus have sole power to do what Trump is doing. However, the congressional GOP has abdicated their congressional duties and so, again, they and Trump should hang.
Teachers: I love how people try to quick fix the educational system by putting the burden on teachers who lack resources to make significant changes. Would everybody be willing to have their jobs reliant on meeting goals without resources, support and factors beyond their control?
(DEI: https://dawnxhenderson.medium.com/challenging-the-image-on-equity-and-equality-c3bb93ff0fb0) - There are still those rare times when I have something to mail. Forever stamps may now be $.73 - but what is the cost of a first class stamp? I have heard the price is set to go up again this spring. II am sure I have stamps in my home - but where? I'd probably need to string a row or two together to mail something. On the converse side - my city still charges extra to do utility payments online vs drop off or mail. You'd think they'd prefer electronic payment.
I suspect you only get charged extra if you use a credit/debit card, and that there’s no extra charge if you link the online payment to your bank account. I do agree that some of their incentives seem perverse.
With regard to voters voting in crooks, look no further (farther?) than Blagojevich's second election. We KNEW he was a crook by then, he was running against a moderate Republican, Judy Barr Topinka, and he STILL won. I remain flabbergasted by that one.
I really liked Judy, but she chose as a running mate DuPage County states attorney, Joe Birkett, and I could not cast a ballot for him. He was a supporter of those law-enforcement officials in DuPage County who cynically and terribly fucked up the Nicarico case. Meanwhile, I remain flabbergasted by every single one of you who voted for Trump despite all the evidence against him.
Oooo, thanks for the reminder about Birkett. I really liked Topinka, too, but I recall the association with Birkett (and the others involved in the Nicarico case) was a big turnoff.
Man, I forgot about Birkett. I completely forgot he was her running mate. I voted for Blago the first time around b/c I couldn't vote for Jim Ryan b/c of his criminal behavior (my opinion) in the same Nicarico case. Looking back, I clearly went with who, for me, was the lesser of two evils. Eric, your mentioning him brings to mind one of your columns where he delayed mentioning until AFTER the election (I'm not quite sure which one at this point) that Brian Dugan was statistically culpable within some tiny percentage in Jeanine's death; you said something along the lines of that made you sure not regret not voting for him by the same percentage. (Or it was words along those lines. I can't remember for certain, but I am certain that thought should not be occupying space in my brain. You should take all those columns and put them in a book for publication. I'd buy it!
The Lt Governor is a meaningless and powerless position. I didn't like Birkett, but I voted for Topinka over Blago. Blago had already proven himself to be a bad governor.
Joe Birkett notwithstanding, my failure to pick Judy Barr Topinka over Blago is one of the two votes I most regret. A piece-of-scum Lt Gov isn't as bad isn't nearly as bad as a piece-of-scum Gov. (Not so clean an analogy in hindsight, given JBT's death not long after that election, but we need to vote with what we know, not endless what-ifs.) The other: Lori instead of Toni in the mayoral race when Toni didn't make the run-off. After reflection, although I loathe having voted for BrandX, PaulV would have been a different kind of just-as-awful, and at least I went for the best-polling of the decent choices in round 1 in hopes of having a run-off that offered one candidate who wasn't atrocious.
i share your flabbergastery [😉] on blago's re-election. but even his 1st, in the primaries, where he owned that he would lie to achieve his political goals. how he bear vallas in that primary still escapes me.
imagine if we had had 2 terms of vallas, a 1st rate govt financial mgr [whatever you think of his politics], instead of 2 terms of blago.
and i have the same problem with 'further' and 'farther' - can never remember the diff.
I voted to cut back on meat. My primary reason is that it’s healthier to consume moderate portions of it, while supplementing my diet with more plant based food. The fact that it helps the environment is secondary, an unintended beneficial consequence.
Personally, the environment is the main reason I've cut way back on meat. Haven't eaten red meat in years (but will out of politeness if served to me) because I learned the facts about how the larger the animal, the larger the damage to the environment. Not supporting inhumane factory farming is a welcomed additional benefit. I will occasionally eat chicken soup or turkey chili but they are now a very small portion of the dish, and the beneficial consequence to me is having a lot more vegetables in my diet.
So while I support the "stop eating meat" option, I understand how intensely humans are creatures of habit and a hard-core shaming and blaming approach makes people resistant and opposed to change rather than open to it. Abrupt, whole scale change to ones diet (a non-optional thing requiring attention multiple times a day) is waaaay to difficult for most people. Much better is to use the carrot approach (raw with dip or cooked with seasoning!) of continued encouragement, enticement with tasty vegetarian dishes, explanations of how less meat is better for the waistline and the wallet. Oh, and stop the massive govt subsidies of the beef industry so it's true cost is reflected in the price.
