Tag Archives: although

Are We About to Say Goodbye to Fish Sticks?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Many people think of climate change as something happening in the atmosphere, but in fact a lot of the most important changes are taking place under the ocean.

In fact, up to one-third of the greenhouse gases humans release, and up to 90 percent of the global warming caused by those gases, ends up sunk in the sea. That has a lot of scary impacts: Rising sea level threatens coastal communities; rising seawater acidity kills off coral and shellfish; changing conditions are forcing dozens of species from whales to puffins into unfamiliar regions of the globe. We’ve even got cannibal lobsters, for crying out loud.

Those impacts can also devastate vital US industries, as a peer-reviewed study published today in Nature illustrates. The research found that warming waters are to blame for a recent collapse of the cod fishery in New England. Although a smaller industry than major commercial fish like salmon and mackerel, cod, commonly used for fish sticks and other processed foods, is a multimillion dollar business in New England.

But the fish have become increasingly rare. Last year, federal regulators slapped tight limits on cod fishing after they discovered that the population was at only 4 percent of the level needed to be sustainable. That was the lowest point in a nosedive that has played out over the last decade. In 2014, the commercial catch of cod in New England—about 5 million pounds—was 67 percent less than it was in 2004; the net value of the fishery was correspondingly cut by more than half, to about $9.3 million.

Researchers at the Gulf of Maine Research Institute wanted to know whether climate change played in role in that collapse. Indeed, they found that sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Maine have risen 99 percent faster than those in the rest of the ocean, rising especially quickly over the same decade-long decline of the cod fishery. The correlation is clear when you look at the two trend lines side-by-side, as in this chart from the study:

Pershing, et al

Higher temperatures make it harder for the fish to metabolize food, leaving them with less energy, especially at their prime reproductive age of about four years. That leads to fewer fish being born. Those that are born may have a harder time finding food, as the plankton they survive on move into deeper water in search of cooler temperatures. Deep water is home to more cod predators.

These problems have all been compounded by a lack of climate-savvy policy by fishing officials, the study found. Because the officials have largely overlooked the impact of ocean warming, they’ve consistently set quotas for commercial fishers far too high, giving the cod population no opportunity to rebound even in cooler years. In other words, overfishing has been rampant even when the overall catch comes in below the legally prescribed limit.

For that reason, the key solution that the researchers advocate is better integration of climate modeling in decision about where, when, and how cod fishing should be allowed. In Canada, extreme limitations on cod fishing seen to have been remarkably successful in revitalizing the population. Still, those management choices aren’t getting any easier to make, as warming continues to rise; the only true fix for New England’s fishing industry is to slow the warming. Bear that in mind the next time you hear a politician complain about job-killing climate action policies.

See original: 

Are We About to Say Goodbye to Fish Sticks?

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, Eureka, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Are We About to Say Goodbye to Fish Sticks?

South Carolina’s Gov. Finally Calls for Removing the Confederate Flag From the State Capitol Grounds

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Following days of mounting pressure, Gov. Nikki Haley just announced her support for removing the Confederate flag from the grounds of the state capitol.

“It’s time to move the flag from the capitol grounds,” Haley told reporters at a press conference, where senators Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham were also present, on Monday.

“Some divisions are bigger than a flag. We are not going to allow this symbol to divide us any longer. The fact that people are choosing to use it as a sign of hate is something we cannot stand,” she added.

The flag has been the subject of controversy in the past, including in 2000 when large protests opposing its presence took place in Columbia, the state’s capitol. The issue resurfaced, creating national headlines, after the mass shooting inside a historic black church in Charleston. This weekend, a racist online manifesto apparently belonging to the suspected gunman, Dylann Roof, which included images of him posing with the flag, one in which he had a gun in his hand, surfaced.

Following the shooting, a slew of Republican presidential candidates—some of whom shied away from directly stating Roof had racist motives—have been asked about their stances on the Confederate flag. Although he condemned the shooting as an “evil act of aggression,” former Florida governor Jeb Bush ultimately said he did not know what was “mind or the heart of the man” behind it, despite the obvious racist symbolism Roof appeared to embrace. After once defending the flag as a “part of who we are,” Graham joined Haley on Monday in backtracking his longstanding support of the Confederate flag.

See the original post: 

South Carolina’s Gov. Finally Calls for Removing the Confederate Flag From the State Capitol Grounds

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Green Light, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on South Carolina’s Gov. Finally Calls for Removing the Confederate Flag From the State Capitol Grounds

Obama Just Called Out Florida’s Climate Deniers in Their Own Backyard

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

President Barack Obama just marked Earth Day with a speech on climate change, given from a podium in Florida’s Everglades National Park. The choice of venue was appropriate from an environmental perspective—the Everglades is already acutely feeling the impacts of sea level rise—but it was also telling from a political standpoint. Although our swampiest national park has a long history of bipartisan support, it’s located in a state that has recently produced some of the most absurdist climate denial in recent memory—and Obama didn’t forget to mention it.

