Tag Archives: labor

Germany’s Key to Clean Energy Is…This Coal Mine?

A German engineer wants to turn an old mine, half a mile underground, into a giant battery. Tim McDonnell/Climate Desk Germany is in the midst of a fierce battle against climate change and is making an aggressive push to get at least 80 percent of its power from renewable sources by 2050. But with nearly half its power still drawn from some of the world’s dirtiest coal, there are plenty of bumps in the road ahead. One of the biggest is how to store renewable energy when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining, a problem that has tormented clean-energy advocates around the globe. One engineer thinks he’s found the solution—half a mile underground. Most of Germany’s coal is a low-grade form called lignite, which is dug out of sprawling open-pit mines and fed into carbon-spewing power stations. Lignite is dirtier than the hard coal more commonly found in the United States in places like Wyoming and West Virginia. Germany has its own hard coal, too—Steinkohle, in local parlance—but costs for the deep-shaft mines needed to get at it run so high that the industry has historically relied heavily on federal subsidies. Those are set to expire in 2018, and when they do, they’ll take Germany’s three remaining hard-coal mines with them. One of these mines is Bergwerk Prosper Haniel, about an hour outside the bustling northwestern city of Cologne. It’s a stark contrast from the open-pit lignite mines that consume entire landscapes: The squat industrial building where I meet André Niemann, an engineering professor at the nearby Universität Duisburg-Essen, looks like any small factory and gives no hint that it sits atop one of the deepest hard-rock mines in the world. We climb into a rattletrap elevator and drop down into the mine as Niemann describes his plan to turn the tunnels beneath us into a giant experiment in clean energy. (Watch the video below for an inside tour of the mine.) “If we want to integrate renewables as a major part, we need energy storage systems,” he says. “The energy storage solution is not solved yet.” Engineers across the globe are scrambling to design batteries that could soak up extra power and feed it back at night or on windless days. And four US states are scrambling to get picked as the site of a $5 billion battery factory Tesla plans to break ground on later this year. But traditional batteries aren’t the only option. So-called “pumped storage” uses renewable energy that isn’t needed at the time it’s produced to pump water into an elevated reservoir; to get the power back later on a cloudy or windless day, the water is drained back downhill through turbines, turning the whole system into a huge hydraulic battery. This illustration shows how the system works: The basic idea isn’t new: There are a number of these systems spread across the world already, including a few in Germany and several in the United States, that together account for nearly all existing bulk energy storage capacity. But Niemann would be the first to build one out of a coal mine, using Prosper Haniel’s preexisting, 18-mile network of tunnels. With hard coal in its waning hours, Niemann says, “now we have access to this deep ground.” His plan is still on the drawing board; until its closure in 2018, Prosper Haniel will continue to pump out 4 million tons of coal per year. But working with the company that owns the mine, RAG, Niemann wants to coat the tunnels’ grimy walls in concrete and fill the place up with water—up to 35 million cubic feet of it, roughly the volume of the Empire State Building. Renewable power would pump some of the water back to the surface, and then gravity would take care of the rest, draining the water back into the mine through an energy-producing turbine. Altogether, the system would have enough storage capacity to power up to 410 typical German homes. Niemann thinks projects like this could be adopted widely to repurpose unused facilities, to build a new energy system on the framework of the old. “Times are changing,” he says. “Mining is temporary, but now we want to establish a permanent solution.” More here:  Germany’s Key to Clean Energy Is…This Coal Mine? ; ;Related ArticlesEl Niño Could Grow Into a Monster, New Data ShowWatch Live: Darren Aronofsky Discusses “Noah” and Climate ChangeJared Diamond: We Could Be Living in a New Stone Age by 2114 ;

See original – 

Germany’s Key to Clean Energy Is…This Coal Mine?

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, OXO, PUR, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Germany’s Key to Clean Energy Is…This Coal Mine?

