Tuesday, November 5, 2019

Bernie Sanders Says Apple's $2.5 Billion Home Loan Program a Distraction From Hundreds of Billions in Tax Avoidance That Created California Housing Crisis








"We cannot rely on corporate tax evaders to solve California's housing crisis."


Monday, November 04, 2019




Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday sharply criticized an announcement from tech giant Apple that the company would invest $2.5 billion in helping to asssuage the effects of California's housing crisis—a crisis that Apple has contributed to by driving prices up as the company has expanded in the San Francisco area. 
"Apple's announcement that it is entering the real estate lending business is an effort to distract from the fact that it has helped create California's housing crisis—all while raking in $800 million of taxpayer subsidies, and keeping a quarter trillion dollars of profit offshore, in order to avoid paying billions of dollars in taxes," Sanders, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020, said in a statement.
"Bernie Sanders comes out swinging on Apple's housing announcement," tweeted ReCode reporter Teddy Schleifer.
"Bernie is the first 2020 candidate I've seen to weigh in on this," added Schleifer.
Sanders, in his statement, said that relying on company's like Apple to solve the issue is not a solution—no matter how much money the tech giant is throwing at the problem.
"Today, more than 134,000 Californians are homeless and renters need to earn $34.69 per hour to afford the average two-bedroom apartment," said Sanders. "We cannot rely on corporate tax evaders to solve California's housing crisis."
As Common Dreams reported, Sanders unveiled his "Housing for All" plan in September, promoting an end to homelessness, national rent control, and the construction of 10 million new homes.
The senator referred to the plan on Monday, promising Apple that it would contribute to solving the issue, though perhaps not in the way the company had in mind. The proposal calls for $2.5 trillion in spending over the next decade—which would "be fully paid for by establishing a tax on the wealthiest top one-tenth of one percent of Americans," according to the Sanders campaign.
"When we defeat Donald Trump, we are going to make companies like Apple start paying their fair share, so that we can finally start making massive long-term investments that guarantee Americans affordable housing," said Sanders.





Report Shows How World's Top Capitalists Driving Humanity 'Head-On Into' Global Climate Emergency









The world's leading asset managers, with trillions of dollars under their direction, continue to vote down efforts to address the crisis.

Monday, November 04, 2019


A "striking" report published Monday by the U.K.-based charity ShareAction exposes how the largest U.S. asset managers are "overwhelmingly" stalling corporate efforts to tackle the climate crisis despite those companies' public proclamations and the growing demands for bold action from people around the world.
ShareAction promotes "responsible investment." According to the new report (pdf), the group's "vision is a world where ordinary savers and institutional investors work together to ensure our communities and environment are safe and sustainable for all."
As the report—entitled Voting Matters: Are Asset Managers Using Their Proxy Votes for Climate Action?—explains:
Investors have a key role to play in helping avert dangerous climate change. One way they can do so is by using their proxy voting rights. Proxy voting is the primary means by which shareholders can exert influence over their investee companies and exert stewardship... Yet, this stewardship tool is often underused by investors. This year, the directors of BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, and Total were all (re-)elected with on average 97% support from shareholders, despite these companies being some of the largest emitting companies on earth and lacking plans to transition to a well-below 2°C world.
Voting Matters analyzes how 57 of the world's largest asset managers have voted on 65 recent shareholder resolutions that covered topics including "climate-related disclosures, companies' lobbying activities, and the setting of targets aligned with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement."
ShareAction researchers found that "U.S. asset managers are clear laggards in terms of proxy voting on climate, whilst European asset managers lead the way." The top 10 worst performers overall are based in the United States; even the report's highest ranked U.S. managers score lower than those in Europe and the rest of the world.
"These results are highly concerning," Voting Matters says, "as the 20 largest U.S. fund managers control about 35% of global assets under management (AUM), more than double the 14% run by the top 20 European players."
The worst performers overall are Capital Group, T. Rowe Price, Blackrock and J.P. Morgan—which are tied for third—Vanguard Asset Management, Fidelity Management and Research Co., Wellington Management International, Franklin Templeton, Northern Trust, State Street Global Advisors, and MetLife Investment Management.
"Six out of 10 of the worst performers have come out in support of the Taskforce for Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and joined at least one investor engagement initiative on climate change," the report notes, "yet fail to vote in favor of resolutions on climate-related disclosures."
The report's author, ShareAction campaign manager Jeanne Martin, said in a statement Monday that "you can't boast climate-awareness in public and block climate goals in private."
"Ultimately, these investors will be judged on their voting, which is the most powerful tool at their disposal," Martin added. "They have the power to put the brakes on the climate emergency, but they're on auto-pilot, driving us head-on into it. We hope their clients take note of these findings which separate out those who are really walking the walk on climate change."
Martin, in a series of tweets Monday, outlined some of the report's key findings, including how fund managers are responding to the more than 50 investor initiatives that aim to compel and support investor activity on the climate crisis, such as the Climate Action 100+ (CA100+) Initiative, a global coalition that pushes some of the world's highest emitting companies to pursue climate action.
Highlighting ShareAction's recommendations for asset owners, Martin concluded that "as stewards of capital for millions of beneficiaries, asset owners have a duty to monitor the engagement activities and proxy voting records of their asset managers."
The report notes that "the last few years have seen a shift in investors' attitudes towards climate change." For example, "1,118 institutions representing US$11.48 trillion in assets and more than 58,000 individual representing US$5.2 billion have committed to divest from fossil fuels."
For those figures, Voting Matters cites Fossil Free, a project of the global environmental group 350.org. DivestInvest and 350.org detailed the divestment movement's successes in September with a report—released just ahead of the Financing the Future summit in Cape Town—that celebrated surpassing the $11 trillion milestone.
"What began as a moral call to action by students is now a mainstream financial response to growing climate risk to portfolios, the people, and the planet," the September report said. "The momentum has been driven by a people-powered grassroots movement, ordinary people on every continent pushing their local institutions to take a stand against the fossil fuel industry and for a world powered by 100 percent renewable energy."







