SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A Real American President: Donald Trump -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: James Seagrove who wrote (87801)8/15/2018 7:57:07 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
James Seagrove

  Respond to of 457990
 
Suicide bomber targets Shiite students in Kabul, killing 48


Rahim Faiez and Amir Shah
Associated Press

A suicide bomber struck a private education center in a Shiite neighborhood of Kabul on Wednesday where high school graduates were preparing for university entrance exams, killing 48 young men and women and leaving behind a scene of devastation and tragedy.

The bombing, blamed on the Islamic State group, was the latest assault on Afghanistan's Shiite community, which has increasingly been targeted by Sunni extremists who consider Shiites to be heretics.

It also showed how militants are still able to stage large-scale attacks, even in the heart of Kabul, and underscored the struggles of the Afghan forces to provide security and stability on their own.

The attack comes amid a particularly bloody week in Afghanistan that has seen Taliban attacks kill scores of Afghan troops and civilians.

It was not immediately clear how the bomber managed to sneak into the building, used by the Shiite community as an education center, in the Dasht-i Barcha area of Kabul.

The spokesman for the public health ministry, Wahid Majroh, said 67 people were also wounded in the bombing and that the death toll — which steadily rose in the immediate aftermath of the bombing — could rise further. He did not say if all the victims were students and whether any of their teachers were also among the casualties.

Dawlat Hossain, father of 18-year-old student Fareba who had left her class just a few minutes before the bombing but was still inside the compound, was on his way to meet his daughter and started running when he heard the explosion.

Hossain recounted to The Associated Press how when he entered Fareba's classroom, he saw parts of human bodies all over student desks and benches.

"There was blood everywhere, all over the room, so scary and horrible," he said. After finding out that his daughter was safe, he helped move the wounded to hospitals.

Fareba was traumatized that so many of her friends were killed, but Hossain said she was lucky to be alive.

The explosion initially set off gunfire from Afghan guards in the area, leading to assumptions that there were more attackers involved, but officials later said all indications were that there was only one bomber.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack but Jawad Ghawari, a member of the city's Shiite clerical council, blamed IS, which has carried similar attacks on Shiites in the past, hitting mosques, schools and cultural centers. In the past two years, there were at least 13 attacks on the Shiite community in Kabul alone, he said.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani condemned the "terrorist" attack that "martyred and wounded the innocent" — students attending class — and ordered an investigation into the attack.

"By targeting educational and cultural centers, terrorists have clearly shown they are against all those Islamic principles (that strive) for both men and women to learn and study," Ghani said in a statement.

The head of the U.N. children's agency denounced the attack, saying it's "deplorable" that children continue to be hardest hit in the growing violence across Afghanistan.

"Children are not, and must never be the target of violence," said UNICEF's executive director Henrietta Fore.

Meanwhile, a Taliban assault on two adjacent checkpoints in northern Afghanistan late on Tuesday night killed at least 30 soldiers and policemen.

The attack took place in Baghlan province's Baghlan-I Markazi district, said Mohammad Safdar Mohseni, the head of the provincial council.

Dilawar Aymaq, a parliamentarian from Baghlan, said the attack targeted a military checkpoint and another manned by the so-called local police, militias recruited and paid by the Interior Ministry.

At least nine security forces were still missing and four others were wounded in the attack, said Abdul Hai Nemati, the governor of Baghlan. He said reinforcements have been dispatched to help recapture the checkpoints.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid claimed responsibility for the assault.

Life was gradually returning to normal Wednesday in parts of the eastern city of Ghazni after a massive, days-long Taliban attack, though sporadic gunbattles was still underway in some neighborhoods.

The Taliban launched a coordinated offensive last Friday, overwhelming the city's defenses and capturing several neighborhoods. Afghan forces repelled the initial assault and in recent days have struggled to flush the insurgents out of residential areas where they are holed up.

The United States and NATO launched airstrikes and sent military advisers to aid Afghan forces as they fight for the city, just 120 kilometers (75 miles) from the Afghan capital with a population of some 270,000 people.

At least 35 Ghazni civilians have been killed, said Arif Noori, a spokesman for the provincial governor. The wounded were still arriving at the city's only hospital, which has been overwhelmed by casualties, he added.

Hundreds of people have fled the fighting in Ghazni, which has also killed about 100 members of the Afghan security forces.

Elsewhere in Afghanistan, the Taliban attacked a police checkpoint in the southern Zabul province early Wednesday, killing four policemen, according to the provincial police chief, Mustafa Mayar.

