It appears the UK wants Chinese telecommunications company Huawei as far away from its 5G network as possible. In an about-face, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has told officials to create plans to reduce Huawei’s involvement in the country’s 5G networks to zero by 2023.
In a day-long virtual convention, after four ballots, the 1,035 delegates assembled for the Libertarian Party convention selected Jo Jorgensen for their presidential candidate.
She won with slightly over 51 percent of the vote (not every delegate voted in every round) on that fourth ballot, with 524 votes. Jacob Hornberger came in second with nearly 28 percent of the vote. Vermin Supreme came in third, with 20 percent of the final vote.
Reason ran an interview with Jorgensen, who is a lecturer in psychology at Clemson and had been the party's vice presidential candidate on a ticket with Harry Browne in 1996, on Thursday.
The L.P.'s voting procedure involved six candidates officially in nomination: Jorgensen, Jacob Hornberger, Vermin Supreme, John Monds, Judge James Gray, and Adam Kokesh. (Though members could vote for other people if they wanted, or for NOTA, and many did.)
Jorgensen led the vote in every round, though she was only 12 votes ahead of runner-up Jacob Hornberger on the first round. As per the L.P.'s procedure, the lowest vote getter in each round was technically eliminated for the next one.
Kokesh was eliminated after round one, Gray after round two, and Monds after round three. Jorgensen's lead grew with each round, to 82 votes over Hornberger in the second round, and a 126 vote lead on the third. Hornberger's support remained pretty steady, rising only to 285 from his first-round 236 votes.
Jorgensen vowed to "make this the most successful campaign we can" in a speech after the results came in. Runner-up Hornberger said in a concession speech that he "hold[s] her in the highest respect and esteem."
Joseph Bishop-Henchmen, an at-large representative on the Libertarian National Committee who is running for its chairmanship this year, said in a written message on learning of her victory that "Jo Jorgensen has proven that she is a fighter, and will serve as a great contrast to the 70+ year old men she's taking on. She brought a remarkably diverse group of Libertarians together."
Jorgensen's vice presidential running mate will be selected in a second vote scheduled for tomorrow.
Yosadara Miron had Monday, May 18, circled on her calendar for two weeks.
It was the day that she and more than 2 million other undocumented immigrants in California could begin to apply for a $125 million program, made up of state and private funds, that would provide one-time payments of $500 per individual adults or up to $1,000 per household.
“I was ready at 9 a.m. and had my personal information and tax identification number ready to give them,” said Miron, who lives in Pomona with her husband and two children. “We wanted to be one of the first people to call and apply.”
Her husband lost his job as a manager at a seafood restaurant in March, she said, and hasn’t had any income in two months.
But on Monday, she was greeted with jammed phone lines and crashed websites due to high demand and interest in the program. Making matters worse, the state issued last-minute direction that callers needed to reach a live person in order to apply for aid.
“I called and called and didn’t get through till 5 p.m. on Monday,” Miron said. “I had to keep trying because we have no other options for help. Now I’m waiting to see if that help is coming.”
Miron and her husband are among the thousands of undocumented workers in the state who don’t qualify for federal assistance or stimulus checks due to their legal status. That’s why when Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the undocumented coronavirus relief fund in mid-April, many immigrant rights and nonprofit groups applauded the state’s efforts. California is currently the only state using taxpayer money to assist undocumented workers.
The program will give $75 million in cash assistance to an estimated 150,000 applicants. Philanthropic organizations and private donors have pledged an additional $50 million to help another 100,000 individuals and families. The funds are available on a first-come, first-served basis until they are spent or June 30, whichever comes first.
To ease privacy concerns about personal information ending up in the hands of federal immigration authorities, the state’s Department of Social Services sent the money to 12 nonprofit groups that will disburse the aid. The organizations are tasked with helping applicants determine if they’re eligible for the program, as well as delivering payment cards to those who are granted aid. Applicants’ information is not to be shared with the state during the process.
To qualify for the aid, applicants must show that they are ineligible for federal assistance programs stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, like the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES Act, and other federal unemployment benefits, and that they have endured a hardship from the pandemic. Only adults may apply.
Hotline numbers for the agencies helping in each county can be found on the Department of Social Service’s website.
Asking For Help
The TODEC Legal Center, a nonprofit in Riverside County, is one of those 12 organizations tasked with helping and disbursing aid to undocumented workers in the greater Inland Empire. According to Luz Gallegos, community programs director, the center received nearly 1 million calls in the first 48 hours of the application period.
“We knew there was going to be a high demand but nothing like this,” Gallegos said. “People think that $500 doesn’t sound like much but it’s a big deal for a lot of families that haven’t had any type of income since the pandemic began.”