We Can Build a #FossilFree World




https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=f5T-YhjpNnE






















Naomi Klein and Youth Environmental Leaders to Join Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez in Iowa for Climate Crisis Summit






"We've never seen something like this in U.S. history. In 2020, Green New Deal voters could determine who wins the Iowa caucuses, and from there the presidency."


Monday, November 04, 2019


Author and environmentalist Naomi Klein, U.S. Youth Climate Strike co-founder Isra Hirsi, and Sunrise Movement leader Zina Precht-Rodriguez are among those slated to join Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in Iowa on Saturday for a "Climate Crisis Summit" focused on the urgent need for a Green New Deal.
"The climate crisis is an international challenge and we are ready to take it on with a Green New Deal," Sanders, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, said Monday in a tweet promoting the summit, which is set to take place at Drake University in Des Moines.
The event, as Vox reported Monday, is part of the Sanders campaign's push to win the Feb. 3 Iowa caucuses with an ambitious climate message and policy platform. In August, Sanders unveiled a sweeping Green New Deal proposal calling for a 10-year mobilization to transition the U.S. economy to 100 percent renewable energy while creating 20 million decent-paying union jobs in the process.
"Sen. Bernie Sanders wants to be the new climate candidate of the 2020 presidential race—and his campaign is betting it can win them Iowa," Vox reported Monday.
The youth-led Sunrise Movement tweeted in response to Vox's story that the country has "never seen something like this."
"In 2020, Green New Deal voters could determine who wins the Iowa caucuses, and from there the presidency," the group said.
The Sanders campaign said in a statement that the summit on Saturday "is set to be one of the largest gatherings in Iowa to confront climate change." The event will feature national climate leaders like Hirsi and Precht-Rodriguez as well as local Iowa activists.
"Sen. Sanders probably has the most intensive climate plan on the circuit right now," Hirsi told Vox. "I think a lot of young people are hearing Sanders' message and waking up."
"The climate crisis is everything," Hirsi added. "It's healthcare, it's racial justice, it's criminal justice—everything. It's our lives on the line; lives are already being lost because of it."
The day after the Climate Crisis Summit, Sanders plans to go on a "Green Jobs Tour" across Iowa's conservative fourth congressional district.
Bill Neidhardt, the Sanders campaign's deputy state director in Iowa, predicted the Vermont senator's bold climate message will have broad appeal among Iowa voters.
"Climate is typically seen as an issue for young voters but we reject the notion that climate only engages young voters," Neidhardt told Vox. "We think a strong focus on climate, especially on the economic issues, can really turn the tide."




Engineers develop a new way to remove carbon dioxide from air







The process could work on the gas at any concentrations, from power plant emissions to open air

October 25, 2019

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

A new way of removing carbon dioxide from a stream of air could provide a significant tool in the battle against climate change. The new system can work on the gas at virtually any concentration level, even down to the roughly 400 parts per million currently found in the atmosphere.




