McConnell comes out swinging by calling the president's remarks...."unpresidential" and "beneath his office" and " incoherent".

Funny how this never came up with the last guy who all of those literally fell into.

Maybe if Biden had mentioned preserving voting rights by injecting light he might have sounded more sensible...

With the latest Supreme Court ruling about big businesses not allowed to mandate, what does that mean for those that were already laid off because they did not vaccinate?

It just went into effect on Monday, I'm not sure anyone was actually laid off as a result of it yet.

Companies who laid off people before then were doing it on their own.

That was not what the ruling was. It struck the OSHA requirement. Businesses still can require vaccines, but OSHA can't fine companies who don't.

From the anti-CRT bill in VA:

Ok, I had to look up the debates to see what it was about. There were articles about it and thought...I don't remember hearing anything about Fredrick Douglass and Lincoln debating. That's a pretty big omission.


Then I read one of the articles and had to laugh at myself. ;)

Abe Lincoln, time traveler?

SI

I thought this was the mandate that provided employers "cover from being sued"?

This way companies could require testing/vaccination or else get let an employee go. It had already been implemented. And then lower courts got involved, then got paused, and then finally SCOTUS.

True that business can still require vaccines but unsure if companies are really willing to do that as I can see disgruntled employees suing.

Republicans have spend years specifically making it easier for companies to fire people, and saying that companies have near unlimited freedom to decide what they do with their employees. They have forcefully weakened unions and collective bargaining.

So here....same thing. Companies have broad discretion and leeway to do as they see fit, only now the shoe is on the other foot, and those very same people are mad that they are being 'forced' into doing it.

Even with collective bargaining groups like my own, our own national lawyers said months ago that the review of applicable precedents allowed the company to make such decisions and there was nothing legally that prohibited them from doing so.

The larger question will be how the SCOTUS allows for exempting individuals via 'religious exemptions' (which are 100% total bullshit imo), and some sort of reasonable accommodation process.

I still can't wait until all these religious freedom rulings are truly tested by people who want something completely antithetical to Christianity.

They will say it doesn't count. The court has ruled many times that religious exemptions only really apply to Christians.

Was thinking the other day about all the "crisis, bad stuff" that Biden is dealing with right now. Here's my list

1) Covid and Omicron uptick, SCOTUS denying his Mandate
2) Economy, markets - inflation, stagflation concerns etc.
3) Russia vs Ukraine, Putin
4) BBB failure & figuring out what to do next (and basically Manchin & Sinema)
5) Voting rights failure & fallout

Somewhat lessor but could escalate quickly or hurt him politically

10) Crazy NK kid shooting off a missile
11) Continued drama with Hunter
12) Kamala's weakness (real or perceived)
13) Iran nuclear deal

Other things I'd like him to get do but unlikely right now

20) Immigration
21) Gun Control
22) Healthcare (there were some in BBB but that was shot down)

His approval is 42.2% right now according to 538 aggregator. He is pretty weak ...

Think you can do better than Biden? Check out this simulator. Lots of Very Positive so may have to buy it

Democracy 4 on Steam

I've owned previous versions, but it has always failed to really grab me. I imagine others might really like it. It is very spreadsheet-y.

I think the challenge Biden has as a President in this point in time is that he's fundamentally a legislator, and used to getting stuff done through the legislative process, with all that entails around process and consensus.

Given the make-up of the Senate, however, none of that is really going to work. So, what a President should be doing now is a) making liberal use of the power available to the Executive (nothing sketchy, just things like directing agencies to do things a certain way, issuing executive orders, etc...) and recognizing you're in a PR battle with the GOP and waging a war against that.

I don't think he likes the former (because process, respect for institutions) and I don't think he has the nous for the latter (because he's never had to develop it, even in Congress, per his history).

Any discussion of worker shortages should include this.

The collapse of legal immigration. pic.twitter.com/1OsOkhm8o0

— The Alex Nowrasteh (@AlexNowrasteh) January 11, 2022

Nah, the numbers involved aren't high enough to be more than marginally relevant. The data I've seen seems to indicate the most sizable part of the labor issue is an increased number of people opting for early retirement. To a degree, that will make it a temporary issue most likely.

