Showing posts with label Goodbye. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Goodbye. Show all posts

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Crimea Votes Overwhelmingly to Rejoin Russia; Truce Until March 21; Goodbye Hryvnia, Hello Ruble; McCain Wants Military Aid for Ukraine

Crimea returns to Russia It’s a done deal. Nothing can be done about it. An Exit poll shows Crimeans Choose to Join Russia in Vote

A majority of Crimeans chose to join Russia in a disputed referendum, exit polls showed, deepening the worst crisis between Russia and the West since the end of the Cold War.

A total of 93 percent voted today in favor of leaving Ukraine to become part of Russia, the Republican Institute of Social and Political Studies said, citing exit polls from the vote in the Black Sea peninsula. The Ukrainian government, the European Union and the U.S. all consider the referendum illegal. About 1.5 million Crimean voters were eligible to take part, according to the region’s prime minister.


Goodbye Hryvnia, Hello Ruble


Crimea will switch to the Russian ruble and abandon Ukraine’s hryvnia on April 1, RIA Novosti cited Crimean Deputy Prime Minister Rustam Temirgaliev as saying today.


McCain Wants Military Aid for Ukraine


The US senate’s head-warmonger, John McCain said Obama is giving “serious consideration” to sending military aid to Ukraine. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, in an ABC interview, said the U.S. should pass “crippling sanctions” on Russia and help Ukraine rebuild its armed forces.


Biden Promote US as World’s Policeman


U.S. Vice President Joe Biden will travel to NATO members Poland and Lithuania tomorrow for talks on Ukraine, according to a White House statement. The Pentagon said last week it would send 12 F-16 aircraft to Poland as a sign of U.S. commitment to defend allies in the region; the U.S. previously sent six fighter jets to Lithuania.


Do US citizens support wasting tax dollars sending Aircraft to Poland? Of course not. Does McCain or the Republicans care about balancing the budget? Of course not?


Did Obama take down Guantanamo Bay, get all US troops out of Afghanistan or Iraq? Of course not.


In case you missed it, please see President Obama is the Biggest Fraud Ever Perpetrated on US Citizens (Fantastic Carey Wedler Video)


Support for war, spying, and for the US to waste money being the world’s policeman is rampant in Congress, deficits be damned. But hey, don’t worry Ukraine and Russia Agree to a 5-Day Truce.


Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com


Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis



Crimea Votes Overwhelmingly to Rejoin Russia; Truce Until March 21; Goodbye Hryvnia, Hello Ruble; McCain Wants Military Aid for Ukraine

Thursday, February 20, 2014

The Lottocracy Has Arrived: Say Goodbye (and Good Riddance!) to Campaigns, Candidates, and Elections


Pic: USGOV (PD)

Pic: USGOV (PD)



“It is accepted as democratic when public offices are allocated by lot, and as oligarchic when they are filled by election.” – Aristotle (Politics IV. 9, 1294b8)


I was in the process of cobbling together a piece on sortition (the selection of government officials by lottery) but it turns out that Alexander Guerrero – an assistant professor of philosophy, medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania – has beaten me to the punch, and then some! He has written a superb essay about the subject and has also come up with an alternative system which he has dubbed “the lottocracy”, an idea which is challenging, thought-provoking, and incredibly hopeful…


So what’s wrong with the system of representation which we currently employ?


“In the presence of widespread citizen ignorance and the absence of meaningful accountability, powerful interests will effectively capture representatives, ensuring that the only viable candidates — the only people who can get and stay in political power — are those who will act in ways that are congenial to the interests of the powerful.”


What is the historical precedent for sortition?


“In ancient Athens, the birthplace of democracy, lottery-selection was used to choose political actors in three of its four major governmental institutions. Selection of political officials in late medieval and early renaissance Italy incorporated selection by lot. More recently, Citizens’ Assemblies (in which citizens were chosen at random to serve on the assembly, and in which citizens heard from experts prior to coming up with their own proposals) were used in the Netherlands to reform election law, and in Canada (in British Columbia and Ontario). Randomly chosen citizens were also brought into the process of constitutional reform in Iceland in 2010, but nothing of the scope that I am envisioning has been tried before.”


How would Guerrero’s “lottocracy” function? 


“First, rather than having a single, generalist legislature such as the United States Congress, the legislative function would be fulfilled by many different single-issue legislatures (each one focusing on, for example, just agriculture or health care). There might be 20 or 25 of these single-issue legislatures, perhaps borrowing existing divisions in legislative committees or administrative agencies: agriculture, commerce and consumer protection, education, energy, health and human services, housing and urban development, immigration, labour, transportation, etc.


