2019年11月29日 星期五

The Pumpkin Index： Measuring the effects of partisanship on pie-eating

Daily chartMeasuring the effects of partisanship on pie-eating

Travelling to a county with a different political leaning shortens Thanksgiving

by 
THANKSGIVING is supposed to be a time for families to gather together, forget their differences and feast on turkey and pumpkin pie. The American Automobile Association expects 51m people to travel at least 50 miles to do so. With this in mind The Economist has created a pumpkin-pie pilgrimage index, a measure of how far people are prepared to go to celebrate Thanksgiving. Our index uses numbers provided by Teralytics, a Zurich-based startup that tracks people’s movements anonymously, sifting through data collected by mobile-phone masts. Using county-level data for a seven-day period over Thanksgiving 2016, we calculated distance travelled, journey time and the duration of stay.
The average American who celebrated Thanksgiving outside their home county left home at 3:40pm on Wednesday, travelled for 300 miles, arrived six hours later at their destination and then stayed for nearly three days. Unsurprisingly, people from counties whose residents travel the farthest tend to stay longer. Nonetheless there is still vast variation between counties. We grouped distance travelled, journey time and duration of stay together into an equally weighted index to rank the counties where people travel farthest and stay longest. Clallam county near Seattle comes top. Its residents travel 1,200 miles on average and stay for four days at their destination. At the other end of the scale is Macoupin county in Illinois, whose residents travel just 100 miles and stay for just 42 hours, on average.
張貼者： 於 沒有留言:

2019年11月24日 星期日

How Juul Sowed the Seeds of a Public Health Crisis

How Juul Sowed the Seeds of a Public Health Crisis


The vaping giant rushed to expand, targeted a generation of young nonsmokers and ignored evidence it was hooking teens
張貼者： 於 沒有留言:

2019年11月22日 星期五

分裂的美國 The Divided Soul of America ；America Divided


分裂的美國 The Divided Soul of America
導演：Jörg Daniel Hissen / 90' / 2018

英文
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF9f65Pxg0k

川普當選，將美國推進了一個嚴重分裂與充滿憤怒的新時代。一場文化戰爭正動搖美國這個全球霸權的未來走向，政黨政治已成為意識形態的戰場。一邊是以自由、平等、多元化為依歸的文化價值；另一邊，則是被資本主義與自由主義拋下的藍領階級。

政治分析家暨歷史學者湯瑪士‧法蘭克，把川普當選稱為「劇烈的反彈」，而且是從1968年起就開始的反對自由主義的聲浪；川普不是第一人，他只是完成了共和黨五十年前要做的事，他為共和黨贏得大多數白人藍領階級的票。

目前是失業礦工的羅伯特，居住在美國「聖經帶」地區，深信神造煤礦就是要讓人使用的，他是熱切的川普支持者，也是虔誠的浸信會教友。羅伯特的情況並非特例，有五分之一的美國人是福音派人士，而這些福音派信奉者成為川普的選票重要根基。儘管川普的道德形象毫不完美，不太吻合福音派的教義，但有超過8成美國福音派白人在2016年的美國總統選舉中支持川普。

哥倫比亞大學歷史學教授馬克‧里拉指出，「美國正同時經歷兩種革命，一個是由下而上的政治上的民粹革命，是由階級焦慮和部落主義所推動；另一方面也正在經歷和代表性及多元化有關的文化革命，這是由文化菁英所推動。」這兩種運動彼此有衝突，美國的自由主義者越是追求或延續這種文化革命，就越會激起底層部落主義式的反彈。

民粹主義是部落主義式的怨恨與經濟剝奪感的結合。美國工人階級覺得自己受到貶低和輕視，對於世道不公、階級不對等而憤憤不平。一般美國家庭的平均收入在過去十年來大幅減少，中產階級基本上已經消失了，貧富差距越來越嚴重。對許多美國人來說，「美國夢」成了難以企及的幻夢。