There are two major arguments used by MAGAs to defend Trump. One is that he is keeping his promises. The other is that this is what the people voted for. The promise? First, it’s not entirely true. Lowering prices? Stopping the war in Ukraine the first day? The great new healthcare plan? Second, some of the promises were scary. Keeping such promises do not impress me. He promised to get rid of his political opponents, Since when is not worshipping Trump a reason to fire someone. This is what the people voted for? Since when? He won by a few points. Many did not vote for him. That doesn’t even include many that did not vote. In fact, less than half the country did not vote for him. MAGAs should at least be factual. His supporters voted for him, not the American people. His supporters urge everyone to simply accept the results and support him. Why? Has the First Amendment and the right to dissent gone away? Did MAGAs accept and support Obama or Biden? January 6 would seem to argue otherwise. There’s a lot of hypocrisy taking place.
Crummy typing again. Less than half the country voted for him.
His supporters think “L’etat, c’est Trump”
Good morning Laurence - You are accurate in your statement that Trump did not win a majority of the popular vote as his total represented 49.8% of the total vote (about 2% of the votes went to third party candidates).
And doing so, he increased his vote totals and percentages in virtually every demographic group including blacks, Hispanics, women and especially, among young (18-29) voters. He ran the table in all swings dates, and also increased his vote in virtually every state including blue states. I believe the overwhelming majority of Trump voters such as myself were voting for the policies that he ran on.
He is now indeed following through on his campaign promises. And a recent Marquette University poll reflected a significant majority if Americans support the policies he is undertaking...
60% favor deporting people here illegally
59% support declaring a national emergency at the southern border
60% support expanding oil and gas development
63% support government recognition of only to genders
Both presidents Obama and Biden promised to identify and cut waste in the federal government. However, the federal government continued to grow under their administrations. Now, the Doge efforts have already identified massive fraud and waste including billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers, thousands of people still listed active in the Social Security system whose age would be 130 or more, FEMA sending $59 million to New York City to house illegal migrants in luxury hotels, a $20 billion dollar fund at HHS that has been used to purchase cars, housing and pay off credit card debt for illegal migrants, USAID payments to Gaza that included $313 million for a cement plant that undoubtedly was used to construct the terror tunnels, and a plethora of programs that the overwhelming majority of Americans would strongly oppose. And of course, a significant reduction in workforce is an absolute necessity in reducing the size of government.
I recognize and respect that you and many other Americans do not support Trump's policies, and I look forward to a robust public debate on the merits of his policies and spending cuts. But at this point, all indications are that a solid majority of Americans do support his policies to date. Have a great day, and stay safe and warm in the current wretched winter weather!
It's really not worth my time or energy to respond, David, but your comments represent the poster-child of what we are up against. For fun, here are the facts on just two of your claims:
Social Security fraud discovered by the DOGE young'uns. This is from Wired but also in the Guardian, PolitiFact, Poynter, etc.. In other words, easily debunked:
"While no evidence was produced to back up this claim, it was picked up by right-wing commentators online, primarily on Musk’s own X platform, as well as being reported credibly by pro-Trump media outlets.
Computer programmers quickly claimed that the 150 figure was not evidence of fraud but rather the result of a weird quirk of the Social Security Administration’s benefits system, which was largely written in COBOL, a 60-year-old programming language that undergirds SSA’s databases as well as systems from many other US government agencies.
COBOL is rarely used today, and as such, Musk’s cadre of young engineers may well be unfamiliar with it.
Because COBOL does not have a date type, some implementations rely instead on a system whereby all dates are coded to a reference point. The most commonly used is May 20, 1875, as this was the date of an international standards-setting conference held in Paris, known as the Convention du Mètre."
And FEMA housing immigrants in luxury hotels. This from PolitiFact but also the facts and details can be found in some AP stories, Newsweek, and other outlets if you'd only look. And your guy himself had a hand in distributing this money in his first term (see last sentence). The horror!
"-The Federal Emergency Management Agency awarded New York City money as part of a program Congress created to help states, municipalities and nonprofits provide basic services to immigrants.
-The program uses Customs and Border Protection funding and is managed by FEMA. It does not use money from FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund.
-New York City does not house migrants in luxury hotel rooms. In 2024, it spent an average of $156 dollars per night per hotel room, below the General Services Administration’s rate."
"FEMA has funded states and organizations that help migrants since Trump’s first term
Since Trump’s first administration, FEMA has given money to help state and local governments and nonprofit organizations that provide immigrants with basic services.
In 2019, as illegal immigration increased, Congress gave FEMA funding to expand its Emergency Food and Shelter Program to include migrant support services to immigrants awaiting court proceedings. The program previously had been used only for people facing homelessness and hunger.