“These single-issue legislatures would be chosen by lottery from the political jurisdiction, with each single-issue legislature consisting of 300 people. Each person chosen would serve for a three-year term. Terms would be staggered so that each year 100 new people begin, and 100 people finish. All adult citizens in the political jurisdiction would be eligible to be selected. People would not be required to serve if selected, but the financial incentive would be significant, efforts would be made to accommodate family and work schedules, and the civic culture might need to be developed so that serving is seen as a significant civic duty and honour. In a normal year-long legislative session, the 300 people would develop an agenda of the legislative issue or two they would work on for that session, they’d hear from experts and stakeholders with respect to those issues, there would be opportunities for gathering community input and feedback, and they would eventually vote to enact legislation or alter existing legislation.


“Single-issue focus is essential to allow greater learning and engagement with the particular problems, especially given the range of backgrounds that members would bring to the institutions, and the fact that these individuals would be amateurs at the particular task of creating legislation. Lottery-chosen representatives would have more time to learn about the problems they’re legislating than today’s typical representatives, who have to spend their time learning about every topic under the sun, while also constantly travelling, claiming credit, and raising funds to get re-elected. In the lottocratic system representatives will be — at least over a long enough run — descriptively and proportionately representative of the political community, simply because they have been chosen at random. But they will not have in mind the idea that they are to represent some particular constituency. Instead, they will be like better-informed versions of ourselves, coming from backgrounds like ours, but with the opportunity to learn and deliberate about the specific topic at hand.”


This all sounds great, but has he considered what might go wrong?


“No pure lottocratic system has ever existed, and so it’s important to note that much could go wrong. Randomly chosen representatives could prove to be incompetent or easily bewildered. Maybe a few people would dominate the discussions. Maybe the experts brought in to inform the policymaking would all be bought off and would convince us to buy the same corporate-sponsored policy we’re currently getting. There are hard design questions about how such a legislative system would interact with other branches of government, and questions about the coherence of policymaking, budgeting, taxation, and enforcement of policy. That said, it’s worth remembering the level of dysfunction that exists in the current system. We should be thinking about comparative improvement, not perfection, and a lottocratic system would have a number of advantages over the current model.”


What would be the potential advantages of such a system?


“The most obvious advantage of lotteries is that they help to prevent corruption or undue influence in the selection of representatives. Because members are chosen at random and don’t need to run for office, there will be no way for powerful interests to influence who becomes a representative to ensure that the only viable candidates are those whose interests are congenial to their own. Because there is no need to raise funds for re-election, it should be easier to monitor representatives to ensure that they are not being bought off.



“Another advantage of lotteries over elections is that they are likely to bring together a more cognitively diverse group of people, a group of people with a better sense of the full range of views and interests of the polity. Because individuals are chosen at random from the jurisdiction, they are much more likely to be an ideologically, demographically, and socio-economically representative sample of the people in the jurisdiction than those individuals who are capable of successfully running for office. As a point of comparison, 44 per cent of US Congresspersons have a net worth of more than $ 1 million; 82 per cent are male; 86 per cent are white, and more than half are lawyers or bankers. Recent empirical work by Scott Page and Lu Hong has demonstrated that cognitively diverse groups of people are likely to produce better decisions than smarter, or more skilled, groups that are cognitively homogenous.”



Read the rest of the interview here.


***


Guerrero is currently writing a book on this subject and for those who may be interested, he mentions several others who are also engaged in discussing these issues: ”There are also a number of academics who have argued for a role for lotteries in the selection of political officials, including C L R James, Oliver Dowlen, and Peter Stone. Other people whose work you might track down, if you’re interested, include, in the UK (Anthony Barnett, Peter Carty, Oliver Dowlen, Ben Saunders, Peter Stone, Keith Sutherland), in the US (Terrill Bouricius, Ernest Callenbach, Hélène Landemore, Ethan Leib, Neil McCormick, Kevin O’Leary, Michael Phillips, Alex Zakaras), in Canada (Mark Warren and Hilary Pearse), the Australian philosopher John Burnheim, the late Afro-Trinidadian philosopher C.L.R. James, Paul Lucardie in the Netherlands, Yoram Gat in Israel, the French activist Étienne Chouard, the political party Partido Azar in Spain, Belgian MP Laurent Louis and the Youth Parliament of Belgium—all have argued for the use of lottery selection in politics, in various forms and to various degrees.” And, as it turns out, there is also a blog – Equality by Lot – which is dedicated to discussing these issues.


“Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know.” – M. King Hubbert  




disinformation



The Lottocracy Has Arrived: Say Goodbye (and Good Riddance!) to Campaigns, Candidates, and Elections

Friday, January 10, 2014

Two And A Half Men - A Kiss Goodbye

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Two And A Half Men - A Kiss Goodbye

Friday, November 8, 2013

Say goodbye to clinical psychology


Very quietly, behind closed doors, at meetings with confidential minutes, a few Health Ministry bureaucrats made a dramatic decision on the Israeli public’s behalf: the liquidation of clinical psychology as a profession licensed and supervised by the state. There’s still no official document that bears this headline, but there’s already a date for implementing the decision, and also a budget for it.


We aren’t talking about battles over professional prestige, disputes between partisans of different treatment methods or even another round of responses to criticism of the establishment or the system. When the new regulations take effect, Israel will become the only place in the Western world where psychology has an expiration date. The reason for this is twofold: the expulsion of psychologists from the public health system, and changes in the nature of their specialization.


In 2015, the “reform of mental health insurance” is supposed to take effect. As part of this reform, responsibility for the public’s mental health will be transferred from the state to the health maintenance organizations. At a recent conference, a Health Ministry representative revealed that the reform includes the following decisions: Psychologists won’t be included in the multidisciplinary teams responsible for mental health, and they will also be dropped from the list of professionals authorized to run mental health clinics. Effectively, the word “psychologist” doesn’t appear even once in the document describing how treatment teams will look, after the reform takes effect.


The immediate impact, of course, will be felt by people who make use of the public psychological services, most of whom belong to the weaker strata of society. In plain language, the high-quality psychological services available to the public hitherto will be completely eliminated, and will cease to be available via the HMOs.


This will have dramatic, long-term implications for every citizen of the state, from the poorest 10 percent to the wealthiest. Once the reform is implemented, there will no longer be any organization responsible for and committed to training clinical psychologists.


For decades, the process of training psychologists was based on the same process as that of training doctors: after obtaining a master’s degree and clinical training, psychologists do a residency in the public service for minuscule pay. In exchange, they gain the experience and knowledge needed to become qualified clinical psychologists. But once the reform takes effect, psychologists will no longer be employed by the public health system – and therefore, they won’t do residencies. Period.


In effect, the Health Ministry has decided that the public should no longer receive the services of expert psychologists in either the public or the private health systems, since would-be specialists will have no place to receive training. When you want to send your son or daughter to a psychologist in another few years, there simply won’t be anyone to send them to.


Another, no less dramatic, document was published recently, containing recommendations for changing the nature of specialization in clinical psychology. This document sparked vehement opposition from leading psychologists, the broader community of clinical psychologists in Israel and the organizations that represent them.


The prevailing professional approach to clinical psychology, both in Israel and worldwide, sees a person as a whole, and it holds that you can’t address just one portion of a person in isolation from this whole. The process of specialization is built in corresponding depth, and includes intensive experience in interpersonal interactions and self-awareness, which are the necessary basis for any treatment method.


The recommendations, which are supposed to become binding regulations as early as next year, reflect a reductionist, piecemeal approach to the human mind. Their implementation would turn future psychologists from specialists in human beings to specialists in techniques, tests and treatments of specific disorders. The name of the profession might remain the same, but a duck that doesn’t talk like a duck, walk like a duck or quack like a duck isn’t a duck, even if a Health Ministry bureaucrat insists on calling it one and even if it confirms this in a binding regulation.


Psychological treatment has its own characteristics and a unique approach that isn’t found in related professions. Studies show that psychological treatment produces great benefits and long-lasting effects. Patient satisfaction surveys have shown time after time that patients are pleased with the psychological treatment they received, and that they prefer psychotherapy to other treatment methods. Psychological treatment is meant for anyone who needs help in coping with difficulties, even those who aren’t dealing with psychiatric disorders.


A decision of such cardinal importance to society, the health system and academia must not be made by anonymous bureaucrats with no public discussion. The public has a right to know when someone is deciding on its behalf that there’s no longer any need for clinical psychologists. The health minister is the person who has the authority, and with authority comes responsibility.


When we wake up in another year or two to a world in which there are no psychologists in the mental health system – to a system in which psychologists are discriminated against, with no authority to manage clinics or make their professional voices heard, and which has no commitment to quality training for psychologists – when all this happens, the health minister won’t be able to hide behind the bureaucrats or claims that she didn’t know. Yael German, by virtue of her position, will be one who signs off on the order with her own hand – a death sentence for clinic psychology in Israel.


The author is a resident in clinical psychology and a doctoral student in Hebrew University’s psychology department.




WHAT REALLY HAPPENED



Say goodbye to clinical psychology