藝術家兼作家莫莉・卡拉巴普勒認為，因為全球化、自動化技術和不人道的資本主義，美國白人正受到經濟衰退之苦；並且，他們同時也感到自己至高無上的地位在流失，平等的概念使他們備受威脅。川普背後是一個共犯結構，來自福音派的財源，加上「白人優越主義」的撐腰，才創造了這頭「川普怪獸」。川普承諾要「讓美國再次偉大」，對某些人而言，這意味著「讓美國再次變白」。

號稱「民族大熔爐」的美國，正經歷著一場認同危機，分裂的兩邊能否重啟對話，或許才是決定美國是否能夠再次偉大的關鍵。

https://viewpoint.pts.org.tw/ptsdoc_video/%E5%88%86%E8%A3%82%E7%9A%84%E7%BE%8E%E5%9C%8B/


-----

Jump to navigationJump to search
America Divided
AmericaDivided.png
GenreDocumentary
Created by
Starring
Theme music composerJ. Period
Composer(s)Paul Brill
Country of originUnited States
Original language(s)English
No. of seasons2
No. of episodes12 (list of episodes)
Production
Executive producer(s)
Producer(s)
Running time34–59 minutes
Production company(s)
  • Act III Productions
  • Freedom Road Productions
  • FarWord Films
  • JustFilms
  • RadicalMedia
  • Divided Films
Release
Original networkEpix
Original releaseSeptember 30, 2016 –
May 25, 2018
External links
Official website
America Divided is an American documentary television series, created by Solly Granatstein, Lucian Read, and Richard Rowley, that premiered on September 30, 2016, on Epix.












































































https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3VYbFWsznI
張貼者： 於 沒有留言:

2019年11月21日 星期四

LA Has More Vacant Homes Than Homeless People, Report Finds

NPR
19小時
At least 36,000 homeless people live in the city of Los Angeles, but L.A. simultaneously has more than 41,000 empty housing units, according to a new report. (LAist/KPCC)
張貼者： 於 沒有留言:

美國嚴了；【前美国驻华大使芮效俭：《香港人权与民主法案》无力影响香港事态】。中國火了：耍嘴皮之外，又能怎樣？China fumes over U.S. rebuke： 'A powerful moment': Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act one step from becoming US law .China fumes over U.S. rebuke.


【前美国驻华大使芮效俭：《香港人权与民主法案》无力影响香港事态】前美国驻华大使芮效俭星期四在参加美中政策基金会在五月花饭店举办的年度晚宴前就 #香港问题 接受媒体采访时说，香港局势平息下来符合所有各方利益。针对美国国会通过的《香港人权与民主法案》，芮效俭说：“美国的这个法律对香港没有约束力。我认为国会的意图是好的。他们希望看到‘一国两制’得以维持并保持活力。我们必须认识到，目前真正的问题是中国大陆的干预，试图稳定局势。这会对‘一国两制’的安排造成非常严重的打击，这也不符合任何人的利益。因此我认为对国会通过这个法案做出过度反应是错误的。它真的无力影响香港的事态。“ https://www.voachinese.com/a/5177247.html








美國嚴了；中國火了：耍嘴皮之外，又能怎樣？

HONGKONGFP.COM|作者：HONG KONG FREE PRESS HKFP

'A powerful moment': Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act one step from becoming US law | Hong Kong Free Press HKFP
US legislation aimed at protecting civil rights in Hong Kong and punishing those deemed responsible for suppressing freedoms has reached its final stage ahead of being enacted. After the US Senate passed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act unanimously on Wednesday, the House of Representati...


China fumes over U.S. rebuke

Officials in Beijing are furious over a U.S. bill compelling the government to support Hong Kong protesters. Passed by Congress this week, it awaits President Trump’s signature.
The measure would require two things: sanctions on Chinese officials responsible for human rights abuses in the territory, and an annual review of Hong Kong’s special trade status with the U.S.
Mr. Trump promised in October to stay silent on the unrest in Hong Kong, but the bill offers leverage in securing a trade deal with China. This week, he said China wasn’t “stepping up” in trade talks, prompting China to affirm its focus on achieving progress toward a “Phase One” agreement.
Response: In an editorial, China’s state-owned People’s Daily described the bill as a “piece of waste paper” and a “serious provocation against the entire Chinese people.” Officials warned the country would take “strong counter-measures.”
Timing: The bill comes at a sensitive moment both for the trade talks and for Hong Kong. The territory is slowly stabilizing after weeks of escalating violence, but local elections this weekend — which may be canceled — could stir more unrest.
張貼者： 於 沒有留言:

NYT: Fiona Hill Testifies ‘Fictions’ on Ukraine Pushed by Trump Help Russia



Fiona Hill Testifies ‘Fictions’ on Ukraine Pushed by Trump Help Russia

A former top White House adviser denounced a theory embraced by Mr. Trump that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 elections, calling it a “fiction” planted by Russia.
Video
0:00/3:21
TRANSCRIPT

The Trump Impeachment Hearing Highlights So Far

Fiona Hill, the former top Russia expert on the National Security Council, and David Holmes, an aide in the United States Embassy in Kyiv, are testifying before the House Intelligence Committee.

“Beginning in March 2019, the situation at the embassy and in Ukraine changed dramatically. Specifically, the three priorities of security, economy and justice, and our support for Ukrainian democratic resistance to Russian aggression, became overshadowed by a political agenda promoted by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and a cadre of officials operating with a direct channel to the White House. While Ambassador Sondland’s phone was not on speaker phone, I could hear the president’s voice through the earpiece of the phone. The president’s voice was loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume. I heard Ambassador Sondland greet the president and explain he was calling from Kyiv. I heard President Trump then clarify that Ambassador Sondland was in Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland replied, yes, he was in Ukraine, and went on to state that President Zelensky quote, ‘loves your ass.’ I then heard President Trump ask: ‘So he’s going to do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘he’s going to do it,’ adding that President Zelensky will do ‘anything you ask him to do.’ Even though I did not take notes of these statements, I have a clear recollection that these statements were made. I believe that my colleagues who were sitting at the table also knew that Ambassador Sondland was speaking with the president.” “Based on questions and statements I’ve heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country — and that perhaps, somehow for some reason, Ukraine did. This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves. The unfortunate truth is that Russia was the foreign power that systematically attacked our democratic institutions in 2016. I continue to believe that we need to seek ways of stabilizing our relationship with Moscow even as we counter their efforts to harm us. Right now, Russia’s security services and their proxies have geared up to repeat their interference in the 2020 election. We are running out of time to stop them. In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests. And I refuse to be part of an effort to legitimize an alternate narrative that the Ukrainian government is a U.S. adversary and that Ukraine, not Russia, attacked us in 2016. These fictions are harmful even if they’re deployed for purely domestic political purposes. President Putin and the Russian security services operate like a super PAC. They deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives.” “Although the hold on the security assistance may have been lifted, there are still things they wanted that they weren’t getting, including a meeting with the president in the Oval Office. So — and I think that continues to this day, I think they’re being very careful. They still need us.” “Obviously what Mr. Giuliani was saying was pretty explosive in any case. He was frequently on television making quite incendiary remarks about everyone involved in this, and that he was clearly pushing forward issues and ideas that would, you know, probably come back to haunt us. And in fact, I think that that’s where we are today. I had to go to the lawyers, to John Eisenberg, our senior counsel for the National Security Council, to basically say, ‘You tell Eisenberg,’ Ambassador Bolton told me, ‘that I am not part of this whatever drug deal that Mulvaney and Sondland are cooking up.’”
3:20The Trump Impeachment Hearing Highlights So Far
Fiona Hill, the former top Russia expert on the National Security Council, and David Holmes, an aide in the United States Embassy in Kyiv, are testifying before the House Intelligence Committee.CreditCredit...Erin Schaff/The New York Times
WASHINGTON — The White House’s former top Europe and Russia expert sharply denounced what she called a “fictional narrative” embraced by President Trump and his Republican allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 elections, testifying that the claim at the center of the impeachment inquiry was a fabrication by Moscow that had harmed the United States.
Testifying on the final day of the week’s public impeachment hearings, the expert, Fiona Hill, tied Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to a dangerous effort by Russia to sow political divisions in the United States and undercut American diplomacy. Her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee was an implicit rebuke to the president, suggesting that when he pressed Ukraine to investigate the theory that Kyiv rather than Moscow undertook a concerted campaign to meddle in the 2016 campaign, he was playing into Russia’s hands for his own political gain.