In 2023, Congress directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection and FEMA to create the Shelter and Services Program for migrants, removing immigration grants from the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. The Shelter and Services Program uses money Congress has given Customs and Border Protection, and is administered by FEMA.
In fiscal year 2024, which started October 2023 and ended September 2024, Congress directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection to give FEMA $650 million for the Shelter and Services Program.
Neither program was, or is, funded with money promised to FEMA’s disaster relief work.
"The Disaster Relief Fund has nothing to do with any migrant assistance account because all that spending is from separate funds," Joshua Sewell, a federal budget expert at the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense, told PolitiFact in October 2024.
During Trump’s first administration, he shifted $271 million in FEMA funding, including about $155 million from the Disaster Relief Fund, to address immigration."
Those are the facts related to just two of your twisted claims. Simple searches can untangle the others as well. I don't believe for a minute that you would be able to manage a robust debate ... based on facts. But, I am staying safe and warm in this wretched weather, thank you.
The date, actually Jan. 1, 1875, is a government convention having nothing to do with Cobol except as it was used and misused by the government. I saw an actual ad recently for Cobol programmers in the Tribune classifieds. I was a Cobol programmer during the late 1960s and early '70s and was almost tempted to apply. Good Cobol could be written (e.g., by me), but it usually wasn't.
In addition, the SSA database currently contains over 400 million names, more than the entire US population. SSA doesn't receive notice of every death in the US & also doesn't know if someone leaves the country.
SSA also doesn't pay out any benefits to anyone over the age of 115, so it's impossible for all those alleged ancient people that lunatic Elmo screamed about to be getting any money!
No David, I don’t think we will have future debates. You are far too one sided. You pick and choose the items you wish to point out. You ignore any of his flaws, like appointing himself the sole guardian of government, attempting illegal moves that get courts ruling against him, or making statements that he is above the law if he thinks he’s doing good. No one one elected him king. As far as I’m concerned, you are just another MAGA.
david - as usual, you are mostly correct. and i am all in favor of downsizing the fed govt, especially its expenditures.
however, pls stick to the facts. DOGE has NOT already identified massive fraud and waste including billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers - this is false. Soc Sec Admin has been combing records, culling ineligible recipients for a while now. if you feel you can prove otherwise about DOGE ID'g billions of Social Security payments to people without Social Security numbers, pls provide us with a link to a credible source.
'Obama and Biden ... the federal government continued to grow under their administrations' - misleading. yes, it's true - but the fed govt grew more under trump 1.0 than during obama or biden, ignoring extraordinary covid-related expeditures during both the trump & biden admin's.
also, musk & trump are lying about the alleged transparency of DOGE - it's almost totally opaque. why can't the taxpayers know who is working with musk on these raids on govt agencies? not saying they shdn't be allowed to go into and investigate the expeditures of govt agencies - but why flout the law in the process?
and please clarify the alleged transparency of DOGE, accd'g to its website - https://doge.gov/
finally, you're cherry-picking stats. e.g., while i don't doubt that 60%, or more, of americans support deporting felons who are in the USA illegally, i highly doubt that a majority of americans support deporting long-term, law abiding, taxpaying undocumented residents who have raised families in the USA, or the so-called Dreamers.
that's fine that you support pres. trump, his policies [such as they are], and the way he executes what he says he'll do. but i suggest stick you to the facts.
here's the reply from perplexity.ai to the question: what percentage of americans support deporting anyone in the USA illegally?
According to recent polls, approximately 66% of Americans support deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally4. This figure is consistent across multiple surveys, with some variation:
A January 2025 Axios/Ipsos poll found that 66% of Americans support deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally4.
A September 2024 Scripps News/Ipsos survey revealed that a majority of Americans support mass deportation of undocumented immigrants6.
An October 2024 Marquette Law School poll indicated that 58% of registered voters agreed with deporting undocumented immigrants2.
However, it's important to note that support for deportation decreases significantly when specific methods or consequences are mentioned. For example:
Only 38% support using active duty military to find and detain undocumented immigrants4.
Just 34% support deportations that involve separating families or sending people to countries other than their country of origin4.
Only 34% support deporting immigrants who came to the U.S. illegally as children4.
Additionally, when given alternatives, a majority of voters (56%) believe that most undocumented immigrants should be given the opportunity to apply for legal status rather than being deported
David - another set of polling stats evaluating the 1st 30 days of trump & his admin - https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/20/politics/cnn-poll-trump-approval/index.html
i'm not offering this just to play trump antagonist - it's another example of how stats can differ depending on how, & when & of whom, the Qs are asked.
Good morning Bob - Thanks for this Paul. And you are totally correct, that responses can vary dramatically depended upon how the questions are asked. Push-polling. In political campaigns is a long time technique used to get people to say the favor a particular candidate with questions that in most cases will point them in that direction.
