Obsidian Wings

Now is the time to start studying Chinese

by liberal japonicus

Or, according to google translate

现在是开始学习中文的时候了。

(Xiànzài shì kāishǐ xuéxí zhōngwén de shíhoule.)

I have made several concerted efforts to study Chinese, and thought that I had given up, but this article makes me realize that I better bite the bullet and take another run at the damn language.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/30/donald-trump-is-handing-china-the-world.html

I can understand if someone gets a bit put out by this post, as worrying about China is probably now down the list given all the shit that Trump has done. Still, in the longer term, as I see buses of Chinese tourists pour into places around here, I think that knowing some Chinese might be a good thing. As the Chinese say 山雨欲来风满楼(shān yǔ yù lái fēng mǎn lóu), [Coming events cast their shadows before them].

 

National Security Council replaced with Yes Men

--by Sebastian

Lots of things scare me about Trump.  So many that it is really hard to focus on one.  Which I'm half-convinced is a strategy, or at least a fortuitous-for-him habit that Trump has of throwing up so many crazy things that you can't grasp any one*.

One of the few tenuous strands of hope I've hung on to is that at least on some of the most important issues, career experts might be able to talk some sense out of him.  It was a foolish hope, but it was my hope.

Trump removed the Joint Chiefs of Staff from their regular place in the National Security Council.

Trump removed the Joint Chiefs of Staff from their regular place in the National Security Council.

I know I wrote that twice.  But once could be skipped over.

I don't care about unprecedented.  I care about deeply foolish.  Elevating Bannon to the Security Council is one thing.  He's Trump's yes man, and primary 'advisor'.  It is a move which reveals the shallowness of Trump's ability to think, but it would have been no more alarming than the fact that Bannon is in the White House at all.

Working to formally cut the Joint Chiefs of Staff out of the loop on National Security matters is.....I honestly don't the words to describe how dangerous that is.  It not only removes the sanity check on his foreign policy, it also keeps them out of the loop on developing issues.  This is actually insane. 

 

*Mild digression on his chaff strategy.  Intentional or not, one of the big ways this mode of operation works is by keeping things off the radar of low information voters.  If someone checks in with politics once a month, they are never going to hear the same thing twice.  Once month it will be Planned Parenthood is in trouble, next month immigrants are in trouble, next month health care is threatened.  Never the same thing twice.  Since the average non-politically connected person may be immediately touched by only one of those things in the short term, it can create the impression that people are causing a lot of fuss for no reason.  It is a scary strategy because the obvious counter is to focus on just one thing.  That might work with your average bad President, but we can't afford to ignore a bunch of the things he does. 

My scripts for calling my Senators about the Muslim/refugee ban

by Doctor Science

I'm incandescently appalled by Trump's Executive Order yesterday about refugees and visitors from certain Muslim countries. Today I wrote up some scripts for calling my Senators.

The talking point I chose to focus on is the vote to confirm John Kelly for Secretary of Homeland Security. Of my two Democratic Senators, Cory Booker voted against and Bob Menendez voted for-- the latter, I'm sure, in part in hopes that Kelly would be a moderating influence. Yeah, not so much.

Right before I called, I checked the Senators' websites and discovered that both had released statements opposing the Executive Order (Menendez; Booker). I then edited my script to remove my request that they release a statement, and changed it to thank them. I also thanked them on Twitter for their statements.

I was able to leave a message for Booker, but mailboxes at all of Menendez' numbers (DC, Newark, Barrington) were full. I'll call both of them again on Monday.

For Senator Booker:

I'm a constituent, calling to thank the Senator for his statement about Trump's refugee ban, and for his vote against John Kelly for Secretary of Homeland Security. I hope, going forward, that the Senator will vote against *all* Trump cabinet nominees, no matter how "reasonable" they seem to be. I also urge you to play hardball with consent decrees, too much is at stake not to.

For Senator Menendez:

I'm a consitutent. I'm calling to thank the Senator for his statement against Trump's Muslim ban.

The Senator voted to confirm John Kelly for Homeland Security Chief, possibly because Kelly said he was personally opposed to a Muslim refugee ban. The events of the past 24 hours have proved that this was meaningless.