Another nonprofit working directly with undocumented workers, the Central American Resource Center in Los Angeles, said in a Facebook post that it received more than 50,000 phone calls on Monday.
Gallegos said the large volume of calls proves how vital this money is to so many people. She pointed out that though many undocumented workers pay income taxes, they don’t qualify for federal relief or unemployment insurance, making things even harder for families that were already living paycheck to paycheck.
According to the state, undocumented immigrants contributed $2.5 billion in state and local taxes in 2019. The group makes up an estimated 10% of the state’s workforce.
“The pandemic has exposed the trauma that the undocumented community faces every day, whether it be lack of health care access, financial stress or job security,” Gallegos said. “This should be a wake-up call for the state that more needs to be done.”
On the front lines
Fernando Romero has worked and supported hundreds of day-laborers in Los Angeles and the Inland Empire through the Pomona Economic Opportunity Center. For the past six years, he’s helped undocumented migrants find work and has connected them with other immigration services.
But when the coronavirus pandemic took off in March, the nonprofit had to switch gears and find ways to financially assist many of the workers that were now out of work. Romero said the nonprofit has provided about $60,000 in aid since mid-March.
“For the last two months we have supported around 60 to 100 workers by giving $200 to 250 a week through pre-paid gift cards,” said Romero, noting the money came from other organizations that helped with grants. “We’ve been a lifeline for so many that can’t find jobs or have any money coming in.”
Another group, Gente Organizada, a community-led social action nonprofit located in Pomona, has also lent a hand to the undocumented community for years now. Jesus Sanchez, the organization founder, primarily works with high school and college students, undocumented and low-income individuals — some of his clients fit all three categories. When the pandemic began, he said, he knew many of his clients would be affected immediately.
“We knew so many folks that would face eviction notices due to loss of income and work, so right away we knew which group would be hit hardest,” Sanchez said. “They already have other worries like debt, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and being deported, so this was a huge blow.”
When the undocumented workers program was announced, Miron was one of the first to reach out to Gente Organizada for help. She and her family had previously worked with Sanchez and they have participated in grassroots projects advocating for undocumented worker rights.
Miron said her application has been accepted, now she is waiting for the money. Every day that passes is another filled with worry and stress, she said. While the family’s landlord has been cooperating with her on late payments, she said she doesn’t know how long her family can withstand the mounting debt.
The relief money should be disbursed within two to four days after an application is approved, according to the TODEC Legal Center.
Miron’s son, Andrew, said that while things have been rough he’s found some peace in having his family home together for the first time in years. While his dad lost his job, the 16-year-old said he’s been able to spend more time with him these past few months. Most mornings start with lining up at food banks with his mom or taking grocery trips with his dad, something he’s found to appreciate during this tough time.
“My mom is stressed and so is my dad but I take this all as a blessing because this is first time we get to spend time together at home which never happens,” he said. “We’re not doing great but we have each other and that’s all I can ask for right now.”
A cogent argument can be made for national security in the sense of protecting one’s free country against foreign tyrants. In the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith argued that some exceptions could be made to economic freedom in the name of the “common defence.” In his book The State, Anthony de Jasay argues more daringly that the only function of the “capitalist state” or minimal state would be to prevent an ordinary state from replacing it, whether domestic or foreign.
A minimal state… “if you can keep it,” Benjamin Franklin would say. Two current examples illustrate that what the state does in the name of national security or related justifications is generally aimed at increasing its own power.
The Chinese state plans to impose new national-security measures on Hong Kong. The Wall Street Journal reports (“China Plans New National-Security Laws for Hong Kong,” May 22, 2020):
In April, the new liaison-office director [for the Chinese government], Luo Huining, declared that Hong Kong’s legal framework for national security must be improved as soon as possible, especially after Beijing waited more than two decades in vain for the city to do so.
The same apparatchik said in a speech:
We must never allow Hong Kong to become a breaching point for risks to our national security.
The Journal article also reports on a letter from the Chinese Foreign Ministry to ambassadors of other countries with the purpose of defending Beijing’s position:
The Foreign Ministry letter also said “Hong Kong has become a notable source of risk to China’s national security” because of legal loopholes and a lack of enforcement mechanisms.
I think it should not surprise anybody familiar with the economic analysis of politics that our own states—in the “free” countries—also use national security to increase their own power, albeit not as uncontrollably as the Chinese government does. Think about the Trump administration imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum imported from allied countries in the name of national security and threatening to do the same on automobile imports from Europe.