I saw an interview of borders czar Tom Homan the other day, and he said something remarkable. One day earlier this week, total encounters of illegal immigrants at our southern border was 229. Certainly sounds like the border is now finally being controlled, And that was a policy most everyone wanted to see happen.
Trump's tweet is shocking and horrifying, but only because he expressed it openly. It's really just a re-statement of the SCOTUS ruling that granted him immunity for any "official" act. It is also a simple statement of factual reality since every branch of the federal government is firmly under his control. Neither the legislature nor the courts have either the will or the ability to counter any of his acts. So both, de facto and de jure, we are right now living under an autocratic regime, with one person above the law imposing his deranged, ignorant, cruel, petty will on on the entire country.
As much as we may want to measure a teacher’s value by what students learn (victories), measuring growth as we measure wins and losses in sports simply does not fit the realities of our schools or of children’’s individual needs in general. I once had high hopes for the “baseline to end of term” testing — until I watched students 1) tank the baseline to assure growth later 2) perform poorly on test days because of factors beyond their control 3) taking tests that couldn’t possibly measure accurately all of the required learning goals in one sitting. Limited stakes testing can be useful in knowing what a child knows and doesn’t know, but teaching a random selection of young people to learn, individually, is very different from coaching a highly selective and motivated group of athletes to complement each other’s skills to win games together. The comparison is absurd.
My idea from many years ago (which would be nearly impossible to do) was to stop basing grades on homework and only base them on how far the class gets through the material along with scores on mid-term/final exams. The class would only progress if all the students successfully “test out” of the current module. There would still be a chance that some students would tank just to be obstinate, but I think the class would have a better chance of learning and retaining the material.
This sounds logical, but It’s the “all students” part that people outside of day-to-day learning don’t consider. Students have widely varying ability levels, motivations, and needs for learning. As a parent, I really don’t care how the class performs, I need my kid to learn and grow as a person. Mass testing and aggregated results don’t help me. Also, I didn’t see test-tankers as obstinate, I saw them as intelligent — they understand the game and know what matters most — the scores. However, in my experience I saw far more students simply not caring about any of the tests, most of which were out of context with what was happening in the classroom.
I certainly see your point, however, I don’t know of any other objective way to try to measure teacher quality. certainly most of us know it when we see it – the teacher who commands respect and attention in front of the classroom. But even a great teacher can face enormous challenges in a classroom full of challenged kids.
Certainly. My best guess is that teachers must be evaluated in the entirety of their value to the system, otherwise we’re simply seeing them as individual tutors. How do they contribute to the school’s institutional mission and community of learning? For example, if a district values girls athletics, does the teacher coach, attend games visibly, use their students’ interest in the game to enhance classroom work, etc? In progressive-thinking districts (all of them imo) do they frequently update curriculum, mentor younger teachers, keep up with recent studies on best practices in the classroom, etc? Our desire to measure by standardize test scores is really useless unless you’re trying to sort the students, not educate them.
So how do you measure it? If you can't measure it, you can't fix it, or at least you don't know whether you've fixed it.
Rick, in my experience those items I mentioned are in fact measured on a rather lengthy teacher evaluation form that generates useful conversations between teachers and admin. What has been controversial is how much student test scores are factored into those evaluations. If your “it” refers to student measures, good teaching requires working with students to set standards and goals in multiple areas (writing, math, problem-solving, project work etc.) that clearly measure growth for each particular student. Tests are one snapshot of that.
The fear that is promoted in teacher evaluation debates is that good teachers will get low ratings and be driven out. But the purpose of all evaluation systems is to identify and reward strong performers and to identify and eliminate poor performers. This requires reasonable (not perfect) and objective measures in combination with good management. High performance organizations always eliminate the bottom 5 to 10 percent of performers to continuously drive-up average performance.
The CTU does not trust CPS management and is primarily motivated to protect all members. So, they reject any performance evaluation, promote tenure, promote time-in-grade advancement, and pretend that there are no low performing teachers.