A new way of removing carbon dioxide from a stream of air could provide a significant tool in the battle against climate change. The new system can work on the gas at virtually any concentration level, even down to the roughly 400 parts per million currently found in the atmosphere.
Most methods of removing carbon dioxide from a stream of gas require higher concentrations, such as those found in the flue emissions from fossil fuel-based power plants. A few variations have been developed that can work with the low concentrations found in air, but the new method is significantly less energy-intensive and expensive, the researchers say.
The technique, based on passing air through a stack of charged electrochemical plates, is described in a new paper in the journal Energy and Environmental Science, by MIT postdoc Sahag Voskian, who developed the work during his PhD, and T. Alan Hatton, the Ralph Landau Professor of Chemical Engineering.
The device is essentially a large, specialized battery that absorbs carbon dioxide from the air (or other gas stream) passing over its electrodes as it is being charged up, and then releases the gas as it is being discharged. In operation, the device would simply alternate between charging and discharging, with fresh air or feed gas being blown through the system during the charging cycle, and then the pure, concentrated carbon dioxide being blown out during the discharging.
As the battery charges, an electrochemical reaction takes place at the surface of each of a stack of electrodes. These are coated with a compound called polyanthraquinone, which is composited with carbon nanotubes. The electrodes have a natural affinity for carbon dioxide and readily react with its molecules in the airstream or feed gas, even when it is present at very low concentrations. The reverse reaction takes place when the battery is discharged -- during which the device can provide part of the power needed for the whole system -- and in the process ejects a stream of pure carbon dioxide. The whole system operates at room temperature and normal air pressure.
"The greatest advantage of this technology over most other carbon capture or carbon absorbing technologies is the binary nature of the adsorbent's affinity to carbon dioxide," explains Voskian. In other words, the electrode material, by its nature, "has either a high affinity or no affinity whatsoever," depending on the battery's state of charging or discharging. Other reactions used for carbon capture require intermediate chemical processing steps or the input of significant energy such as heat, or pressure differences.
"This binary affinity allows capture of carbon dioxide from any concentration, including 400 parts per million, and allows its release into any carrier stream, including 100 percent CO2," Voskian says. That is, as any gas flows through the stack of these flat electrochemical cells, during the release step the captured carbon dioxide will be carried along with it. For example, if the desired end-product is pure carbon dioxide to be used in the carbonation of beverages, then a stream of the pure gas can be blown through the plates. The captured gas is then released from the plates and joins the stream.
In some soft-drink bottling plants, fossil fuel is burned to generate the carbon dioxide needed to give the drinks their fizz. Similarly, some farmers burn natural gas to produce carbon dioxide to feed their plants in greenhouses. The new system could eliminate that need for fossil fuels in these applications, and in the process actually be taking the greenhouse gas right out of the air, Voskian says. Alternatively, the pure carbon dioxide stream could be compressed and injected underground for long-term disposal, or even made into fuel through a series of chemical and electrochemical processes.
The process this system uses for capturing and releasing carbon dioxide "is revolutionary" he says. "All of this is at ambient conditions -- there's no need for thermal, pressure, or chemical input. It's just these very thin sheets, with both surfaces active, that can be stacked in a box and connected to a source of electricity."
"In my laboratories, we have been striving to develop new technologies to tackle a range of environmental issues that avoid the need for thermal energy sources, changes in system pressure, or addition of chemicals to complete the separation and release cycles," Hatton says. "This carbon dioxide capture technology is a clear demonstration of the power of electrochemical approaches that require only small swings in voltage to drive the separations."
In a working plant -- for example, in a power plant where exhaust gas is being produced continuously -- two sets of such stacks of the electrochemical cells could be set up side by side to operate in parallel, with flue gas being directed first at one set for carbon capture, then diverted to the second set while the first set goes into its discharge cycle. By alternating back and forth, the system could always be both capturing and discharging the gas. In the lab, the team has proven the system can withstand at least 7,000 charging-discharging cycles, with a 30 percent loss in efficiency over that time. The researchers estimate that they can readily improve that to 20,000 to 50,000 cycles.
The electrodes themselves can be manufactured by standard chemical processing methods. While today this is done in a laboratory setting, it can be adapted so that ultimately they could be made in large quantities through a roll-to-roll manufacturing process similar to a newspaper printing press, Voskian says. "We have developed very cost-effective techniques," he says, estimating that it could be produced for something like tens of dollars per square meter of electrode.
Compared to other existing carbon capture technologies, this system is quite energy efficient, using about one gigajoule of energy per ton of carbon dioxide captured, consistently. Other existing methods have energy consumption which vary between 1 to 10 gigajoules per ton, depending on the inlet carbon dioxide concentration, Voskian says.
The researchers have set up a company called Verdox to commercialize the process, and hope to develop a pilot-scale plant within the next few years, he says. And the system is very easy to scale up, he says: "If you want more capacity, you just need to make more electrodes."