Meet the New Super Working Class

Mother Jones

Via Counterparties, a new study suggests that we now have a “superordinate” working class: highly paid professionals who are so dedicated to their professions that they’d rather work in the office than engage in leisure or vacation time:

The best educated men used once to work much shorter hours for pay, an echo, still in the 1960s, of the end-of-19th century leisure-class ideology. But by the beginning of the 21st century they are working the longest hours in their exchange-economy jobs. And the best-educated women in each of the regime types, show an even more decisive differential movement into paid work.

Now add these trends together and we see, unambiguously, the 21st century reversed education/leisure gradient, with the best educated, both men and women, working, overall, a much larger part of the day than the medium-level educated, who in turn do more than the lowest educated. At least from the 1970s onwards, we see no decisive decline in overall work time, perhaps the slightly the reverse, with a small historical increase, particularly for the best educated, in the range 530 to 550 minutes per day. Industrious activities are transferred out of the money economy, and, replacing the 19th century leisure class, we find a 21st century superordinate working class.

The basic evidence is on the right. I guess I find it only modestly convincing. In 1961, highly educated men in the corporate world worked similar hours to their less-educated peers. By 2005, they were working a bit more, but their total work hours were actually down from their peak. Conversely, although it’s true that highly educated women have very plainly outpaced the working hours of their less-educated peers, this is hardly surprising given the immense change in opportunities allowed to women since 1961, as well as the vastly higher pay that well-educated women can now expect in the corporate world.

So yes: highly-educated professionals are working more than they used to. Are they working themselves into a new, 21st-century frenzy, though? The evidence for that seems fairly modest. The big story here seems to be a more prosaic one: women are basically catching up to men, which hardly comes as a surprise. Beyond that, though, the evidence for a rising Veblenesque warrior class that views long hours as a status symbol strikes me as weak. Obviously it exists in places like Wall Street and Silicon Valley, but I suspect that its broader impact is fairly limited.

More here: 

Meet the New Super Working Class

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Meet the New Super Working Class

March Jobs Report Shows a Spring Pick-Up

Mother Jones

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

The US economy added 192,000 jobs in March, according to new numbers released Friday by the Department of Labor (DoL). The unemployment rate remained steady at 6.7 percent.

The number of jobs created last month was an improvement on the more moderate job gains seen in recent months—113,000 in January, and 175,000 in February. And even those numbers were revised upwards in March by a total of 37,000 jobs.

There’s more good news. Six years after the financial crisis, private employers have finally regained all the jobs lost during the recession, and then some. The private sector lost 8.8 million jobs during the economic slump, and has since hired 8.9 million.

The portion of Americans who either had jobs or were looking for jobs—this is called the labor force participation rate—ticked up to 63.2 percent after a half-million Americans began looking for work again last month. And the number of long-term unemployed—those Americans who have been jobless for 27 weeks or more—has fallen by 837,000 since last year.

Economists predict that the positive March jobs numbers mean that the Federal Reserve, the US central bank that sets monetary policy, will likely continue to pull back on the massive economic stimulus measures it put into effect in September 2012.

Now for the sour news. The number of jobs added to the economy last month was still fewer than many economists had expected. “Everybody who said ‘ah we finally turned the corner, we’re going to be booming like crazy’—I think they’re going to have to hold off for a few months,” Austan Goolsbee, President Barack Obama’s former top economic adviser, said on CNBC Friday.

And the jobs gained last month are not necessarily good middle-class jobs. The professional services sector posted the largest gains in March, but of the 57,000 new jobs added, most were in temp work. Food services added 30,000 jobs. The healthcare sector took on 19,000 jobs, and construction added 19,000.

The disparities in unemployment by race changed little in March. The jobless rate was 5.8 percent for whites, 12.4 percent for blacks, 7.9 percent for Hispanics, and 5.4 percent for Asians.

Continue reading:

March Jobs Report Shows a Spring Pick-Up

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on March Jobs Report Shows a Spring Pick-Up

Hobby Lobby’s Hypocrisy: The Company’s Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers

Mother Jones

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

When Obamacare compelled businesses to include emergency contraception in employee health care plans, Hobby Lobby, a national chain of craft stores, fought the law all the way to the Supreme Court. The Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate, the company’s owners argued, forced them to violate their religious beliefs. But while it was suing the government, Hobby Lobby spent millions of dollars on an employee retirement plan that invested in the manufacturers of the same contraceptive products the firm’s owners cite in their lawsuit.

Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012—three months after the company’s owners filed their lawsuit—show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).

Several of the mutual funds in Hobby Lobby’s retirement plan have holdings in companies that manufacture the specific drugs and devices that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, is fighting to keep out of Hobby Lobby’s health care policies: the emergency contraceptive pills Plan B and Ella, and copper and hormonal intrauterine devices.

Continue Reading »

See the original post:  

Hobby Lobby’s Hypocrisy: The Company’s Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hobby Lobby’s Hypocrisy: The Company’s Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers

What’s Wrong With the Fed?

Mother Jones

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

That’s the question Ryan Avent asks today. The reason is simple: In 2012, the Fed announced an inflation target of 2 percent per year, as measured by the PCE index. But they haven’t come close to hitting it. Why not?

The chart on the right shows the most recent inflation data. In 2011, PCE inflation measured 2.4 percent. In 2012, it came in at 1.8 percent. That’s a little low—especially during a supposed economic recovery—but it’s easy to see why no one was alarmed. It’s something to keep an eye on, but no one ever said the Fed could fine tune inflation to a few tenths of a point.

But then came 2013. There was a fair amount of monthly variability in the data, but the year-end number clocked in at 1.1 percent. That’s way too low, especially considering that (a) the previous year had come in below target, (b) inflationary expectations were still well anchored, and (c) the labor market was still noticeably loose. What this means is that the Fed has failed to meet its employment mandate for six full years and is now failing to meet its inflation target too. Avent wants to know what’s going on:

This is an extraordinary period of time during which the Fed has failed to meet even the rather lax definition of the mandate it has set for itself by a rather substantial margin. How can we explain this? Some possibilities are:

1) The Fed is technically unable to meet its mandate.

2) The Fed is staffed by incompetents.

3) The Fed is actually pursuing a goal outside its mandate without explaining what that goal is and what the justification is for pursuing it.

4) America’s statistics are all wrong. The Fed knows this but has refused to tell anyone else.

Whichever of the above you favour as an explanation, it suggests a need for meaningful reform, either to the personnel at the Fed or to the distribution of macroeconomic responsibilities across government.

My own guess is a little bit of #1 and a lot of #3. I suspect the Fed really is having technical trouble meeting its goals—at least, in a way it’s comfortable with. But that’s just a guess.

It’s less of a guess that the Fed is pursuing goals outside its mandate. It’s hardly a secret that there are plenty of Fed governors who are still living in the 70s, petrified of inflationary spirals and determined to keep inflation as low as possible. Not 2 percent. As low as possible. What’s more, they consider full employment not a virtue, but a threat. It leads to higher inflation, after all.

I think 2014 is something of a watershed year for the Fed. The hawks can argue that a single year of 1 percent inflation is nothing to worry too much about. This stuff bounces around. But at the very least, they should be on board with getting the inflation rate back up to their stated goal. Given the current employment level and the state of the global economy, this poses little risk. If they aren’t willing to do it, they need to come clean that they don’t really care about their statutory mandates and are simply substituting their own timeworn fears and class loyalties for the expressed will of Congress.

Credit:

What’s Wrong With the Fed?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What’s Wrong With the Fed?

President Obama Takes on Overtime Rules

Mother Jones

From the New York Times:

President Obama this week will seek to force American businesses to pay more overtime to millions of workers, the latest move by his administration to confront corporations that have had soaring profits even as wages have stagnated….Mr. Obama’s decision to use his executive authority to change the nation’s overtime rules is likely to be seen as a challenge to Republicans in Congress, who have already blocked most of the president’s economic agenda and have said they intend to fight his proposal to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour from $7.25.

This is obviously just the latest in Obama’s long series of Constitution-crushing moves that flout the law and turn the president into a despot-in-chief, gleefully kneecapping Congress and — wait. What’s this?