Evanston D65, where my kids [Millennials] attended K-8, is an intersting case study. the sociecomics of the kids/families in a school distrcit of 6-7000 students was extremely wide - a significant minority of minority students [large majority black, tho a growing % hispanic] from low income families, and a much larger %-age of students from middle and upper middle income families [vast majority white].
the white kids performed on standardized tests at levels => those of the kids from further up the N shore. the minority kids consistently [mostly] performed at levels below 'meet expections' for grade level, or whatever wording was used.
again, as in my reply to Steve T above, 1] if children can't read, can't write coherently, &/or can't perform 4-function arithmetic, they ultimately can't function as citizens in a democracy. and 2] among the many factors that contribute to student academic achievement #1 is quality of teacher and #2 is quality of teaching
Bob I couldn’t agree more that teachers have an important job and the quality of their teaching is most important in helping students learn. I spent 34 years teaching in the HS classroom and helping my own kids navigate through public school, college, and grad school. I earned my bachelor’s and Masters degrees at Northwestern and taught on the N Shore as a young man, but the majority of my time was spent in a low-income, 80 percent percent minority district. I’ve seen just about every attempt to help students achieve as individuals and as part of aggregated groups that are used to measure schools. The reality is that when you measure student growth by standardized test scores, the only thing you’re showing is that students are getting better at cracking test code. When my district made test scores 50 percent of teacher evaluations, we knew the job — help our kids better understand the logic and language used in the test. The problem is those tests are written to sort students for college admittance, not measure their ability to “function as citizens in a democracy.” The goal for the vast majority of kids in this country is not getting into highly selective college as it is in a few zip codes where 95 percent of students go on to 4-year colleges. Constant high-stakes testing sucks the life out of a positive, interactive school experience. Good teachers cannot be “good” if the presiding value is making numbers go up on tests written by profit-driven companies to help colleges keep their enrollments consistent. I don’t suggest getting rid of all tests - I wrote my own to help know what skills my students needed to improve the most, but your comments suggest that testing is the only sure way to measure quality in students and teachers. I assure you that is simply not the case. As I mentioned in my response to Eric, the best measures for teacher quality should be based on the variety of ways that they help students grow, given the needs and values of the community. And yes, you can measure that growth in many ways besides test-taking.
rick, i believe you're mistaken in your critique of my position on standardized testing.
1] i neither expressed nor implied that standardized ... 'testing is the only sure way to measure quality in students and teachers'. education, and especially socilaization, of children is a shared responsibility of parents, teachers & the community.
quantitative measures of student achievement shd not represent 100% of a teacher's evaluation - but it shd represent some %. it can be discussed/argued/negotiated over what % that shd be.
2] i can't comment of the efficacy or quality of the current standardized testing regimen. but if it/they are a poor measure of student academic achievement, the problem is not standardized testing - it's the quality of the standardized test[s].
i stand by my central argument: teachers of academic subjects shd be held accountable for the academic achievement of their students.
My mainstreamed special ed student would have ruined every class in elementary and middle school if the whole class had to meet the same standards for everyone to pass.
I understand, and as I said the idea was a bit untenable. It was always more of a thought experiment than a fleshed out proposal.
Often a teachers value is determined by the students in hindsight. My 6th grade teacher who moved my desk to the hallway in front of the office discovered my potential by removing the opportunity for distractions. I’ll always be indebted to Miss Meyer’s.
Goodhars' Law: When a measure becomes a goal it stops working as a measure. One fix might be not to have the teachers administering the tests.
Excellent point about Goodhars Law. However, if changing the administration of the test is a solution then what are we really solving?
Most of our state-mandated exams measuring progress are online, and they're the same for all students. Testing dates are set by the administration and monitored by the teachers. We do not create or score the tests.
Wonder who invented the law that Goohars claimed.
sorry, Skeptic - conflict of interest in that solution.
High-achieving kids have no where to go when they score well at the outset so they take a dive, for sure. I did it myself after getting in trouble for not improving when there was nowhere to go after you max out the test right away. I remember my mom losing it with the school because I got a B for not improving by x% from the first test when I got 100% on the first test. It's illogical.
Yep! If that happens in a school that “levels” or “tracks” kids (as most do), it’s the school’s placement problem, not the kid’s learning problem.
I was already on the top track class, they had nothing else for me. Wouldn't let me skip a grade because I was (a) already one of the youngest in my grade and (b) physically very small. Private schools in the area were no better, just religious based, not academically rigorous. I did a lot of "independent study" to keep from being bored out of my mind.
Sounds like your school did not have effective individualized learning — a form of “placement problem”, or as you said offering nowhere to go given your abilities and needs. I hope you eventually found teachers who met you at your level!
When I was in college (back in the old days) I took an Astronomy survey class (a really neat class for those with inquiring minds). A student's grade was based on 4 hourly exams and the final exam. All of the tests were graded on a fairly strict bell curve. There was one caveat - each student was permitted to "throw out" their worst hourly exam. Having aced the first 3 hourlies, I took a dive (0%) on the last hourly. During the pre-final exam study session with out TA, I asked about the last hourly exam - which had been administered right before study days before the cumulative final exam - so grades for it hadn't been posted. My TA looked at me and said "You!!! - We TAs couldn't figure out how someone had gotten ALL of the answers wrong. Then I took a look at your grade entries. Well done."