Still though increasing legal immigration is probably one of the best tools the government has to alleviate the labor shortage. It won't fix it entirely of course but a positive step is a positive step.

It's 500k to 1mil in decreased immigration since 2018. That's a lot of workers not in the labor pool now.

Increasing legal immigration is a long term fix. It won't help labor shortage in near term (e.g. 1-2 years).

But I'm all for greatly increasing it and also temp guest workers.

Unfortunately, don't think there will be an appetite for an all encompassing immigration rework. But think Dems & GOP can come to consensus on specific, targeted stuff like guest workers and fixing H1-B.

Alternatively, the GOP, when they get back in full power in 2024, may succeed in stripping away all social welfare programs and worker protections and everyone will have to go back into the labor pool to survive.

I don't think increasing immigration is even a long-term fix. The economy needs to be agile enough to adjust to fluctuations in the amount of available labor, because that's going to keep on happening regardless of the pandemic, and there's no way an even perfectly-run immigration policy is going to be able to adequately anticipate those needs in time to handle them. Shifting demographics is just a natural phenomenon.

Yes, immigration helps, just saying it's a band-aid instead of a real solution. Not to mention that relying on other countries to train the proper amounts and proportions of workers we need with the right skills is problematic on multiple levels, both practically and IMO morally.

I think the more relevant question is why aren't we better at adjusting to these kinds of circumstances as a country.

I don't really see a labor shortage issue. If people are opting for early retirement or other reasons to not enter the labor market, it's because the compensation is not worth their time.

Also, any short-term labor issues is due to a highly contagious virus ripping through the country. When you have half a million people testing positive a day, that's a lot of people unable to show up to work. Not to mention the people they've exposed or who have to care for them.

https://apnews.com/article/business-...5acf4491813c1b

I LOL'd as I read this despite how ridiculous it is.


I see what you did there Sen. Diaz.;)

Well he certainly worded that well didn't he?

Demographic wise we are not making enough babies, and not keeping up with STEM (and some other areas). Putting more emphasis on skills based vs family based immigration will certainly help long term. Increasing guest workers will also help in the jobs that Americans don't want.

If demographics is a major driver of this (which I believe it is), then targeted immigration policies will certainly help long-term IMO. If we were to enact legislation to make permanent residency/citizenship easier for college graduates (not just international students in the US & factoring security concerns) in critical fields (e.g. STEM, nursing), we would increase our human capital significantly.

It will increase our competitiveness and hurt other countries with the old cliche "brain drain".


TBF I don't think many people predicted mass resignation/retirement a year ago. The demographic trend was predicted but not this mass scale resignation/retirement in the past 1+ year.

But its here now and don't see much that we are doing to blunt it other than proposing more spending and/or reduce spending. But those don't really help the baseline supply of human capital (e.g. babies, more people).

No, Sen. Manchin, nobody would keep people from voting.

I'm sure there will be no form shortages in Red counties.

or counties with a low percentage of minorities

He already said "red counties"

SI

We already do a bunch of H-1B in tech and other industries to keep wages lower. Companies put out listings with ridiculous requirements in the US and vastly below market average wages and then say there are no workers available. Then they import workers for low wages despite the fact that H-1B workers are supposed to make the same as the other workers in the company. It's well documented (just a couple of examples) but the DoL isn't stepping in. And the workers aren't going to because, if you just came here from another country and the company controls your visa, are you going to challenge that? Hell no.

We still get a ton of intellectual talent coming here from the university system - it's probably been our biggest driver for decades. It's a legit competitive advantage in the mental marketplace - you want that degree from an American institution, at least until we break them or other countries catch up in a more substantial fashion (and they are).