Florida is home not just to Senator Marco Rubio, a GOP presidential contender who maintains that humans can’t affect the climate, but also to Governor Rick Scott, who landed in headlines last month after apparently barring state employees from talking about climate change.

“Climate change can no longer be denied,” Obama said today. “It can’t be edited out. It can’t be omitted from the conversation… Simply refusing to say the words ‘climate change’ doesn’t mean climate change isn’t happening.”

Obama also took a jab at Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) for bringing a snowball onto the Senate floor. “If you have a coming storm, you don’t stick your head in the sand,” he said. “You prepare for the storm.”

You can watch the full speech below (starts at 48:00):

Originally posted here – 

Obama Just Called Out Florida’s Climate Deniers in Their Own Backyard

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Just Called Out Florida’s Climate Deniers in Their Own Backyard

The Boston Globe Really, Really Wants Elizabeth Warren to Run for President

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Sunday, the editorial board of the Boston Globe published a four-part argument urging Senator Elizabeth Warren to run against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president. The editorial, which touted Warren’s commitment to reducing income inequality, warned Democrats that allowing “Clinton to coast to the presidential nomination without real opposition” would be a big mistake.

“Unlike Clinton, or any of the prospective Republican candidates, Warren has made closing the economic gaps in America her main political priority, in a career that has included standing up for homeowners facing illegal foreclosures and calling for more bankruptcy protections,” the Globe‘s editorial board argued. “If she runs, it’ll ensure that those issues take their rightful place at the center of the national political debate.”

The paper went onto argue that even on issues, such as strengthening financial regulations, on which Clinton and Warren agree, it was difficult to imagine a “President Clinton enforcing the Dodd-Frank legislation with as much vigor as a President Warren” at a time when income inequality remains a high priority for many Americans.

Although Warren has repeatedly said she is not interested in running for president, Sunday’s editorial comes at somewhat of a vulnerable moment for Clinton, who’s still dealing with the controversy surrounding her exclusive use of a personal email account while serving as secretary of state. Although the controversy doesn’t appear to have damaged Clinton’s popularity with top Democratic donors, it has further underscored the serious lack of viable challengers to her nomination.

“Fairly or not, many Americans already view Clinton skeptically, and waltzing to the nomination may actually hurt her in the November election against the Republican nominee,” the Globe argued.

If Warren were to remain uninterested in a run, the editorial board said she should continue her efforts to reduce income inequality and “help recruit candidates” to advance her signature cause.

To read the editorial in its entirety, visit the Boston Globe.

See original article – 

The Boston Globe Really, Really Wants Elizabeth Warren to Run for President

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Boston Globe Really, Really Wants Elizabeth Warren to Run for President

FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations

Mother Jones

In a rare and candid speech on Thursday, FBI director James Comey urged police officers to begin engaging in honest conversations about broken race relations in America, saying it was time for officers to stop resorting to “lazy mental shortcuts” that have too often lead to the mistreatment of minorities.

“Those of us in law enforcement must re-double our efforts to resist bias and prejudice,” Comey said in an address to Georgetown University. “We must better understand the people we serve and protect—by trying to know, deep in our gut, what it feels like to be a law-abiding young black man walking on the street and encountering law enforcement. We must understand how that young man may see us.”

The speech follows the high-profile police killings of two unarmed black men, Michael Brown and Eric Garner, and the widespread anger expressed over the lack of grand jury indictments against the officers in both deaths. The fatal shootings sparked massive protests across the country, with demonstrators demanding for police reform.

On Thursday, Comey referred to both Brown and Garner, along with the two NYPD officers who were shot execution-style in their patrol car in December. Calling their deaths a “crossroads,” Comey said it was time for law enforcement agencies to acknowledge that a large portion of police history “is not pretty” and rife with instances of persisting, unconscious prejudices.

Comey’s rationale aligns with psychological studies indicating that even in the absence of overt racist views, individuals–particularly police officers–often act with bias, especially in instance where a split-second decision is required.

“If we can’t help our latent biases, we can help our behavior in response to those instinctive reactions, which is why we work to design systems and processes that overcome that very human part of us all,” he said. “Although the research may be unsettling, what we do next is what matters most.”

Link: 

FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on FBI Director Delivers Powerful Call for Change in Police Race Relations

How Much It Costs to Raise a Kid, in 4 Charts

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A middle-income family with a child born in 2013 can expect to spend about a quarter of a million dollars in child-rearing expenses over the next 18 years, according to a new report from the USDA.

Costs such as housing, food, transportation, clothing, health care, child care, and education will amount to an expected $304,340 ($245,340 in 2013 dollars) for middle-income families, a 1.8 percent increase from last year’s report. For each income bracket, costs will increase as the child ages:

Although households with incomes in the lowest third will spend less than half as much on child-related costs as higher income families, their spending will amount to a far greater percent of total income.

Housing is the highest child-rearing expenditure, amounting to 30 percent of expenses for middle-income, husband-wife families with two children. Raising a child is costliest in the urban Northeast and least expensive in rural areas.

USDA

The report notes that child-rearing costs have grown 24 percent since 1960, when a middle-income family could have expected to spend $25,230 ($198,560 in 2013 dollars). The USDA has also released an interactive calculator to help families estimate child-rearing costs based on type of household, number of children, location, and income.