i disagree. it's not unreasonable to expect a teacher of academic subjects to increase the overall academic achievement of her/his class of students over the course of an academic year. if a well-trained, well-educated, non-probationary teacher can't raise the academic achievement of their class for most academic yrs - even acknowledging the challeneges you mentioned - then perhaps they are in the wrong profession.
this accountability is not addressed solely to teachers as individuals - teachers at a grade level at a school, principals and administrators [on the academic ladder] are responsible too, and shd be held accountable. granted education is more than reading, writing and 'rithmetic - but if children can't read, can't write coherently, &/or can't perform 4-function arithmetic, they ultimately can't function as citizens in a democracy.
finally [for now], studies show that the highest correlates to student academic achievement - among the many factors that contribute to student academic achievement - are 1] quality of teacher and 2] quality of teaching.
Bob, there are many devils in the details of how we define words like achievement and quality — please see my response above. Thanks.
Regarding the price of a stamp, this is a good time to repeat a joke from the very first episode of SNL. “The post office just released a new stamp commemorating prostitution. It’s 10 cents, but if you want to lick it, it’s a quarter.”
If you want to factor in the human cost of delivering mail, you should include that fewer people are using USPS. They're paying bills and other expenses online, emailing needed paperwork, messages, and government documentation (like tax returns). Less mail, higher postage costs as well.
Congress has prevented the post office from expanding into other business formats, as technology has evolved and reduced the need for actual paper documents.
I think while "diversity" and "inclusion" will always be opposed by the hard core MAGA racists, the use of the term "equity" over "equal opportunity" is what helped loose many of those in the middle. About 15 years ago the term "equity"switched to using equal results, not equal opportunities to then determine if something was racist and unfair and that rubbed many people the wrong way. If a minority group suffered worse outcomes on everything from income to health to test scores, to incarceration, that alone was used to show racism, even if they went to the same school system, and had same health options, etc.
So can we exile Trump to St. Helena?
Far too nice a place, for a disgusting pile of shit like him. Johnston Island would be far better!
Guantanamo!
No, Johnston is a truly awful place. No fresh water, thousands of miles from anywhere. Contaminated by leftover chemical warfare & a failed A-Bomb test when the bomb didn't properly explode, but just scattered plutonium all over the place.
Gitmo is a paradise compared to Johnston!
As Eric stated, the math has flipped for the GAO on the dollar coin, but the issue is more nuanced, even before that, paper dollars were better for people (but not necessarily the government). The coins we hold much more slowly and sit on top of our dresser longer than bills stay in our wallets. Therefore, we would end up holding more currency and not using it if there were dollar coins. That is like giving a free loan to the treasury.
The story from NPR's Planet money is here:
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/11/29/166103071/no-killing-the-dollar-bill-would-not-save-the-government-money
Ah, DEI, you make it sound so simple and easy. I am afraid it is way more complex.
Take an example, you are a boss needing to fill a manager position.
There are 4 qualified candidates: a woman, a black guy, an Asian American of Japanese descent and a white guy.
Now each has a history, the woman is the first woman in her family to finish college and work in the business world, the Japanese American’s family was interned during WW2, the white guy’s dad was drafted and killed in Vietnam and the black guy’s family are naturalized citizens who came to this country from Haiti in the 1970s.
Hmmm…how do we measure the person having the most “injustice” and do we apply it not by person but by appearance?
Making this even more difficult, I may be the boss, but I do not help myself by hiring someone who does not “fit” and thus leaves the job early to go elsewhere. Having to replace and hire new managers costs the company money and does not help my resume.
I got 4 folks that can do the job, this DEI injustice argument does not really help leaving me with other criteria to insure I hire someone who stays with the company. My “criteria” may be somewhat sexist, racist or perhaps unfair. What do I do?
So 4 people who can do the job but you want to make sure you get someone who Jells with the team and won't leave the company too soon (or ever)? Ask yourself what would make anyone leave the company? No one quits a job because they are too happy (or overpaid).
This is typical of hiring managers in Corporate America. They are risk adverse and don't want to get it wrong because it's an indictment of their ability instead of just an Opps. There is no magic bullet and sometimes it just doesn't work out.
Assuming a healthy, not too dysfunctional workplace, you have to take a chance and go with your gut. As long as your gut doesn't default to "well with all things being equal, let's automatically go with the White Guy".
To be clear, you can pick the White Guy if you honestly feel that he is the best fit. But you have to also own it if he doesn't work out and the other three find jobs somewhere else.
So does my “gut” replace DEI considerations? And do you consider the examples “equal”?
Is best fit from my perspective then the way to go?
And the white guy has faced some injustice, the government drafted his dad which resulted in his death. So there is an direct injustice argument there.
Should I use the criteria of who needs the job financially the most?