But I think we also have a huge perception problem. First off, staying in your native country is a huge draw - it's home and you're probably well off and comfortable there. So there needs to be a big enticement to move. If you are a top performer in a, I dunno, what do we think is the "second tier" of countries? BRIC? It's not like they are some hellscape compared to the USA. Upward mobility is still there-ish, but shrinking, and local wages have stagnated since the 70s. And have you looked at what living in the US looks like the last few year... couple decad... our history? Especially if you're not white (not that it's a picnic in other parts of the world - I get that, too)?

Just picking some random metrics: Life expectancy, per capita income, cost of living, poverty rate, infant mortality, internet speeds, percentage of users with internet, and happiness index. We're pretty good on most of them, like around 20th. But 20th, not #1. And there's a lot of good with bad - like wages are in the top 10 but, even with those wages, we're in the 30s for cost of living and we're quite a ways down on poverty rate (I stopped counting but we're outside the top 50), above India and Brazil but below China and Russia, because our cost of living is so high.

The long and short is that if you're an "in demand" immigrant, you have lots of suitors. Why would you come to the US vs Europe? Health care, college, shorter working weeks, more vacation with the latter. We'll give you fewer social benefits because our social safety net is crappy compared to most other "developed" countries but we'll also reward you by paying you less than your local peers but you still have to live with our high cost of living. What a deal!

SI

Just stating the obvious :)

But, this does bring forth an interesting question. Would blue counties that are predominately white be affected as much as blue counties that are not?

It's just mind-boggling as an American to see that a party may bring down the UK government. That wouldn't rate on the top 100 scandals here during the past two years.

It’s apples to oranges, but a dinner almost brought down Newsom.

But not really. The recall wasn't close.

Shit. Trump's party at the WH gave a bunch of people Covid, himself included. Then, while he had it, he knowingly exposed his opponent to it and half the country wishes he would have given to Biden to kill him.

It's a whole lot easier to bounce a Prime Minister than a President. President, as we've seen, can just go "I don't care" and be fine.

This is not really true and is mostly propaganda from corporate lobbyists. There are plenty of skilled workers in this country. Companies just don't want to pay them their fair market rate and want to flood it with more people to drive down salaries.

When the most effective way to get a raise in your current IT job is to take a job somewhere else for higher pay and then reapply to your old position a year or 2 later there's a problem.

It's the advice I commonly see given to people in IT and I've seen it done far too many times to count.

This is actually true for a lot of knowledge worker jobs, not just in IT.

Those companies literally colluded with each other to limit their own labor pool. The opposite of what you'd do if you are short on talent.

Apple and Google settle antitrust lawsuit over hiring collusion charges | Apple | The Guardian

Amazing how quickly the press went from Biden won't have a press conference to Biden's press conferences are too long.

Is it really amazing? Really?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Yes, I remember those ComputerWorld ads. I am also on record saying we need to rework H-1B, you'll get no argument from me.

I'm not saying increase H-1B. I'm saying make it easier for needed highly educated and/or skills to immigrate (e.g. create a new H-99 visa with the proper incentives, processes for desired skillsets). Or maybe create a point system like in Canada and UK to identify your "desirability".


About 1M foreign college students last year. I cannot find any stats on how many F-1 student visas ultimately become PRs. But I do know the H-1B process is tedious. Make it easier for the desired skills and more will come/stay.


According to Gallup 2018, the US is still the most desired country to immigrate to. By far.

But assume your statement is more geared towards Europeans not wanting to immigrate to US as much? I'm good with that ... I'll take the college educated in needed skills from Asia, Africa, South America, LATAM etc.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/245255/...e-migrate.aspx


I think there's a lot of reasons. But regardless, college educated immigrants prefer the US. Admittedly it may be declining but as of 2015 ...

4 ways highly educated immigrants study and work in U.S. | Pew Research Center

******

It comes down to whether or not you believe the US will, in the long run, have an issue with not having enough babies (=workers)? If you do, I don't see many other alternatives than increasing immigration (because we sure as heck can't force the population to have more babies).

Yup, let's carve it up. Let's see what Biden can push through.