In 2004, business groups persuaded President George W. Bush’s administration to allow them greater latitude on exempting salaried white-collar workers from overtime pay, even as organized labor objected….Mr. Obama’s authority to act comes from his ability as president to revise the rules that carry out the Fair Labor Standards Act, which Congress originally passed in 1938. Mr. Bush and previous presidents used similar tactics at times to work around opponents in Congress.

Oh. So he’s just doing the same stuff that every other president has done. Sorry about that. You may go about your business.

For what it’s worth, this gets to the heart of my impatience with all the right-wing hysteria about how Obama is shredding the Constitution and turning himself into a modern-day Napoleon. I’m not unpersuadable on the general point that Obama’s executive orders sometimes go too far. But so far no one has provided any evidence that Obama has done anything more than any other modern president. They all issue executive orders, and Obama has actually issued fewer than most. They all urge the federal bureaucracy to reinterpret regulations in liberal or conservative directions. They all appoint agency heads with mandates to push the rulemaking process in agreeable directions. And they all get taken to court over this stuff and sometimes get their hats handed to them.

Is Obama opening up whole new vistas in executive overreach? I don’t see it, and I don’t even see anyone making the case seriously. You can’t just run down a laundry list of executive actions you happen to dislike. You need to take a genuinely evenhanded look at the past 30 or 40 years of this stuff and make an argument that Obama is doing something unique. Until you do that, you’re just playing dumb partisan games.

See the original post:

President Obama Takes on Overtime Rules

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on President Obama Takes on Overtime Rules

What Have the Democrats Ever Done For Us?

Mother Jones

Yesterday I wrote a post griping about the supposed mystery of why so many working and middle class voters (WMC for short) have drifted into the Republican Party over the past few decades. It’s hardly a mystery, I said, and it’s not an example of people voting against their own economic interest. The problem is simple: Democrats haven’t really done much for the WMC lately, so fewer and fewer of them view Democrats as their champions. That being the case, they might as well vote for the party that promises to cut their taxes and supports traditional values.

Scott Lemieux agrees with many of the specific points I made, but nonetheless thinks I went too far with my “general framing.” His post is worth a read, and it also gives me a handy excuse to write a follow-up. This is partly to expand on some things, partly to defend myself, and partly to concede an issue or two. So in no special order, here goes:

First off, you’re really talking about the white WMC, right?

Yeah, that’s usually how this stuff is framed. As it happens, I’d argue that although the black and Hispanic WMC still firmly supports Democrats, they largely do it for noneconomic reasons these days. But that’s a subject for a different day. What we’re talking about here is mostly about the white WMC.

But has this drift toward the Republican Party even happened? Haven’t you written before that it’s a myth?

Yes I have, based on the work of Larry Bartels, who says this is solely a Southern phenomenon. However, I’ve been persuaded by Lane Kenworthy’s work that the drift is both real and national. It’s not a myth.

Lemieux says that relative to Republicans, Democrats are better than I give them credit for. What about that?

No argument there. I don’t think anyone could read this site for more than five minutes and not know what I think of the modern Republican Party.

Plus he says that Obamacare has been a big plus for the WMC. And a bunch of folks on Twitter said the same thing.

That’s a point I’ll concede. I was thinking of a few things here. First, most WMC voters already get health coverage at work, so Obamacare’s impact on them is limited. Beyond that, the Medicaid expansion was targeted at the poor, and the exchange subsidies get pretty small by the time you reach a middle-class income. But my memory was faulty on that score. A middle-class family with an income of, say, $50-60,000 still gets a pretty hefty subsidy. And of course there are other features of Obamacare that help the middle class too. I was little too dismissive of this.

On the other hand, this is also a pretty good example of Democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They stuck together unanimously to pass the bill, which was great. But ideological ambivalence had already watered it down significantly by then, and ever since Obama signed it, it seems like half the party has been running for cover lest anyone know they voted for it. If Democrats themselves can’t loudly sell their own bill as a middle class boon, it’s hardly any surprise that lots of middle-class voters don’t see it that way either.