Dr. Hill’s account of how Mr. Trump’s team carried out what she called a “domestic political errand” that diverged from his own administration’s foreign policy amounted to sharp — albeit indirect — criticism of the president she served, and it brought home the grave national security consequences of the effort.
“These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes,” said Dr. Hill, the British-born daughter of a coal miner who became a United States citizen and co-wrote a length book analyzing the psyche of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
The Russians, she said, “deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives. When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy.”
Both Dr. Hill and David Holmes, a top aide in the United States Embassy in Kyiv, testified in detail about what they understood to be a concerted campaign by the president and his allies, led by Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, to condition a White House meeting for Ukraine’s president on his announcement of investigations that Mr. Trump wanted into the 2016 election claim and of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
Image
Credit...T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times
“Investigations for a meeting,” is how Dr. Hill described her understanding of the deal laid out by the president’s inner circle, including Mr. Giuliani, Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, and Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff.
Under questioning from the top Republican counsel on the House Intelligence Committee, Dr. Hill said she confronted Mr. Sondland in July about his failure to coordinate with other members of the administration on his actions regarding Ukraine. She understood only later that Mr. Sondland was part of a group of officials — along with Mr. Mulvaney and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — who were “being involved in a domestic political errand, and we were being involved in national security, foreign policy — and those two things had just diverged.”tinue reading the main story
Dr. Hill said she had told Mr. Sondland at the time that, “this is all going to blow up.”
Mr. Holmes said it was his “clear understanding” by the end of August that Mr. Trump had frozen $391 million in vital security aid to pressure Ukraine to commit to announcing an investigation into Mr. Biden and his family.
Their testimony came as Democrats sought to pull back the focus of the impeachment proceedings at the end of two weeks of detail-heavy hearings focused on White House meetings, suspended security assistance for Ukraine, diplomatic exchanges and plenty of obscure Ukrainian names. But they also notched additional new information that could help bolster their case.
Republicans, knowing that Dr. Hill’s criticism was coming, used their opening remarks to try to blunt the attacks. Representative Devin Nunes of California, the panel’s top Republican, said that his party did not doubt Russia’s actions in 2016, but were open to a broader focus that Democrats were not.
“Needless to say, it’s entirely possible for two separate nations to engage in election meddling at the same time, and Republicans believe we should take meddling seriously by all foreign countries,” Mr. Nunes said.
In 2017, American intelligence officials released a report concluding that Mr. Putin ordered a state-sponsored campaign to try to influence the 2016 presidential election. No evidence has emerged that there was a similar effort by Ukraine.
Mr. Trump, who has responded to the proceedings in real time, took shots at Mr. Holmes Thursday morning, and his allies went after Dr. Hill as well. As Mr. Holmes testified, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that there was no way he could have heard what he claimed to have picked up the cellphone conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland.
Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, wrote on Twitter that Dr. Hill only had an “OPINION” to offer, not firsthand knowledge. Republicans have dismissed multiple witnesses as unelected bureaucrats merely second-guessing the president’s policy positions.
Mr. Holmes said his assessment came after he drafted and sent a cable to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on behalf of William B. Taylor Jr., the top American diplomat in Ukraine, attempting to explain the importance of the security assistance to Ukraine.
Image
Credit...T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times
“By this point,” Mr. Holmes said, “my clear impression was that the security assistance hold was likely intended by the president either as an expression of dissatisfaction with the Ukrainians who had not yet agreed to the Burisma/Biden investigation or as an effort to increase the pressure on them to do so.”
Burisma is a Ukrainian energy company that employed Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son, on its board.