It's amazing, if by amazing we mean completely unsurprising, aka the way the media typically acts in many circumstances and has for decades. A news cycle driven by our electorate means controversy *must* be created. If one controversy ends, a new one must rise to take it's place, like heads on a hydra.

You're right that it wasn't predicted, but resignation/retirement have little to do with having more people. They literally demonstrate that lack of peole isn't the problem. It's the fact that the human capital that we do have doesn't want to work the jobs that are available at the price that employers are willing/able to pay.


This sort of gets back to issues we've previously discussed, but I don't think this is an acceptable goal. We need to have a more global mindset, not a us-vs-them one.

How the fuck did Biden manage to piss off NATO, Ukraine and Russia in a single statement. The guy just cannot get out of his own way, even when it’s an absolute gimmie.

Manchin is saying that his proposal from December is now off the table. Presumably, he thought that it was good policy a month ago, but not now that it might pass. It's very hard to negotiate a deal with someone that isn't negotiating in good faith.

He's pretty dumb.

It's gotten to the point that you have to wonder how much money he's getting from the Rs.

Biden just told the truth. Foolish in the forum, maybe, but the truth nonetheless. We aren't going to war over some border skirmish. It's going to take a full-fledged invasion before we even think about it.

The are an infinite number of truths that the leader of the free world isn’t supposed to say in a press conference. The guy is either senile or has incredibly poor judgement. Putin has got to be absolutely beside himself that the guy who got elected running against the guy he helped get in power partly on that platform is helping him arguably more than the first guy did.

Biden has always done this. He speaks the same in public as he does in private.

And this is being way overplayed. Putin knows that the big risk is economic, not military. He's not the only one that can see NATO has no interest in starting a potentially nuclear war over Ukraine.

So we got pissed because the former guy lied all the time, now we are pissed because the current guy tells the truth too much.

I don't think anybody is saying Biden's foot-in-mouth proclivities are as bad as Trump's lies.

Half the country is literally saying that

JFC he literally had to come out and walk his comments back after his Secretary of State had to contradict him while facing the music with our allies. But my team is better than the other team so fuck it right?

He’s a shit president and he’s handing the White House back to Trump or worse. Or is the 20% drop in approval rating all Republicans as well?

Again, he is just really dumb.

Pres. Biden called out Republicans after being asked if he ‘overpromised’ things to Americans: ‘I did not anticipate that there’d be such a stalwart effort to make sure … President Biden didn’t get anything done’ pic.twitter.com/Qf3w25Ntlu

— NowThis (@nowthisnews) January 19, 2022

All I'm saying is that what he said has no bearing on whether or not Putin attacks. If Putin, mistakenly IMO, thinks he can weather the economic hit, he'll attack. If he doesn't, he won't. Everybody involved knows there isn't going to be a war with NATO unless things get messy and spill over to a NATO neighbor. Ukraine is the most upset because they still think they will one day be in NATO. I get why they want that, see the above, but they aren't getting that and again, everyone involved knows this.

I meant here on the board. It's not half the country, but the people you're talking about mostly wouldn't be in favor of Biden if he walked on water while simultaneously solving world hunger and peace, curing cancer, and providing pain-free solutions to climate change.

I.e. as ever, what matters is what independents/moderate dems/etc. think of what Biden is doing. Not what those who can't be persuaded (conservatives in general) and those who will support him no matter what (liberals in general) say.

It was a dumb comment and absolute gaffe from Biden.

But yes, my team is absolutely better than the other team. I've been passionate about politics since the 80s and I've never felt more sure about that than I do right now.

That is a particularly baffling statement after serving as VP in the Obama administration for 8 years. Either he's absolutely clueless or he had some delusional belief that he was so great a statesman that he simply wouldn't have any of those issues.

I don't think Biden is that dumb. I think he most certainly knew better, and does. Only he can know for sure of course, but I'd say it smells like a convenient and bad excuse for what almost all politicians do - promising what they know they can't deliver.

Yup, and I think he could have done a much better job of handling it.