But Democrats have done a lot of things beyond just Obamacare.

Sure, and I’ve listed them myself from time to time. But here’s the thing: folks like Lemieux and me can look at this stuff and make a case that Democrats are helping the middle class. Unfortunately, it’s mostly too abstract to register with average voters. Did the stimulus bill help the WMC? Probably, but it’s not concrete enough for anyone to feel like it helped them personally. How about the CFPB, which Lemieux mentions? I think it’s great. But if you stopped a dozen average folks on the street, not one would have the slightest inkling of what it is or whether they benefited from it. These things are just too small, too watered-down, and too sporadic to have much impact. What’s more, whatever small impact they do have gets wiped out whenever Democrats support things like the 2005 bankruptcy bill or get cold feet about repealing something like the carried interest loophole.

OK, but why did you “yadda yadda” all the genuinely big things Democrats have done for the poor?

I didn’t. I explicitly mentioned them. And this isn’t some kind of shell game over definitions of “poor” and “working class.” After all, no one ever asks why the poor have drifted away from the Democratic Party, even though they presumably have social views that are similar to the WMC. You know why? Because they haven’t drifted away. And why is that? Because Democrats have done stuff for them.

That’s the whole point here. The WMC feels like Democrats do stuff for the poor, but not for them. And there’s a lot of truth to that.

But what can Democrats do? Republicans block every proposal they ever make.

I’m not blaming them for that. Politics is politics. And I’m not ignoring the fact that Dems stand up against Republicans all the time. They do. Nor is this an exercise in “both sides do it.” Obviously Republicans are far more slavishly devoted to the interests of corporations and the rich than Democrats.

Hell, I don’t even personally oppose every manifestation of the neoliberal policy evolution of the post-70s Democratic Party. Some of it I support. I’m a fairly moderate, neoliberalish squish myself most of the time. If you care about evidence in the policymaking process, the evidence is pretty strong that some lefty dreams just don’t make sense.

Nonetheless, the corporate drift of the Democratic Party since the 80s is simply a matter of record. Lemieux and I can toss out lists of small-ball Democratic accomplishments all day long, but the vast majority of low-information voters have never heard of them or don’t think they really do them any good. Maybe they’re mistaken or misguided, but that’s the way it is.

If Democrats want to regain the support of the WMC, they have to consistently unite behind stuff that benefits the WMC in very simple, concrete ways. Democrats do that on abortion, for example, and everyone knows where they stand even if they don’t win all their battles. It’s the same way with economic policy. Even if they don’t win all or most of their battles, they need to unite behind real programs for the middle class; they need to talk about them loudly; they need to stop diluting their message by taking the side of the plutocrats whenever it’s convenient; and they have to keep it up for decades.

Maybe the reality of modern politics prevents this. But if that’s the case, then it’s time to stop navel-gazing about why the WMC has drifted away from the Democrats. The answer is staring us all in the face.

See the article here:  

What Have the Democrats Ever Done For Us?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Have the Democrats Ever Done For Us?

America Could Soon Face More Days of “Extreme Rainfall”

Global warming means more heavy rainfall…and more drought. NOAA Squelch, squelch, squelch – that could be the sound of future America, if predictions about how climate change will ramp up “extreme rainfall” prove accurate. Say the world’s nations do little to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases pouring into the atmosphere. By the years 2041 to 2070, the warmer climate could bring torrential downpours to vast parts of the United States, as shown in this model from NOAA. Dark-blue splashes depict areas that might see as many as two or more days a year of extreme rain, defined as “rainfall totals in excess of the historic 98th percentile.” (This is against a 1971 to 2000 baseline.) Cities that should maybe consider wooing the umbrella-manufacturing industry include Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Boise, Idaho; Richmond, Virginia; and much of the Northeast. Read the rest at Atlantic Cities. View original article:  America Could Soon Face More Days of “Extreme Rainfall” ; ;Related ArticlesHere Are 5 Infuriating Examples of Facts Making People DumberCitizen Scientists: Now You Can Link the UK Winter Deluge To Climate ChangeA World of Water, Seen From Space ;

