This is a fascinating article about the working conditions at Amazon.com. In the article, current and former employees complain of 80-hour work weeks, interrupted vacations, co-worker sabotage and little tolerance even for those struggling with life-threatening illnesses or family tragedies.
I’m concerned about rejecting the Iran nuclear deal, because I’m skeptical that a better deal is possible. However, this article argues otherwise. If Congress disapproves of the Iran deal, the author argues that the “most likely scenario” is one in which:
“... the Iranians exploit the temporary confusion of a congressional disapproval to divide the P5+1. … Iran would implement certain nuclear commitments but not others. … Iran could then try to divide the Russians and Chinese from the West, and the Europeans from the United States in order to undermine the multilateral sanctions regime.”
“China and Russia might return to some Iranian business … But they are also likely to stay at the negotiating table to achieve their original objective: Keeping Iran from getting nukes. Beijing doesn’t want a nuclear-armed Iran wreaking havoc with global energy prices; Moscow wouldn’t mind high energy prices but not a revolutionary Islamist regime with nukes stirring up trouble in its neighborhood, including with Russia’s large Muslim population.”
“Europe, however, is the key. Europe’s markets always have been Tehran’s big economic prize. The key for Congress and the White House will be to use diplomatic persuasion and U.S. financial sanctions to keep the Europeans out of Iran.”
This is an editorial from the Washington Post that is highly critical of Donald Trump’s immigration proposal. I found this tidbit to be interesting:
“According to the Migration Policy Institute, about 87 percent of the United States’ undocumented immigrants — some 10 million people — have no serious criminal record.”
I don’t understand why Donald Trump believes there is an urgent need to deport people who don’t have a serious criminal record (I assume “no serious criminal record” means they haven’t committed any violent crimes).
This is an editorial from the Wall Street Journal that is highly critical of Trump’s immigration proposal.
“Republican critics of U.S. immigration policy have long claimed that they welcome legal immigrants. That claim is going to be tested now that Donald Trump has unveiled a policy outline that would deport millions and sharply restrict all immigration. Mr. Trump is bidding to make the GOP the deportation party.”
“Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) signed legislation Wednesday to spend $250 million from taxpayers on a new arena for the Milwaukee Bucks basketball team.”
“[M]any conservatives … object to taxpayers subsidizing a professional basketball team owned by billionaire hedge-fund investors — especially at a time when the state has slashed funding for public education and the university system.”
I’m generally opposed to taxpayer money being used to subsidize private businesses.
Tom--Here's a good site to check out issues on the upcoming election. I like Trumps immigration policy. But not Trump. At least not yet :)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential-quiz?from=6auvPs6Y2
/DAD
Tom and family--here's the latest on global warming debate:
ReplyDelete"On the weather front, the World Meteorological Association issued a declaration from their meeting in Geneva, Switzerland that included the appeal “to foresee and to prevent potential man-made changes in climate that might be adverse to the well-being of humanity.” Later, the WMO joined with the United Nations Environment Programme to form the International Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. panel whose global warming predictions have been discredited by the earth’s failure to warm.
Another major event was the launch of a satellite system designed to track global temperatures and other environmental phenomena like the health of the polar ice caps.
Today, we have the benefit of reviewing thirty-six years of satellite data detailing the shrinking or increase of the polar ice caps, and the results are amazing.
The global ice area is virtually the same today as it was in 1979.
With polar ice caps remaining stable since the beginning of the global warming crisis, and the earth’s temperatures stubbornly refusing to rise for almost two decades, despite increasing carbon emissions, every assumption used by the Environmental Protection Agency to justify their regulatory assault on America’s legitimate energy sector needs to be rethought.
http://netrightdaily.com/2015/08/polar-ice-caps-stable-since-1979/
love,
DAD