I think Biden's problem is his age, and I don't mean in an "old man is senile" way. I think he truly believed "politics as usual" would win the day when he became president - that the horse-trading and compromising he's been used to for 40 years would magically return once Trump was gone and people returned to normal. And he was sadly mistaken and delusional about that.

But that's basically what he ran on, as the great uniter. I think many people underestimated the Trump cult and partisan divide. I think that's why people like McConnell, Graham, Haley and McCarthy floated "Trump was responsible" trial balloons right after January 6th, only to feel the blow back and either go silent or do an about face. Biden wasn't alone, but he is president and is now facing the music for not delivering on what was, in hindsight (maybe foresight) an impossible task.

I think that's much of the Dem's issue is that they aren't fighting evenly. IE. they keep brining knives to gun fights

BUT

I also think a GREAT majority of Dems are center and thus if the DEMS do fight "dirty" those constituents, including me, may be turned off by the 'giving up' of fair play. I'm not torn on it until it happens, right. I mean right now I say "Fight dirty like they do" but then when they talk about things that are in that camp, ie. changing the Filibuster I feel the hair stand up on my neck.

Given the ideas espoused by the GOP these days, Flasch, it's either killing the filibuster or ending up with concentration camps.

(only kinda joking)

Wouldn't keeping the filibuster enable the democrats to employ the same tactics to prevent conservative policies from being implemented. No party will ever get 60 senators so we are stuck in this loop of nothing happening.

I think the Filibuster is done anyways. The next time the GOP takes control of the senate, you're going to see clip upon clip of Democrats calling the filibuster racist, anti-democratic etc... That Republicans will feel compelled to get rid of it on principle alone and do what the evil Democrats could not. Of course everyone will know this is BS but the end result is the same.

Democrats should probably get a jump on things now and find a way to bribe Manchin and Sinema.

What does the GOP want to do that will take 60 votes? They are mostly concerned with judges and financial things, which can be done with a majority. I honestly can't think of anything the GOP wanted to do where they had 51 votes but not 60. When they've failed, it hasn't been because of the filibuster, it's been because they can't get to 51.

edit: The first big test will be if they have a unified government in 2025 and SCOTUS has killed Roe v. Wade. At that point, I can't imagine they'll let a filibuster keep them from making abortion illegal nationwide.

That feels like '6 of 1 half dozen of the other' to me. He was dumb if he actually thought the Republicans would let him govern more than Obama, and he was just as dumb/incompetent if he knew those were empty promises but did absolutely nothing to prepare for or control the optics of that inevitable fallout.

Yeah, Republicans changed the rule for Supreme Court justices back in 2017. I don't think there is much legislation they really care about that requires 60 votes. Maybe tax cuts or corporate bailouts, but it's pretty easy to find Democrats willing to go along with that.

I believe tax cuts can generally be passed via reconciliation (i.e. 51 votes).

Yeah. It's also worth noting that these are all just modern made up rules that no one is forced to go by. McConnell didn't allow a confirmation hearing for an Obama Suprem Court justice which went against tradition.

Republicans will ignore any of these rules if they feel they can do something they want. Democrats won't.

A woman in VA said this:


and the cops said she apologized, so everything's fine.

Doesn't sound like the Feds kicked in her door and dragged her to jail, so I'm going to guess white.

Anyone figure out what Garland does for a living? Are we still paying him?

That was just a lucky guess...

This photo of Amelia King is posted on the Facebook page of Emry King. pic.twitter.com/cCnljhF338

— David Begnaud (@DavidBegnaud) January 21, 2022

Imagine how confident you have to be in your standing in society to just blurt out terrorist threats at a recorded public meeting in front of law enforcement.

Now imagine a Muslim man publically threatening to shoot up a school while having photos on social media holding weapons and gleefully supporting violent extremist groups.

Soon, imagining that will be illegal under VA's anti-CRT law.

Amelia King was charged with "oral threat on school property."

Page County woman charged after comments made at school board meeting

0% she would have been charged had this not gone viral.

oh no, that $2500 fine and/or up to 12 months in jail is going to be a harsh punishment.