The question, "why would any new hire quit" is a key, usually overlooked question in this discussion. Had a long convo with a friend last night who's spent decades in organizational development and *REALLY* understands DEI. She said the thing that bothers her most about the way people talk about it is that's it's only thought of in hiring, and never about the rest of the work experience or opportunities going forward.
I saw an example of this a lot when I was starting in the legal/corporate world. Management would had being criticized for the lack of women in senior positions. First, they'd make the few women there do extra work (serving on hiring committees, sitting in on all interviews with women candidates, etc) that was uncompensated, unbillable, and not considered in advancement reviews. They'd push back by saying, "We hire women but they all choose to leave when they have babies and don't come back." But they'd have crappy health insurance plans, offer no or minimal leave options, force women to breast pump in bathroom stalls, and have zero flexibility on hours.
Righting historical injustice is only an implied goal of DEI programs, it is not the guiding criteria. The guiding criteria is representation. In your example if the company has a diversity program they would give preference to the person whose gender or racial background was underrepresented in the company - if there are too few women managers, the preference would go to the woman, too few African Americans - to the Black guy, etc. Assuming they are both equally qualified. Perceived past personal suffering of each is irrelevant.
Interesting, and who decides if there are enough black managers versus women managers?
And if I am the boss tasked with hiring, don’t I have a say in who gets hired, especially if they report to me?
Does ability, hard work, just being competent enter into this?
If it is just “ representation” , it seems to me rather problematical and likely to raise more anger than solving past injustices.
And some demagogue/scammer might take advantage of this manufactured anger and win public office.
I would guess there is a diversity officer at the company who monitors and sets guidelines for representation relative to general population. Women are about 50% of the general population. If the company only has 5% women managers, it means a qualified woman should have priority for a manager opening.
As I mentioned already, this is assuming that everyone qualifies equally. If there are no qualified women candidates, then they shouldn't be hired.
So you find replicating the population as a criteria, what if blacks are underrepresented too? Does the more underrepresented group win?
And who is doing the hiring here, the Diversity Officer or the boss who is tasked with doing the hiring?
Diversity officer sets the guidelines, he is not doing the hiring. The hiring manager will need to follow company policy and guidelines just as he does in every other decision he makes.
If multiple groups are underrepresented at the company and multiple qualified minority candidates are available it could be up to the hiring manager to decide who gets priority, he can flip a coin if he prefers or request additional guidance from diversity officer or his higher ups or other people involved in the process.
Regardless of our status in this country, home ownership remains a key to being a comfortable, valuable member of society. I will always err on the side of awareness of our deeply unfair system when it comes to hiring decisions that allow people to achieve and keep that home/property investment. Recent studies are pretty clear that the financial system cheats minority members out of hard-earned money, status, and safety.
https://news.gatech.edu/news/2023/08/07/investors-force-black-families-out-home-ownership-new-research-shows
https://www.freddiemac.com/research/insight/20210920-home-appraisals
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/09/1162103286/home-appraisal-racial-bias-black-homeowners-lawsuit
Trump's statement is a stunning assertion of monarchy. The ancient Greeks used the word "irresponsible" to describe the monarch/tryant, i.e., untethered from any constraint, unbounded, and answerable to no one. Is this pronouncement Trump's scariest? Perhaps. But I found his quest for immunity equally shocking. The nerve simply to pursue it was galling. That the Supreme Court granted it was dumbfounding. Yet here we are.
Fun Fact: money in the form of coins rather than notes is called Specie.
Another Fun Fact: I swear the teacher who taught me that in high school had it the other way around, which might say something about CPS even in the late 80s.
Trump and the GOP congress should hang for breaking their oaths to defend the constitution and instead enabling their unitary executive to impose authoritarianism on our liberal government.
People need to understand that everything that Trump is doing with regards to firing people from and changing agencies and departments created by law are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, Article II, Section 2:
"...he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices..."
That's it. Congress makes law, including that which created those agencies and departments, and thus have sole power to do what Trump is doing. However, the congressional GOP has abdicated their congressional duties and so, again, they and Trump should hang.
Teachers: I love how people try to quick fix the educational system by putting the burden on teachers who lack resources to make significant changes. Would everybody be willing to have their jobs reliant on meeting goals without resources, support and factors beyond their control?
(DEI: https://dawnxhenderson.medium.com/challenging-the-image-on-equity-and-equality-c3bb93ff0fb0) - There are still those rare times when I have something to mail. Forever stamps may now be $.73 - but what is the cost of a first class stamp? I have heard the price is set to go up again this spring. II am sure I have stamps in my home - but where? I'd probably need to string a row or two together to mail something. On the converse side - my city still charges extra to do utility payments online vs drop off or mail. You'd think they'd prefer electronic payment.