Story Source:
Materials provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Original written by David L. Chandler. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:
Sahag Voskian, T. Alan Hatton. Faradaic electro-swing reactive adsorption for CO2 capture. Energy & Environmental Science, 2019; DOI: 10.1039/C9EE02412C





'System deadlock': Joker artistically diagnoses modern world's ills – Zizek








3 Nov, 2019 20:31 / Updated 18 hours ago




Seen as a potential validation for violent glory seekers, the 'Joker' movie turns out to be not an incitement for violence but a judgement on the modern political system's flaws, philosopher Slavoj Zizek says.
The much acclaimed Todd Phillips movie starring Joaquin Phoenix has received its fair share of criticism from almost everyone, from the woke community to the US Army, who all believed it could prompt some "evil" people to commit acts of violence.
Yet, the film's critics have apparently overlooked the underlying message of the movie, world-renowned philosopher Zizek told RT, adding that it is not about some mentally-challenged person, but about the "hopelessness" of our "best ever" political order itself, which many still simply refuse to accept.
Daily life has become a horror movie
We should congratulate Hollywood and the viewers on two things: that such a film that, let's face it, gives a very dark image of highly developed capitalism, a nightmarish image which led some critics to designate it a 'social horror film', came out. Usually, we have social films, which depict social problems, and then we have horror films. To bring these two genres together, it is only possible when many phenomena in our ordinary social life become phenomena which belong to horror films.

It is even more interesting to see how reactions to the film provide a whole specter of political cohesions in the US. On the one hand, conservatives were afraid that this film would incite violence. It was an absurd claim. No violence was triggered by this film. On the contrary, the film depicts violence and awakens you to the danger of violence.

As it is always the case, some politically correct people feared that the film used racist clichés and celebrates violence. It is also unfair. One of the most interesting positions was that of Michael Moore, a leftist documentarist, who celebrated the film as an honest depiction of reality of those poor, excluded and not covered by healthcare in the US.
His idea is that the film explains how figures like Joker can arise. It is a critical portrayal of reality in the US, which can give birth to people like Joker. I agree with him but I would also like to go a bit further.
'Deadlock of nihilism'
I think what is important is that the figure of Joker in the end, when he identifies with his mask, is a figure of extreme nihilism, self-destructive violence and a crazy laughter at others' despair. There is not positive political project.
The way we should read 'Joker' is that it very wisely abstains from providing a positive image. A leftist critique of 'Joker' could have been: "Yes, it is a good portrayal of reality in the poor slums of the US but where is the positive force? Where are democratic socialists, where are ordinary people organizing themselves?" In this case, it would have been a totally different and a pretty boring film.

The logic of this film is that it leaves it to the spectators to do this. The movie shows sad social reality and a deadlock of the nihilist reaction. In the end, Joker is not free. He is only free in a sense of arriving at a point of total nihilism.
It is up to us to decide what we should do.
I designated the figure of Joker in a kind of Kazimir Malevich, the Russian avangardist, position when he did this famous painting of the Black Square. It is a kind of minimal protest – a reduction to nothing. Joker simply mocks every authority. It is destructive but lacks a positive project. We have to go through this path of despair.

It is not enough to play the game of those in power. That is the message of 'Joker'. The fact that they could be charitable like Bruce Wayne's father in this latest movie is just a part of the game. You have to get rid of all these liberal stupidities that obfuscate the despair of the situation.
Yet, it is not the final step but a zero level of clearing the table to open up the space for something new. This is how I read the film. It is not a final decadent vision. We have to go through this hell. Now, it is up to us to go further.
Social alarm clock
The danger of explaining just the backstory is to give a kind of a rational explanation that we should understand the figure of Joker. But Joker does not need this. Joker is a creative person in some sense. The crucial moment in the film for his subjective change is when he says: "I used to think my life was a tragedy. But now I realize, it's a comedy."

Comedy means for me that at that point he accepts himself in all his despair as a comical figure and gets rid of the last constraints of the old world. That is what he does for us. He is not a figure to imitate. It is wrong to think that what we see towards the end of the film – Joker celebrated by others – is the beginning of some new emancipatory movement. No, it is an ultimate deadlock of the existing system; a society bent on its self-destruction.
The elegance of the film is that it leaves the next step of building a positive alternative to it to us. It is a dark nihilist image meant to awaken us.
Are we ready to face reality?
The leftists who are disturbed by 'Joker' are 'Fukuyama leftists'; those who think that the liberal democratic order is the best possible order and we should just make it more tolerant. In this sense, everyone is a socialist today. Bill Gates says he is for socialism, Mark Zuckerberg says he is for socialism.
The lesson of 'Joker' is that a more radical change is needed; that this is not enough. And that is what all those democratic leftists are not aware of. This dissatisfaction that grows up today is a serious one. The system cannot deal with it with gradual reforms, more tolerance or better healthcare.
These are signs of the need for more radical change.
The true problem is whether we are ready to really experience the hopelessness of our situation. As Joker himself said at a certain moment in the film: "I laugh because I have nothing to lose, I am nobody."




Recession ahead: China won’t bail US out this time (Full show)




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU8aOAIGKRM