What happened to dropping terroristic threatening charges on anyone who sneezed menacingly? After 9/11, that was all the rage.

And another one.

House committee in Florida passes 'Don't Say Gay' bill | TheHill

I like the play though. It is much easier to say that you did not know you were being hateful if you can say that you never learned anything that would have explained what you are doing is hateful in school.

Sure the Democrats won't do anything but you have to vote for them for the judges at least.....

NEW: Biden has nominated Jennifer Rearden — a former Trump judicial nominee, GOP donor, and corporate lawyer who has helped Chevron-aligned law firm Gibson Dunn target human rights attorney @SDonziger — to serve as a federal judge. https://t.co/2adn7sWYdS

— Revolving Door Project (@revolvingdoorDC) January 20, 2022

You joke but they literally charged someone with terrorism for coughing near a cop.

Woman faces terrorism charges for coughing near police officers and telling them she has COVID-19 | TheHill

Weird story that I guess falls in general politics. Workers at a hospital got a better offer from another hospital and took it. Court has now ruled they can't take it and must still work for the other hospital for less pay.

Wisconsin is an at-will state and serfdom is illegal I believe.

What we know the Ascension, ThedaCare court battle over employees

They aren't forcing the employees to work anywhere. The employees aren't even being sued. They are preventing one hospital system from hiring former employees of the other hospital system. So basically it is an injunction against the new employer. They have quit the other job and are not being forced to go back.
The judge was still wrong in granting the injuction from what the legal experts I am reading. It was shocking that he did. In the end, really the only thing the court could really do is force the one hospital to pay the other hospital damages if they could even prove damages. Stopping their employment was ridiculous. The employees are being punished and they are not even being sued.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I'm not an expert on Appleton, but I imagine the opportunities for a highly skilled position like that is pretty limited. So if you are cutting off their opportunity to work somewhere else, you're essentially forcing them to work at the other hospital.

So yes, it's not suing the actual employees, but the purpose of the lawsuit is the same. To limit the free market and prevent employees from leaving.

Wisconsin is an at-will state with lots of folks who preach free market. They've been awfully quiet about this one.

This is a very key point. The judge's ruling effectively means "at-will" is a remedy only available to the employer.

Can you guys explain to me why we care about Russia invading Ukraine?

Land Creep... in my view. Watch any WW2 doc and see what Neville Chamberlin had to do with how the Nazi's got such a head start. Side bar, thank god for Winston Churchill.

I think everybody should care about a sovereign nation invading another one. It sets a horrible and very destructive precedent to decide that is ok. And yes, we tend to ignore it when it happens in certain parts of the world, but that doesn't mean we *should*.

They don't have aspirations that far into Europe. Nor do they have the means to do so.

You shouldn't care unless you work in the defense industry or have some altruistic reason you don't apply to your own country.

Absolutely Rainmaker. Hitler will be perfectly fine just absorbing the Sudetenland. He definitely won't want to go any further.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Are you a Russian troll?

Maybe it's just me, but you seem rather keen on pointing out flaws in America (not always unjustified) but you're rather non-chalant about authoritarian Russia invading Ukraine.

Because it sets a precedence we do not want to encourage. Putin may be happy with Ukraine for a while but he'll think about others eventually.

Personally, I would go the political route and buy sympathizers who will eventually get elected to highest posts. It doesn't matter if Russia occupies Ukraine, it matter that Russia controls Ukraine.

But Putin took Crimea and won that gamble. He has a cult of personality of rebuilding Russia/USSR so something like economic/banking sanctions won't stop him (hey Germany, need some of our natural gas?) if he really wanted to go.

My biggest beef is why is the US, seemingly, taking the lead here in pushing back on Putin. EU should be doing that with US backing.

Pick up a history book so you can tell the difference in the two and why they are not remotely comparable. This is a dumb take, even for you.

The EU doesn't care enough. Also, because being a superpower has certain responsibilities, and this is one of them.