I suspect you only get charged extra if you use a credit/debit card, and that there’s no extra charge if you link the online payment to your bank account. I do agree that some of their incentives seem perverse.
Great visual quips. I could have voted for all of them!
With regard to voters voting in crooks, look no further (farther?) than Blagojevich's second election. We KNEW he was a crook by then, he was running against a moderate Republican, Judy Barr Topinka, and he STILL won. I remain flabbergasted by that one.
Ms. Topinka always seemed to be a stand-up human being.
There is a more recent election that comes to mind.
Beth, my wife was a big supporter of Judy Barr. She went to a number of her rallies and meetings.
A number of times Judy was asked about her chances of winning. She replied, I am the underdog…and remember he is better looking than me.
So sad, she should have won based on merit. But that is not voters focus on these days.
I really liked Judy, but she chose as a running mate DuPage County states attorney, Joe Birkett, and I could not cast a ballot for him. He was a supporter of those law-enforcement officials in DuPage County who cynically and terribly fucked up the Nicarico case. Meanwhile, I remain flabbergasted by every single one of you who voted for Trump despite all the evidence against him.
Oooo, thanks for the reminder about Birkett. I really liked Topinka, too, but I recall the association with Birkett (and the others involved in the Nicarico case) was a big turnoff.
Man, I forgot about Birkett. I completely forgot he was her running mate. I voted for Blago the first time around b/c I couldn't vote for Jim Ryan b/c of his criminal behavior (my opinion) in the same Nicarico case. Looking back, I clearly went with who, for me, was the lesser of two evils. Eric, your mentioning him brings to mind one of your columns where he delayed mentioning until AFTER the election (I'm not quite sure which one at this point) that Brian Dugan was statistically culpable within some tiny percentage in Jeanine's death; you said something along the lines of that made you sure not regret not voting for him by the same percentage. (Or it was words along those lines. I can't remember for certain, but I am certain that thought should not be occupying space in my brain. You should take all those columns and put them in a book for publication. I'd buy it!
The Lt Governor is a meaningless and powerless position. I didn't like Birkett, but I voted for Topinka over Blago. Blago had already proven himself to be a bad governor.
Joe Birkett notwithstanding, my failure to pick Judy Barr Topinka over Blago is one of the two votes I most regret. A piece-of-scum Lt Gov isn't as bad isn't nearly as bad as a piece-of-scum Gov. (Not so clean an analogy in hindsight, given JBT's death not long after that election, but we need to vote with what we know, not endless what-ifs.) The other: Lori instead of Toni in the mayoral race when Toni didn't make the run-off. After reflection, although I loathe having voted for BrandX, PaulV would have been a different kind of just-as-awful, and at least I went for the best-polling of the decent choices in round 1 in hopes of having a run-off that offered one candidate who wasn't atrocious.
And say what you need to about Judge Birkett, but if it came down to it he would have been far superior to Blago.
Judy Topinks no more chose the knuckle dragger Birkett than she chose the date of the election. He was inflicted on her by the Republican Party.
I voted for her, my second vote for a Republican in my long life. My first was for Governor Edgar and hones, largely ineffective guy.
i share your flabbergastery [😉] on blago's re-election. but even his 1st, in the primaries, where he owned that he would lie to achieve his political goals. how he bear vallas in that primary still escapes me.
imagine if we had had 2 terms of vallas, a 1st rate govt financial mgr [whatever you think of his politics], instead of 2 terms of blago.
and i have the same problem with 'further' and 'farther' - can never remember the diff.
I voted to cut back on meat. My primary reason is that it’s healthier to consume moderate portions of it, while supplementing my diet with more plant based food. The fact that it helps the environment is secondary, an unintended beneficial consequence.
As I've gotten older I don't enjoy meat as much as I used to.
Personally, the environment is the main reason I've cut way back on meat. Haven't eaten red meat in years (but will out of politeness if served to me) because I learned the facts about how the larger the animal, the larger the damage to the environment. Not supporting inhumane factory farming is a welcomed additional benefit. I will occasionally eat chicken soup or turkey chili but they are now a very small portion of the dish, and the beneficial consequence to me is having a lot more vegetables in my diet.
So while I support the "stop eating meat" option, I understand how intensely humans are creatures of habit and a hard-core shaming and blaming approach makes people resistant and opposed to change rather than open to it. Abrupt, whole scale change to ones diet (a non-optional thing requiring attention multiple times a day) is waaaay to difficult for most people. Much better is to use the carrot approach (raw with dip or cooked with seasoning!) of continued encouragement, enticement with tasty vegetarian dishes, explanations of how less meat is better for the waistline and the wallet. Oh, and stop the massive govt subsidies of the beef industry so it's true cost is reflected in the price.
I really think lab produced meat could be the answer if it proves to be safe in the long term.