|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2020-100
Last week's posts at Moon of Alabama:
> While Kushner was not a driving force behind AMMC, the source who spoke on a condition of anonymity explained, the joint effort was led by campaign lawyers to reassure a paranoid Trump that no one was taking secret cuts. Parscale, it was thought, should not hold dual roles as head of a company serving as a campaign clearinghouse and campaign manager. Parscale and Kushner both signed off the arrangement, the source confirmed. <
—
Other issues:
737:
Covid-19:
There is a new variant (B.1.1.7) of SARS-CoV-2 circulating in Britain. It seems to be more transmissible and has become the predominant variant. There are no signs so far that it causes a more severe Covid-19 disease or more deaths.
Prof Francois Balloux @BallouxFrancois – 7:02 UTC · Dec 20, 2020
I felt it may be helpful to provide an update on the new #COVID19 lineages in the UK and in SA that might both be more contagious than any #SARSCoV2 in circulation until recently. Those comments should be considered preliminary as the evidence available to me is still sketchy.
1/…
Nick Stripe @NickStripe_ONS – 21:39 UTC · Dec 19, 2020
I have seen the table below being widely shared to falsely imply that deaths are no higher than normal this year
The table is both factually incorrect and misleading
Those who created it deliberately sow confusion and doubt
1/6
M4A:
Syria:
Saudi Arabia:
Use as open thread …
EU countries shutting down travel to and from UK amid new highly infectious Covid-19 strain scare
So much for “herd immunity” – after all it worked wonders in Human History! The Black Plague only killed 33% of the population!
I love when I’m proven to be right. And it happened in the UK of all places – the biggest country to completely refute lockdowns at the beginning of the pandemic. It’s like Mother Nature is showing the petite-bourgeoisie the middle finger.
Side note: Sweden – the other “herd immunity” darling, has just enforced lockdowns. Their schools are also closed.
–//–
General apologizes for ‘miscommunication’ over Pfizer vaccine shipments to states
But I thought the free market was the best mechanism possible for the optimum relocation of resources?
Reality is a bitch, isn’t it?
–//–
Sinovac secures annual output of 300 million COVID-19 vaccine doses by end of year
End of 2020 year, not 2021. For 2021, that capacity will double, to 600 million doses.
Besides being the second best vaccine available (behind only the Sputnik V, which is more expensive because it requires two doses instead of one), the Sinovac vaccine is easily stored:
The vaccine packs are stored at 2C to 8C. But thermal stability tests have shown the vaccine can be effective for more than one month at 25C and more than 20 days at 37C.
With those advantages, it is not wonder even the rabid and hallucinated and unconditionally pro-USA Bolsonaro is caving in to the inevitable, as he recently has approved – against his will – the Sinovac vaccine to Brazil, through Brazil’s equivalent to the American CDC, Anvisa.
–//–
More fake news by the NYT:
No “negative” news: How China censored the coronavirus
Here’s a hint for beginners in Contemporary History, : if it is republished in The Japan Times, it is automatically fake news (propaganda warfare piece). This is a propaganda device called “triangulation”, and is widely practiced by Western MSMs across the globe.
The Japan Times is what we here in my country call a “portal”, i.e. a pseudo-newspaper that mostly buys the rights to republish other newspapers (usually, news agencies, such as AP, Reuters, ANSA, France Presse et al, but also world renowned newspapers such as the NYT, Bloomberg and WaPo), while keeping its original content production (in Japan Times’ case, about Japan itself) to a minimum, in order to cut costs with journalism per se. It is a pamphlet disguised as a newspaper. The difference between The Japan Times and the likes of Sputniknews is in the fact that the latter puts a twist, a counter-opinion over the content of the Western newspapers while explicitly citing the source, which puts it more in the category of the British “tabloid”. In other words, Sputniknews et al are what we call counterpropaganda outlets (yes, counterpropaganda/counter-intelligence agencies and operations are as old as propaganda and intelligence themselves). Many modern counterpropaganda outlets even make their reputations over tweets – but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are counterpropaganda: propaganda outlets can also do the same in order to neutralize counterpropaganda outlets: clear examples of that are the “alt-right” blogs and websites that recently proliferated in the USA. Each propaganda device has a correspondent counterpropaganda device, which has a correspondent propaganda device and so on: there is no 100% formula to determine which is which, so critical thinking and erudition on the historical period you’re analyzing are the decisive tools.
Triangulation is when a given media cartel (MSM) gathers secretly with their editors to “rig the game”, and synchronize their editorial lines. The biggest newspapers/TV stations usually go first (if there are three of them in the same country, they relay which goes first), followed by the middle sized ones one day later and so on. This process ideally involves written propaganda (newspaper), TV stations (video, television) and radio – hence the name “triangulation”.