We all make mistakes, but I urge the Senator to make NO MORE when deciding about Trump's cabinet picks. Vote against *all* Trump cabinet nominees, no matter how "reasonable" they seem to be. I also urge you to play hardball with consent decrees, too much is at stake not to.

I also called my Representative, Bonnie Watson Coleman, and urged her to make a statement opposing the Executive Order.

Everything going to have to be done all over again on Monday, when there are actually people in the offices, but it's a start. I've added my Senators' DC & local phone numbers to my address book (I already had my Rep's there). If you have scripts for use on Republican Senators, please add them.

Now I'm going to make dinner and stay away from the Internet for a while. Except for maybe animal pictures.

Middle-eastern Refugees: Landscape with Flight into Egypt, by Pieter Bruegel the Elder. (source)

Alternative (and Other) Facts -- Weekend Open Thread

by wj

Note Silver has been running a series of columns at 538 on the 2016 election and why so many predictions were so far off. The latest talks about Early Voting.

This quote kicked off something in my mind: "On Oct. 23, for instance, The New York Times argued that because Clinton had banked votes in North Carolina and Florida, it might already be too late for Donald Trump to come back in those states." It occurs to me that "analyses" like that might actually have had an impact on the election.

Consider. You are a voter who is extremely unhappy about the way that the country has been being run. But you aren't so unhappy that you want to see a loose cannon like Trump in office. You want change; not a nut case and chaos. So you have no intention of voting for him.

Then you read an article that says he has no chance to win in your state. Which lead to the possibility that you can make safely a statement about how unhappy you are, without the risk of him being elected. So you, and a bunch of others who feel similarly, vote for him strictly as a protest. And wake up the next morning to discover that those articles were wrong, and you have just contributed to a result that you in no way wanted. Oops.

All of this isn't exactly a matter of "alternative facts". That is, you weren't refusing to believe solid evidence, and making up stuff instead. But it does show what happens when uncertainty is large, and someone who purports to be an expert tells you something that you would like to believe. Critical thinking isn't easy; especially when you already know what would be convenient if it were real.

infrastructure

by russell

Here is a draft version of the Trump administration's initial infrastructure priorities.  Somewhat to my surprise, they all seem pretty good, to me.  They all seem like... useful, needed infrastructure.

Many of the concerns that have been raised about the funding mechanisms, and what the ownership status of the projects will be once completed.  I.e., will the public pay, and through what mechanism, and will the end result be the property of the public or of the private organizations who participate in building them.

See here and here for a discussion of some of the concerns.  See here for a more even-handed discussion, from McClatchy.

Some of this stuff is already well underway, for instance the I-93 rebuild in NH.  So, I don't know how much of this is new stuff, how much is stuff that is already work in progress, and in the latter case if it's on the list just to secure funding.

But it all looks like pretty good stuff to do.

A Reminder: The United States is a low-taxed nation

by Ugh

Since this is the issue I know best and as we head further into the darkness that started on Friday, I thought I would post this helpful reminder when it comes to the debate regarding "tax reform" this year:  the U.S. is a low taxed nation among developed economies, our supposed competitors.

This may surprise some folk, as we are used to hearing about how the U.S. has one of the the highest corporate tax rates in the world, or at least among OECD countries, which is true but that is (a) the marginal corporate income tax rate and (b) it only accounts for ~9% of revenue at the federal level.  All in - federal, state, and local income and other taxes - the U.S. ranks 32nd out of 35 OECD nations by taxes as a percentage of GDP, at 25.88% in 2014 (only Mexico, South Korea, and Chile are lower). OECD data.*

For comparison, the FY2017 U.S. budget deficit was estimated at 2.6% of GDP and in FY2016 it was 3.2%.  Thus, raising taxes to close out the deficit completely for FY2016 (to use the higher % of GDP number), or perhaps spend on infrastructure, would put us at 29.08%, or only up to 27th out of 35 OECD countries, behind those communists in Canada, which at 31.22% would still be 2% of its GDP higher.  But that would apparently kill all our jobs (do they bleed? he asks), there not being any jobs in those aforementioned high-tax countries, apparently.