View original: 

America Could Soon Face More Days of “Extreme Rainfall”

Posted in Citizen, GE, OXO, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on America Could Soon Face More Days of “Extreme Rainfall”

Here Are 5 Infuriating Examples of Facts Making People Dumber

The notorious “backfire effect” has now been captured in multiple studies. Alex E. Proimos/Wikimedia Commons On Monday, I reported on the latest study to take a bite out of the idea of human rationality. In a paper just published in Pediatrics, Brendan Nyhan of Dartmouth and his colleagues showed that presenting people with information confirming the safety of vaccines triggered a “backfire effect,” in which people who already distrusted vaccines actually became less likely to say they would vaccinate their kids. Unfortunately, this is hardly the only example of such a frustrating response being documented by researchers. Nyhan and his co-author Jason Reifler of the University of Exeter have captured several others, as have other researchers. Here are some examples: 1. Tax Cuts Increase Revenue? In a 2010 study, Nyhan and Reifler asked people to read a fake newspaper article containing a real quotation of George W. Bush, in which the former president asserted that his tax cuts “helped increase revenues to the Treasury.” In some versions of the article, this false claim was then debunked by economic evidence: A correction appended to the end of the article stated that in fact, the Bush tax cuts “were followed by an unprecedented three-year decline in nominal tax revenues, from $2 trillion in 2000 to $1.8 trillion in 2003.” The study found that conservatives who read the correction were twice as likely to believe Bush’s claim was true as were conservatives who did not read the correction. 2. Death Panels! Another notorious political falsehood is Sarah Palin’s claim that Obamacare would create “death panels.” To test whether they could undo the damage caused by this highly influential morsel of misinformation, Nyhan and his colleagues had study subjects read an article about the “death panels” claim, which in some cases ended with a factual correction explaining that “nonpartisan health care experts have concluded that Palin is wrong.” Among survey respondents who were very pro-Palin and who had a high level of political knowledge, the correction actually made them more likely to wrongly embrace the false “death panels” theory. 3. Obama is a Muslim! And if that’s still not enough, yet another Nyhan and Reifler study examined the persistence of the “President Obama is a Muslim” myth. In this case, respondents watched a video of President Obama denying that he is a Muslim or even stating affirmatively, “I am a Christian.” Once again, the correction—uttered in this case by the president himself—often backfired in the study, making belief in the falsehood that Obama is a Muslim worse among certain study participants. What’s more, the backfire effect was particularly notable when the researchers administering the study were white. When they were non-white, subjects were more willing to change their minds, an effect the researchers explained by noting that “social desirability concerns may affect how respondents behave when asked about sensitive topics.” In other words, in the company of someone from a different race than their own, people tend to shift their responses based upon what they think that person’s worldview might be. 4. The Alleged Iraq-Al Qaeda Link. In a 2009 study, Monica Prasad of Northwestern University and her colleagues directly challenged Republican partisans about their false belief that Iraq and Al Qaeda collaborated in the 9/11 attacks, a common charge during the Bush years. The so-called challenge interviews included citing the findings of the 9/11 Commission and even a statement by George W. Bush, asserting that his administration had “never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaeda.” Despite these facts, only one out of 49 partisans changed his or her mind after the factual correction. Forty-one of the partisans “deflected” the information in a variety of ways, and 7 actually denied holding the belief in the first place (although they clearly had). 5. Global Warming. On the climate issue, there does not appear to be any study that clearly documents a backfire effect. However, in a 2011 study, researchers at American University and Ohio State found a closely related “boomerang effect.” In the experiment, research subjects from upstate New York read news articles about how climate change might increase the spread of West Nile Virus, which were accompanied by the pictures of the faces of farmers who might be affected. But in one case, the people were said to be farmers in upstate New York (in other words, victims who were quite socially similar to the research subjects); in the other, they were described as farmers from either Georgia or from France (much more distant victims). The intent of the article was to raise concern about the health consequences of climate change, but when Republicans read the article about the more distant farmers, their support for action on climate change decreased, a pattern that was stronger as their Republican partisanship increased. (When Republicans read about the proximate, New York farmers, there was no boomerang effect, but they did not become more supportive of climate action either.) Together, all of these studies support the theory of “motivated reasoning”: The idea that our prior beliefs, commitments, and emotions drive our responses to new information, such that when we are faced with facts that deeply challenge these commitments, we fight back against them to defend our identities. So next time you feel the urge to argue back against some idiot on the Internet…pause, take a deep breath, and realize not only that arguing might not do any good, but that in fact, it might very well backfire. View original:  Here Are 5 Infuriating Examples of Facts Making People Dumber ; ;Related ArticlesCitizen Scientists: Now You Can Link the UK Winter Deluge To Climate ChangeA World of Water, Seen From SpaceLow-Lying Islands Are Going To Drown, so Should we Even Bother Trying To Save Their Ecosystems? ;