The goal of the triangulation tactic is to create to the masses the illusion the event portrayed is: 1) of national or global importance, 2) that it really happened in the real world and 3) therefore, that the MSM had to talk about it “against their will”, that is, that they really did investigative journalism to get the “fact” portrayed. It also creates an aura of truth because of the scale of the propaganda, where its detractors can be dismissed as being “conspiracy theorists” outright.
Posted by: vk | Dec 20 2020 16:37 utc | 6
A New Congressional Budget Office Study Shows That Medicare for All Would Save Hundreds of Billions of Dollars Annually – Jacobin
In USA, healthcare sector has the total revenue at least triple of Military Industrial Complex, and it is extremely rapacious. Regulatory capture is rampant and costs are bloated, often beyond imagination of Americans, including those “well informed”. One should note that Australia makes it will less than half of USAian expenditures per capita with better outcomes. “Of course”, this happens with a single payer system that severely dampens regulatory capture etc., government has to balance the budget to some degree while getting pressure from the voters to actually provide quality care. By the way of contrast, market mechanisms cannot deliver any cost reductions except by reducing the “consumption” in response to “price signals”, that partly explains rather meager health outcomes in USA — when we compare with countries like Australia, Greece, Japan etc.
Recently I encountered an example how costs are blown up beyond imagination. I belong to at least half of adults with herpes simplex infection and roughly annual annoying outbreaks that may be occasionally dangerous (in my case, once in 40 years). There is a good reliable cure, acyclovir, and a minor but annoying (and ugly looking) outbreak can be treated quickly with an ointment or cream. As my tube of ointment got severely out of date, I got another one. Currently I have no coverage assisting with medication costs. And I got a needed prescription quickly, called to my pharmacy.
First price check (it takes time in American pharmacy! apparently somewhat bewildering computer queries), 300+ dollars for 30 g tube. Few years ago I got such a tube for 200+, in part because I wanted to use it quickly and there were no other sizes in town. More checks: 15 g tube, with a store discount, 50 dollars. But there is no way to use that much in few years — the skin area that you treat is typically very small. What about smaller sizes? Yep, there is a cream in 5 g tube. I got another prescription, for the cream (took three days while the old tube helped me with the outbreak, so I was patient, physician office was apparently quite confused why I am switching from ointment to cream).
Now how much is 5 g tube of cream? 600+ dollars. How about a generic? THIS IS A GENERIC!!! Zovirax, brand medicine, is 900+. I got 15 g for 50 dollars and made an online check how is it in Poland (I still remember the language).
Take a deep breath. Around 2 dollars, without prescription (can be less and can be more, highest seemed to be 2.50 USD = 10 PLZ. Mind you, the expiration date on my ointment is in 2 years, so I good a deal (50 rather than 300 or 600) that costs 25 times more than in Poland. There it is produced by a local company with cosmetics as the main line of business. As far as health outcome is concerned, it is a medicine that is good to have at home just in case to treat the outbreak instantly, reducing the ugly look within 1-2 days and also the risk of getting the infection of cornea that once happened to me. And many people would do it, especially for 2 dollars and no doctor appointment (or 30-60 minutes on the phone).
There are several examples like that that I encountered personally, having a reasonably good health so few medical experiences. Consider: the intricate regulation of generic medicines in USA increased the cost 25 times.
A similar ratio also affects another medicine that is worth to keep just in case, injectable epinephrin, good to have if you are at risk to anaphylactic shock, people with an allergy can get it from a wasp bite etc. 16 dollars in Poland (80% covered by insurance), more than 300 in USA (covered or not covered). For full benefit, you should carry the syringes when you go out, and in six months the doses are out of date. Bloated costs reduce the number of people who take the precaution against occasionally lethal shock, and offer no benefits whatsoever. BTW, a dose of epinephrin costs about 1 USD, the extra cost in USA and Poland is to make it easy for the affected person to inject it without help.
Thus we have many billions intercepted by rapacious companies on two simple medicine. Rationally managed single payer system should be able to reduce the costs by 1-2 trillions per year and improve the health in the process.
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Dec 20 2020 18:05 utc | 9
Folks, i think you have been misdirected.. on why the content delivered by NYT and other msm are all about real war over cyber intrusions. (As B said, anyone including China, Russia, you me, the moon, Mars, Zupiter. and points years and light years away can hack nearly anyone’es digital security. War with anybody (d/n matter who) is not about national defense of the nation state, or protecting the governed from foreign risks, as B said in his last article, the nations of the world spy on each other since the beginning of time. The Trojans began the process.