A few days ago, on May 19, the same administration did something similar, even if it is not as immediately obvious how it harms Americans (while it clearly hurts poor people who are legitimately looking for asylum in America), and even if national security took a public-health face. The Wall Street Journal explains (“Trump Administration Extends Order Blocking Migrants at Border,” May 19, 2020):
The Trump administration extended a public-health order allowing it to reject migrants crossing U.S. borders without giving them access to the asylum system until the government determines the new coronavirus no longer poses a danger to the public.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published the indefinite extension on Tuesday. The order was introduced in March for a duration of 30 days and extended in April for another 30 days.
The public-health order allows the government to turn back any migrants it encounters crossing the border—including unaccompanied children and anyone asking for humanitarian protection—without taking them into custody or allowing them to file asylum claims.
What’s nice of Mr. Trump is that, with his limited understanding of the world, he often reveals his ulterior motives as a badge of honor—in this case, that the extension of the public-health order has little to do public health. The Wall Street Journal quotes him:
Every week, our border agents encounter thousands of unscreened, unvetted and unauthorized entries from dozens of countries. And we’ve had this problem for decades. With the national emergencies and all of the other things that we’ve declared, we can actually do something about it.
This looks pretty close to what Rahm Emmanuel (pardon me but I am tempted to write, borrowing from Mr. Trump’s invectives, the radical left, do-nothing Democrat Rahm Emmanuel, or the Democrat Savage Rahm Emmanuel) said in 2012:
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. What I mean by this is, it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.
Both President Donald Trump and Chairman Xi Jinping invoke nationalism to excite their respective political bases and reinforce their power. Nothing new there, perhaps, but two amusing facts are worth noting. In the Hong Kong story, the Wall Street Journal reports:
“I feel sick,” said Dennis Kwok, a pro-democracy legislator in Hong Kong who has in recent weeks been the target of criticism from Beijing for holding up legislation, including delaying the passage of a proposed bill that would criminalize disrespect for China’s national anthem.
Compare that with a tweet of November 29, 2016 from president-elect Donald Trump:
Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag – if they do, there must be consequences – perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!
Fortunately, constitutional constraints prevented Trump from following up on this idea, as on many of his electoral promises. The Supreme Court had long ruled that burning the flag is protected by the First Amendment.
The reality remains that in America, China, France, Canada, and most other countries, national security is generally a fraud. Think about all states in the world, even far from American shores but including the American state, used 9/11 as an excuse for increasing their surveillance power over their own citizens. The interesting question is how different states succeed in getting away with it. How does the state, a complex institution, democratic or not, always push to become Leviathan?
(2 COMMENTS)Of course you should worry, not withstanding all of the dogmatism on Twitter and the pre-Lucasian framing of various charts and graphs.
Here is a simple way to look at it. Let’s say the Fed does the very best job possible with its monetary policy (and in my view the Fed has done a very good job so far). That would mean in terms of the loss function a Fed error in one direction would mean a too low rate of price inflation, and a Fed error in the other direction would mean a too high rate of price inflation.
Now, supply conditions have never been so volatile in my lifetime, and perhaps never in American history. We don’t know how the virus will spread, how reopenings will go, when a vaccine will arrive, how good the vaccine will be, how much a climate of fear will persist, and so on. Demand conditions in turn depend on how these supply conditions will evolve.
The Fed thus could make an error on either side of its target, through no procedural fault of its own. As a result, as a simple matter of logic, the rate of price inflation could be too high, or it also could be too low.
if you think you know the direction of the error in advance, you aren’t paying enough attention to the underlying unpredictable uncertainties.
And if your response is to cite old open letters to the WSJ and the like, that is the same dogmatic error that the inflation hawks from the 1970s have been making.
There are other, more substantive arguments why the rate of price inflation might end up too high (the fiscal side really matters!), but that is the simplest one and you won’t see it on Twitter. And it is fine to argue, by the way, as does Matt Yglesias, that you would rather see it too high than too low.
I was glad to see Martin Wolf tackle this whole question (FT) and not be too scared off by the yappers.
The post Should you worry about the rate of price inflation being too high? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
Photo by Tom Warren / The Verge
Microsoft is finally bringing cloud support to Outlook for Windows email signatures. It’s a feature that Outlook users have been requesting for more than a decade, and it has remained at the top of Microsoft’s most-requested feature list for Outlook for Windows for nearly three years.
Microsoft originally acknowledged that it was planning some type of sync support for Outlook signatures back in September, and the company says it will now roll this out in a June update. Office 365 and Microsoft 365 subscribers will get access to cloud signature support in Outlook for Windows, allowing users to have a consistent signature across devices.
Many companies have had to turn to custom solutions to implement Outlook for Windows signatures that...
Log in