Continued here:

Here Are 5 Infuriating Examples of Facts Making People Dumber

Posted in alo, Citadel, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Are 5 Infuriating Examples of Facts Making People Dumber

VIDEO: Meet the Olympic Workers Still Waiting for Payday

Mother Jones

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

In November, Milenko Kuljic left Bileca, his rundown town in Bosnia and Herzegovina, for Sochi. He was lured by a recruiter who promised he’d make about 2,000 Euro ($2,700) a month building infrastructure for Sochi’s winter Olympics .

Kuljic says he began working for a major construction company overseeing work at some of the games’ most iconic venues, where he says he never got anywhere near the amount of money he was promised. Instead over two months of working, he says he was only given the equivalent of about $1000 for basic living expenses. living in a dormitory with pay-to-use showers, sharing four toilets with some 200 other workers. All the while, he says his employers promised to eventually pay him in full.

At the end of the two months, he was suddenly arrested, detained for a week, and then flown home with 122 other workers from the Balkans on a flight chartered by the Serbian government.

Hundreds of other guest workers from all around the world feared a similar fate, and fled Sochi without pay to avoid arrest, and the arguably worse punishment it would bring: a 5-year ban on returning to Russia as a guest worker.

It was Kuljic’s second time seeking work in Russia. The first time, he says no one cared about workers, like him, who lacked official work permits: “I suspect that they told the authorities about us so that they wouldn’t have to pay the money they promised.”

Kuljic’s experience is far from unique. Of the approximately 96,000 workers who helped build Sochi’s Olympic buildings, parks, and infrastructure about 16,000 were migrant workers, according to Human Rights Watch. Most hailed from former Soviet countries, primarily Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan, as well as from communities—like Kuljic’s in Bosnia—where families rely on money sent by workers abroad.

For years, such workers put up with rampant xenophobia and exploitative conditions—overcrowded housing, paltry and unsavory food—in pursuit of a decent wage in Russia. But this fall, with just six months left until the games, thousands of migrants were rounded up and deported. In October alone, according to Russia’s Federal Migration Service (FMS), over 3,000 workers were expelled from the Krasnodar region, which includes Sochi.

Migrants to Russia face routine discrimination, as nationalists blame them for taking work from employable Russians. Polls have shown that two-thirds of Russians believe immigrants are prone to crime, and, whether or not they came legally or illegally, want to reduce their numbers in the country.

As non-Russian workers flooded Sochi, such anti-immigrant sentiment escalated—and was encouraged at the highest levels of government.

“It would be very easy for people of other nations to take over this land,” Alexander Tkachev, the governor of the Krasnodar region, declared in August of 2012. “We have no other choice: we will squeeze them out, restore order, ask for documents…so that those who are trying to come here on illegal business understand that maybe it’s better they don’t come.”

Continue Reading »

View original post here:  

VIDEO: Meet the Olympic Workers Still Waiting for Payday

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on VIDEO: Meet the Olympic Workers Still Waiting for Payday