The Taliban have seized several districts across the country in recent years and carry out near-daily attacks targeting Afghan security forces. The assault on Ghazni was widely seen as a show of force ahead of possible peace talks with the U.S., which has been at war in Afghanistan for nearly 17 years.

Also Wednesday, six children were killed when they tinkered with an unexploded rocket shell, causing it to blow up, said Sarhadi Zwak, spokesman for the governor of the eastern Laghman province. The victims were girls, aged 10-12, who were gathering firewood, he said, blaming the Taliban.

Afghanistan is littered with unexploded ordnance left by decades of war. It is also plagued by roadside bombs planted by insurgents, which are usually intended for government officials or security forces, but often kill and maim civilians.

Associated Press writer Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations contributed to this report.



To: James Seagrove who wrote (87801)8/16/2018 8:49:36 AM
From: FJB5 Recommendations

Recommended By
HerbVic
Honey_Bee
James Seagrove
Thehammer
toccodolce

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 457990
 
France: The Rise and Fall of Emmanuel Macron - FRANCE IS A SHITHOLE. AVOID AT ALL COSTS.
by Guy Millière
August 16, 2018 at 5:00 am

gatestoneinstitute.org
  • France's Justice Department is not independent of the government; no judge will seek to know more about Macron's scandal. No thorough and deep investigation will take place. The French media are largely subsidized by the government and no more independent of the government than the Justice Department is.
  • Even the French media that are not funded by the state self-censor what they report, because they are supported by businesses that depend on government contracts. No French journalist will try to discover a thing.
  • The economist Charles Gave recently used statistical data to demonstrate that if nothing changes, the non-Muslim population of France could be a minority in 40 years. He added: "What happened to Spain or Asia Minor in the 10th and 11th centuries will happen to Europe in the 21st century, that is a certainty."


When Emmanuel Macron was elected president of France in May 2017, he was portrayed as a reformer who was going to change everything in France and beyond.

Fourteen months later, illusions are gone. The reforms carried out have been essentially cosmetic and failed to slow France's sclerotic decline. Economic growth is close to zero: 0.2 per cent in the second quarter of 2018. Unemployment, at around 8.9%, remains high. French public spending as a percent of GDP is, at 56.4%, still the highest in Europe. The country is still frequently paralyzed by public transportation strikes. No-go zones continue to spread, and Macron himself recently admitted his helplessness by asking for a " general mobilization" of the population. Riots are frequent; large-scale public events lead to looting and arson. The night after the French team's victory at the soccer World Cup, hundreds of thugs mingling with the crowds broke windows, vandalized banks and ATMs, destroyed street signs and torched cars.

cont...



To: James Seagrove who wrote (87801)8/16/2018 9:48:58 AM
From: FJB3 Recommendations

Recommended By
HerbVic
James Seagrove
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 457990
 
Mastercard Forces Patreon to Blacklist Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer


Mastercard has reportedly forced Patreon to shut down the account of conservative author and “Jihad Watch” owner Robert Spencer.



To: James Seagrove who wrote (87801)8/16/2018 10:26:33 AM
From: FJB5 Recommendations

Recommended By
HerbVic
Honey_Bee
James Seagrove
locogringo
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 457990
 
The Hajj journey begins: Stunning images show Saudi Arabia preparing for the arrival of over two million Muslim pilgrims in Mecca this weekend - WHAT AN OPPORTUNITY, AND I DON'T MEAN FOR PRAYER.

By DEBBIE WHITE FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 08:02 EDT, 16 August 2018 | UPDATED: 08:43 EDT, 16 August 2018
dailymail.co.uk




To: James Seagrove who wrote (87801)8/16/2018 11:08:51 AM
From: FJB4 Recommendations

Recommended By
HerbVic
Honey_Bee
Thehammer
Woody_Nickels

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 457990
 
Elizabeth Warren Plans To Destroy Capitalism By Pretending To ‘Save’ It

Warren's plan would overrule corporate leaders’ control over their own businesses. This is also known as "socialism."

Scott Shackford
Aug. 15, 2018 2:05 pm
reason.com

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) thinks she knows what ails capitalism: There aren't enough people telling the biggest businesses what to do.

Try to contain your surprise that Warren believes the profit motive is ruining capitalism. She wants the largest corporations in the United States to be legally answerable to people other than their shareholders, and she's introducing a bill to force it.

Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act" would require that corporations that earn more than $1 billion in revenue a year (note "revenue," not "profits") would need a federal "charter" in order to operate. This charter would obligate these companies to consider all "stakeholders," not just shareholders, when making decisions. The bill would also require these corporations to permit employees to elect 40 percent of the company's board of directors; a super majority of 75 percent of directors and shareholders would have to approve political donations. (Gee, I wonder if somebody will propose something similar for unions?) Shareholders would be permitted to sue the company if they felt its actions were driven purely by profit and did not reflect the desires of its many "stakeholders."

The justification for all this is the common, economically sketchy claim of income inequality; that the rich are getting richer and that wages are stagnating. Warren complains in a Wall Street Journal commentary that shareholders have "extracted" $7 trillion in profits since 1985 that "might otherwise have been reinvested in the workers who helped produce them."

That number may look huge when presented this way, but it breaks down to $233 billion a year when calculated over 30 years. The United States' total Gross Domestic Product for 2016 was more than $18 trillion. (For extra fun homework, imagine taking this to its logical socialist conclusion, and calculate how much money each American would get from that $7 trillion profit figure if it were forcibly redistributed annually over that 30-year period.) Furthermore, Warren's argument assumes that because the money didn't get "reinvested" back into workers—in the form of, say, increased wages—those workers did not benefit from whatever it was that money did instead—like improvements to the machinery or software they use.

It's interesting that progressives (and many nominal conservatives) invoke "economic multipliers" when the government spends our tax dollars on subsidies and grants within the private sector. Entire communities, we are told, benefit when tax dollars are given to just a handful of politically connected firms. That money must acquire some special magic when it passes through a legislator's hands, because private sector profits apparently just get buried in a great big hole.

Our options and our technologies have expanded dramatically and are increasingly accessible to more and more people. It's telling that none of that seems to be a consideration in Warren's proposal. Here's a reminder about the entire "growing income inequality" nonsense: Our middle class is shrinking because more people are moving up the economic ladder, not down.
Warren explains that she wants to essentially force these companies to use the "benefit corporation" model, which prizes a set of values above just profits. She notes that successful companies like Kickstarter and Patagonia have embraced such a model, and that it's legal in several states.

So, stay with me here: If these types of business models are so successful in the American market, then why wouldn't corporations adopt such a model voluntarily? We shouldn't need a federal bill at all! And what about companies that are reinvesting? Amazon brings in billions in revenue annually, but has operated for most of its lifetime barely making a profit. That it has recently started to increase its profit margin has inspired headlines over how dramatically their profits have increased. But here's what it actually looks like over time, courtesy of ReCode:

Courtesy of ReCode

Amazon made the decision to invest in growth over profits for the long term, and the market has rewarded that decision. Now, it's getting the profits it passed up for years. Amazon is not legally operating under the public benefit corporation business model, but it certainly did operate for most of its lifespan with priorities other than profit. Yet Warren doesn't mention Amazon at all in her commentary. Why aren't they an example of a model corporation?

Warren even complains in her commentary that "companies are setting themselves up to fail" by funneling earnings to shareholders rather than reinvesting them. Assuming this is true, what does this have to do with her? Let them fail. This is why there is a marketplace. Why keep a poorly managed company alive if it's not creating value and drawing customers?

But Warren isn't really concerned about businesses failing. She's worried about the ones that succeed despite operating in ways that she doesn't like. What she really wants to is put the federal government in a position of evaluating and approving how companies grow.
She wants to substitute the decisions of people who run businesses with the prejudices and preferences of people who think like she does. And she wants to use the courts to enforce her ideas of how corporations should be managed.

I brought up Amazon for a reason. Even though Amazon heavily reinvests in its own growth over profits it has constantly been getting crap over its low wages. Under Warren's bill, employees could essentially use the government to force Amazon to raise its wages. This would have benefited a certain number of employees, but it also would have done so at the expense of the company's growth. It would be creating fewer jobs. It would be smaller.
There are some people who would see this as a good thing, but it could also result in a marketplace where people don't have the broad access to products and supplies that we have today. And that is not even getting into all the technology investments Amazon is responsible for that are making our lives better in any number of ways and will continue to do so in the future.

Warren says she wants American corporations to be looking out for "American interests." They are. They're just not always the same as Warren's political interests. She doesn't grasp the difference.

She has an apparently champion for her bill in Matt Yglesias over at Vox. Yglesias has also noted how frequently zoning regulations and NIMBY types keep much-needed urban housing development at bay. So he realizes when too many people have regulatory veto power over market decisions, stagnation is the outcome, and it ends up hurting any number of people. Why would this be any different?