See more here:  

How Much It Costs to Raise a Kid, in 4 Charts

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Much It Costs to Raise a Kid, in 4 Charts

Does the Minimum Wage Look Better if You Account for the EITC?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Over at the Economix blog, minimum wage skeptic David Neumark makes a reasonable point: sure, adjusted for inflation, the minimum wage has declined since the 1960s. But we’ve created and then expanded the EITC as a wage support tool since then, so you need to look at the two together. If you do that, wage support for low-income families looks a lot better.

Like I said, it’s a reasonable point. The problem is that Neumark appears to use the statutory EITC amount in his calculations. In the case of the minimum wage, using statutory amounts is OK since it’s a universal policy. But for EITC, you really want to look at actual average benefits and how they’ve changed over time.

This is very, very difficult. Or, to put it more bluntly, it was too difficult for me, and I couldn’t find any authoritative measure of this. However, by cobbling together a few different sources and making some (hopefully reasonable) assumptions about average hours worked and so forth, I took a crack at estimating the value of the EITC converted into hourly wages. The CBPP, for example, says that the average EITC for a family with children was $2,805 in 2010. Nearly all of this goes to families in the bottom quintile with wages under $20,000, which means it goes to workers who are probably making the minimum wage or only slightly more. Some of those families have a single earner working 2,000 hours per year. Some work less. Some families have multiple earners working more than 2,000 hours together. But if you use 2,000 hours as a horseback guess, the average EITC payment comes to about $1.40 per hour worked.

I can’t emphasize enough how rough this is. But I doubt it’s off by a huge margin. Putting this together with a bit of other data, here’s what it produces:

If there’s better data bearing on this point, I’m happy to post about it. For now, though, my best guess is that even when you account for the EITC, income support for poor families remains a couple of dollars per hour below its 1960s level.

My personal policy preference is to divide income support between the EITC and the minimum wage. They address different problems and they have different targets (the EITC, for example, is heavily targeted toward families with children, while the minimum wage is universal). Although Neumark is not a fan of increasing the minimum wage, he suggests this is a reasonable policy choice:

There is a more subtle argument — that the combination of an earned-income tax credit with a higher minimum wage can lead to better outcomes than the earned-income tax credit alone….My work with William Wascher has explored the interactions of higher minimum wages and a more generous earned-income tax credit. We indeed find that a combination of these two policies leads to higher employment and income among single women with children who are eligible are for the credit. At the same time, the combined policies lead to more adverse employment effects on specific groups — like teenagers and less-skilled minority men — who are not eligible for the earned-income tax credit and have to compete with the new labor market entrants who are eligible for it.

Thus, on distributional grounds there may be an argument for coupling the earned-income tax credit with a higher minimum wage. But to be clear, the higher minimum wage entails some job loss. We may simply be willing to accept this job loss in return for better distributional outcomes.

Although Neumark disagrees, my reading of the literature as a whole suggests that the adverse employment effects are very small, even on the groups most strongly affected by a higher minimum wage. That said, if anyone wants to propose a significant expansion of EITC instead of an increase in the minimum wage, I’m all ears. Generally speaking, though, I’m in favor of guaranteeing a certain minimum compensation to everyone, not just families with children. For that reason, I’d like to see the minimum wage increased.

View the original here: 

Does the Minimum Wage Look Better if You Account for the EITC?

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Does the Minimum Wage Look Better if You Account for the EITC?

Americans spent 4 percent of household income on gas in 2012

Americans spent 4 percent of household income on gas in 2012

In 2012, Chevron made $26.2 billion in profits. Exxon, $44.9 billion. Shell, $26.59 billion. At today’s prices, that’s enough to buy almost 25 billion gallons of gas in California.

Last year, Americans paid record-high average gas prices, a fact that is certainly linked to the oil companies’ massive profits.

How much did Americans spend on gas? From the U.S. Energy Information Administration:

Gasoline expenditures in 2012 for the average U.S. household reached $2,912, or just under 4% of income before taxes, according to EIA estimates. This was the highest estimated percentage of household income spent on gasoline in nearly three decades, with the exception of 2008, when the average household spent a similar amount. Although overall gasoline consumption has decreased in recent years, a rise in average gasoline prices has led to higher overall household gasoline expenditures.

EIA

Click to embiggen.

Four percent of household income went to gasoline in 2012. But here’s the kicker:

U.S. gasoline consumption fell in 2011 to 134.2 billion gallons, its lowest level since 2001. However, at the same time, EIA’s average city retail gasoline price rose 26.1% in 2011, and another 3.3% in 2012, when it reached $3.70 per gallon. The effect of the higher prices in 2011 and 2012 outweighed the effect of reduced consumption.

We are paying more for gas even though we’re using less. Allowing just three oil companies to rake in nearly $100 billion in profits.

Hat-tip: Ed Crooks.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Living

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Originally from: 

Americans spent 4 percent of household income on gas in 2012

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Americans spent 4 percent of household income on gas in 2012