So when you hear that the U.S. needs tax reform or lower taxes to become "competitive" with the rest of the world, view it with some skepticism.  If that's a reference solely to the U.S. corporate income tax and how the U.S. is virtually alone with such a high rate and a purported "worldwide" tax system, note that most major U.S.-based MNCs (i) currently pay tax at an  effective rate on their non-U.S. income of somewhere between 0 and 15%; (ii) do not intend to ever repatriate that money "home" to the United States where they would incur the higher U.S. corporate rate - or at least most say so in SEC filings (and they wouldn't lie, would they?); (iii) pay a much higher effective tax rate on their U.S. source income - something like 20-30%, or even higher; and thus (iv) a move to a lower U.S. corporate tax rate and a territorial system means primarily a tax cut on income earned in the United States by U.S.-based MNCs - the stuff we're supposed to tax under a territorial system - and the ability to repatriate foreign earning tax free, which history tells us (specifically, the 2004 American Job Creation Act repatriation tax holiday) will be used to pay dividends, engage in share buybacks, or buy other U.S. companies, not "create jobs" (whether they bleed or not).

Why then, you may ask, the big push for large US based MNCs to invert?  Because most of the "juice" in inversions involves stripping income out of the United States via interest and royalty payments to related parties, thus reducing U.S. tax on their U.S. income.  But this is something U.S.-based multinationals can't do (and we wouldn't want them to do) and the U.S. congress refuses to implement strong earnings stripping rules - a feature of most of those aforementioned countries' tax systems - because that would be a tax increase (and/or they want to do it in "comprehensive tax reform").

More than you wanted to know, I'm sure.

*If you want to throw in the "BRICS" - Brazil 34.4%, China 22.0%, India 17.7%, Russia 19.5%, South Africa 26.9% this from wikipedia based mostly on Heritage Foundation numbers so caveats apply.  

Quo Vadis? -- Inauguration Thread

by wj

I innocently assumed that someone else would put something up first thing this morning (i.e. before we woke up on the West Coast). But since they didn't....

Commuted -- Open Thread

by wj

President Obama has now commuted more sentences than any previous President. From what I can tell, a lot of there are non-violent drug offenders and others whose sentences are arguably out of proportion to the reality of their offense. So far, so good.

But then there's this:

“Chelsea Elizabeth Manning – Oklahoma City, OK

Offense: One specification of wrongful and wanton publication to the internet intelligence belonging to the United States; five specifications of stealing, purloining or knowingly converting U.S. government records; six specifications of willful communication of information relating to the national defense; one specification of willful communication of information in unlawful possession; one specification of willful communication of information relating to the national defense by exceeding authorized access to a U.S. government computer; one specification of willful communication of information relating to the national defense obtained by accessing a U.S. government computer; five specifications of failure to obey order or regulation; U.S. Army Court Martial

Sentence: 35 years’ imprisonment (August 21, 2013)

Commutation Grant: Prison sentence commuted to expire on May 17, 2017.”

I don't know what the President's reasons were for this action. But for the life of me, I can't think of any good reasons for doing it. Why???

The sentence (35 years) might be argued to be excessive. But the 7 years that results from this commutation seems horrible inadequate to the offense. So no obvious service of justice.

The politics don't look particular good either. At best, it will leave the GOP, with its new-found enthusiasm for WikiLeaks, in an awkward position. Which doesn't seem to me to be anywhere near an adequate reason.

So what was he thinking? My quick google of the subject found various other people giving reasons why it was appropriate. But no sign of what Obama himself was thinking. Maybe he will enlighten us during his last press conference....

Gopnik on the Music Trump can't hear

by liberal japonicus

Adam Gopnik's piece about Trump and his failure to find anyone of any stature to play at his inauguration, except those he can order to do so, is food for thought.

And so the inability, so far, of Donald Trump to get any significant musicians from any of those traditions, rock or country or blues or Broadway, to sing at his Inauguration is not a small comic detail but a significant reflection of this moment in history. It reminds us of just how aberrant Trump and Trumpism is. When the Rockettes have to be coerced to appear at your show—or you’re left to boast of the military bands, directly under your orders, who are playing—one is witnessing not just some snobbish hostility on the part of “Hollywood” entertainers but a deeper abyss between the man about to assume power and the shared traditions of the country he represents. There is no music in this man.