Mr. Holmes also offered a detailed account of a phone call he overheard between Mr. Trump and Gordon D. Sondland, his ambassador to the European Union, in Kyiv in late July. The call took place a day after Mr. Trump directly asked Mr. Zelensky for the investigations.
Mr. Holmes said he could overhear the president ask Mr. Sondland if Mr. Zelensky would conduct the inquiries he sought. Mr. Sondland assured him “he’s going to do it,” and that the Ukrainian leader would do “anything you ask him to.” Afterward, Mr. Holmes testified that the ambassador told him Mr. Trump did not care for Ukraine but only for the “big things” like the investigations.
A day after Mr. Sondland laid out an extensive campaign to secure the political investigations, both witnesses said they had zero doubt about what Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani were after. Dr. Hill and Mr. Holmes both testified that references to investigating Burisma by Mr. Giuliani and other government officials were, in Dr. Hill’s words, “code for the Bidens.”
Asked by the Democratic counsel for the Intelligence Committee whether “anyone involved in Ukraine matters in the spring and summer would understand that as well,” Mr. Holmes had a one-word answer: “Yes.”
Mr. Sondland and Kurt D. Volker, the former special envoy to Ukraine, both said under oath this week that for many months they believed talk of Burisma was merely a reference to Mr. Trump’s interest in eliminating rampant corruption in Ukraine, given the company’s history.
Dr. Hill also offered the most precise account to date of an awkward White House meeting with Ukrainian officials on July 10 that ended abruptly after Mr. Sondland told the visiting officials that they would need to commit to investigations Mr. Trump sought before getting a meeting with the president.
John R. Bolton, then the national security adviser, stiffened visibly and sat back in his chair when Mr. Sondland made the comment, apparently so disturbed by it that he quickly cut off the meeting, she said. After the meeting ended, Mr. Sondland explained precisely what he was up to, Dr. Hill testified, referencing a deal with Mr. Mulvaney.
“That he had an agreement with chief of staff Mulvaney that in return for investigations, this meeting would get scheduled,” she said.
Image
Credit...Erin Schaff/The New York Times
Thursday’s session capped two marathon weeks on investigative impeachment hearings, the first in two decades, and only the third such proceedings in modern history. In public sessions by turns gripping and grinding, the House Intelligence Committee has heard from a dozen witnesses who described how Mr. Trump and his allies inside and outside the government shunted aside official American policy toward Ukraine in favor of an unorthodox, politically charged campaign to secure two investigations that Mr. Trump sought.  ntinue reading the main story
 former ambassador to Ukraine rom her post because she ran afoul of Mr. Giuliani and his allies. The seasoned diplomat who reluctantly replaced her said he watched, distraught, as the entire United States relationship with Ukraine was staked on the investigations, with Ukrainian lives and American foreign policy interests as collateral damage. Then on Wednesday, Mr. Sondland testified in no uncertain terms that there had been a clear “quid pro quo” at the highest levels of Mr. Trump’s government linking a White House meeting for Mr. Zelensky to investigations — and that everyone had known it.Other witnesses from the White House, State Department and Defense Department spoke of unanimous opposition to Mr. Trump’s decision to freeze the security assistance, and how they raised questions about the legality of withholding money appropriated by Congress. One of them, Laura Cooper, testified that Ukraine began inquiring about the assistance on July 25, a month earlier than Republicans have insisted they knew, on the very same day of Mr. Trump’s call with Mr. Zelensky.
“In the coming days, Congress will determine what response is appropriate,” Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the Intelligence Committee chairman, said as he opened Thursday’s hearing. “It will be up to us to decide, whether those acts are compatible with the office of the presidency.”
As lawmakers leave town for the Thanksgiving holiday, it appears increasingly inevitable that the 116th Congress will impeach the president for only the third time in American history. The question is on what timetable they will proceed giving the dwindling number of legislative days and competing priorities before them.
The Impeachment Hearings
Fiona Hill Viewed Serving Trump as Risky. Now She’s an Impeachment Witness.
What We’ve Learned From Hill and Holmes’s Impeachment Testimony
Nicholas Fandos is a national reporter based in the Washington bureau. He has covered Congress since 2017 and is part of a team of reporters who have chronicled investigations by the Justice Department and Congress into President Trump and his administration. @npfandos
Michael D. Shear is a White House correspondent. He previously worked at The Washington Post and was a member of their Pulitzer Prize-winning team that covered the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007. @shearm

More in Politics


張貼者： 於 沒有留言:
訂閱： 文章 (Atom)