You see’ when a private corporation in USA governed America or in UK governed UK, or in Israel governed Palestine, has a secret (copyright, patent or trade secret) the private Oligarchs and their monopoly powered corporations don’t want persons anywhere in the world to steal, copy, use or improve their copyrighted software. Economic Zionism is at play here.
The monopoly powered private corporation, depends on the nation state to protect their copyright privilege. Go to war, write treaties do whatever is necessary; but make damn sure, we the private monopoly powered corporation, have the monopoly we paid you law makers to give us.
Monopoly powered corporation enjoys a monopoly on the market place only as long as the government that wrote the law, and that granted the copyright to the private corporation, enforces the monopoly of copyright against all competitors: domestic or foreign.
Microshit invents an OS, copyrights it, and makes trillions, gets the USA to adopt the software into its national defence, and promises the USA no smart person can break into the Microshit software. Micro smart, breaks into Microshit’s computer, copies the copyright protected OS, removes the copyright, puts the entire copied file into the foreign language native to Micro smart, and presto Micro smart now has a competitive product to challenge Microshit with. Microshit sues, but to make the suit stick, it needs international agreements that prevent Micro smart from hacking Microshit and using the stuff Micro smart copied from Microshit.
Worse from Microshit’s POV is after Micro smart copied the Microshit stuff, it edited out the spy ware and the secret Digital Rights Management that was hidden deep inside the Microshit software, and added a few hundred lines of code that improved the copied software; it now is 3x faster, 4x smarter, and is protected from hacking by anyone including Micro smart. So the faster, smarter, no spyware OS takes a large share of the market from Mircoshit. and Microshit talks the USA into going to war against Russia, China, Iran or whomever because Micro smart outsmarted Microshit and converted the world to open source.
Posted by: snake | Dec 20 2020 18:39 utc | 14
@suzan
If the thread will indulge me, I would like to present, as a reference, a Supreme Court opinion from 1868 that spells out clearly why the Union of the States is a perpetual union, and why there is no right of secession inhering in any state, not even Texas.
Many thanks to suzan in the previous open thread for finding this case:
Texas v White et al
It’s apparent from this opinion that earlier Court opinions had long settled this matter, but this case is useful precisely because it can thus deal with the matter of secession in a very succinct way. Also, the case involves Texas, whose people have often held the mistaken belief that the state has the right to become an independent nation again, simply by its own choosing.
The whole opinion is worth reading, since much of it details the course of the rebellion of the states – it’s quite gripping if you bring a little Hollywood imagination to the narrative.
But in the Opinion itself, I suggest paragraphs 97-103 are the heart of the matter, and I’d like to excerpt from this section at length, with my emphasis:
97
Did Texas, in consequence of these acts, cease to be a State? Or, if not, did the State cease to be a member of the Union?
98
It is needless to discuss, at length, the question whether the right of a State to withdraw from the Union for any cause, regarded by herself as sufficient, is consistent with the Constitution of the United States.
99
The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form, and character, and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these the Union was solemnly declared to ‘be perpetual.’ And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained ‘to form a more perfect Union.’ It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
100
But the perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union, by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, or of the right of self-government by the States. […] The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.
101
When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.
102
Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired […]
103
Our conclusion therefore is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union, notwithstanding the transactions to which we have referred. And this conclusion, in our judgment, is not in conflict with any act or declaration of any department of the National government, but entirely in accordance with the whole series of such acts and declarations since the first outbreak of the rebellion.
I’ve emphasized the one point that to me is most important. There is no injustice in the fact that every state has entered the Union in perpetuity, because the member states by a 3/4 majority can choose to amend the Constitution in any way they wish – and I’ve suggested previously that this includes dissolving the Union itself if the states so agree.
I’ve never understood why the leaders of the South, as schooled and learned as they were, chose to war against the North, rather than to take the political path to persuade the other states to let them go peacefully.
Carl Sandburg describes as the attitude of the South, that they believed they were superior fighters to those of the North – one southerner was worth five, kind of thing. The South thought the North was unhip, inflexible, boring – or something like that – while the South was cultured and supple as a whip. How they never understood that wars are won by machinery and that the North had plenty of it to crush the South, I don’t understand. I suppose they thought they were the Vietcong. They wasted all that energy, that they could have poured into the political finesse of all their desires.
And all to prove that there is no right of secession from the indissoluble Union, except through amendment, by agreement of the states.
Posted by: Grieved | Dec 21 2020 0:20 utc | 43
|