As they say, read the whole thing.

Blinding myself with science

by Doctor Science

I'm finding the news so depressing/enraging/flabbergasting these days that I've taken refuge in the pursuit of scientific knowledge. Specifically, helping citizen science projects at the Zooniverse. It's been years since I talked about them, and I'm working on different projects these days.

When I'm in the mood for picking a project, I go to the Zooniverse project page, sort by "Most Help Needed", and test-drive some projects to see how I like them. These days I mostly do "spot and count the animals" projects, because they're easier on my carpal tunnels than many of the others, and I just plain love spotting the animals.

Zooniverse projects are premised on the fact that humans are much better at visual pattern recognition than current computers. In the case of spotting-the-animals, the skill is what 500 million years of evolution trained our visual systems to do: to look at image after image of Coyotes:

and immediately spot the Wolf:

It took a remarkably short time working on Snapshot Wisconsin (where I saw the above pictures) for my brain to learn to tell a coyote from a wolf. This is an example of a task which is much easier for a brain than a computer, which is what the Zooniverse is for.

My favorite current projects, in decreasing order of "Help Needed":

1. Snapshot Wisconsin gets the public involved in monitoring Wisconsin wildlife year-round: the pictures come from camera traps set up by volunteers.

Most common subjects: White-Tailed Deer. Interesting rarities I have seen include: Elk (re-introduced to Wisconsin), Wolf, Sandhill Crane, Fisher, Gray Fox, Bobcat, Flying Squirrel. The images come in sets of 3 that can be run like a mini-GIF (which makes spotting the animals quite easy), many of the animals are familiar, and there aren't all that many different kinds, so this is an easy, rewarding project. Right now they need a lot of help because they just uploaded a new set of images, mostly from this past fall.

A favorite picture:

Doe and Fawn, mutually grooming.

2. Western Shield -- Camera Watch is comparing areas of the south-western jarrah forest where foxes and feral cats have been excluded to areas where these introduced predators are still present, to see the effect on native species.

Most common subjects: Grey Kangaroo and Black-Gloved Wallaby. I guess more than 80% of the images are of one of these two species, you will get *really* good at recognizing them. Interesting others I have seen include: Emu, Monitor Lizard, Echidna, Woylie, Kangaroo and Wallaby joeys in the pouch. *Lots* of birds, a definite plus for me. Images in sets of 3, not very many species, and you get to see Australia, which is really strange to the eyes of someone from another continent.

A favorite picture:

Black-Gloved Wallabies, including joey leaning out of the comfy pouch to pick up a snack.

3. Camera CATalogue is trying to track Leopards, in particular. You identify animals in the images, and say which *side* of the animal you can see. The goal, as I understand it, is to create databases of leopard sightings in various parts of Africa, and to track individual leopards by their spot patterns.

Most common subjects: Nothing Here, and Fire -- up to 80-90% of images (at least in the current batches). After that, though, the animal images are often of very high quality, with clear pictures of a wide variety of interesting African animals. Elephant, Impala, Hippopotamus, Warthog, Cheetah, Sable Antelope, Buffalo, Giraffe, Jackals, Serval, Hyena: it's as good as a zoo. The images come through in batches from different regions in southern Africa, and each batch doesn't stay up all that long -- the animals tend to be easy to ID, so the project has only about 5 views per image.

A favorite picture:

Two young leopards play-fighting, the most-favorited image in the Zooniverse so far. As well it might be!

4. Wildcam Gorongosa is monitoring the return of wildlife to Gorongosa National Park in Mozambique, where large mammals were almost wiped out during the 1977-1992 civil war. There are a lot of cameras and images are uploaded pretty frequently (not just in "seasons" or batches), so the project almost always Needs Help.

Most common subjects: Baboon, Warthog, Bushbuck. Baboons almost always are in groups, often with interesting (or cute) behavior. Other notable creatures I've seen: Mongoose, Lion, Elephant, Sable Antelope, Owl, Serval, Ground Hornbill, and Pangolin. The images are captured one at a time, but there's a web app where you can see images in sequence, to better determine what you're looking at.

One of my favorites:

This pregnant Impala is the first to arrive for the herd's breakfast gathering, which you can follow in a long series of images starting here.