Select Page
Balancing Economics, Public Health and Psychology

Balancing Economics, Public Health and Psychology

by | May 20, 2020 | Economics, Health & Medicine, World Events | 0 comments

I’d like to believe most people don’t need to read articles like this one in order to understand common sense and perspective. I’d like to.

What’s about to happen this week is based in gigantic proportion on economics. That’s a super valid concern. It deserves some kind of response. But, it should NOT be a significant signal about the reduction of public heath risk to widespread Covid infection.
A reasonable, common sense approach to understanding what the risk reality is right now in this country lies not in solely listening to commercially funded TV or radio news programs, most politicians, vociferous family members, friends, or even, business owners.
The intelligent and rational way to decide when, where, how, and why all of us re-open our own lives, is by reading and understanding transmission rates through public health sources, publicly funded news outlets, respected epidemiologists, science and medical professionals, closely studying and following the arc so far.
We all want to return to normalcy, but this crack of daylight in the wall of sequestering, should not be mistaken for any meaningful symbol of all clear. Not by a long shot. NOT by a long shot.
If you’re on the fence, get off it by reading and sourcing good info, data and opinions, as far away as possible from vested interests, or anyone who has a bone to pick for/against political entities. Let knowledge and fact be your guide, not pressure by friends, family, retailers, politicians, or a weakness of will.
This is a public health issue. It is your health issue. It is my health issue. This is the priority for where it should begin and end.

MB

Article below reprinted from Business Insider

How to decide if it’s worth the risk to return to malls, gyms, salons, and more as states reopen but experts remain cautious.

AP Photo/David J. Phillip

  • Shops, restaurants, salons, gyms, and even bowling alleys are opening across the US as states loosen their shelter in place orders.

  • Experts say it is important to realize that returning to businesses can still be risky, and answers on safety are far from black and white.

  • You can determine risk by weighing factors such as if you can stay six feet away from others, if everyone is wearing masks, and what the prevalence of the coronavirus is in your area.

  • Different types of businesses come with different risks, meaning that concerns about returning to restaurants, stores, salons, and gyms need to be examined separately and together.

As businesses reopen across America, many people are confused about what exactly is safe and what isn’t.

Experts say that just because restaurants, stores, and even nail salons are open, does not mean that they are necessarily safe to visit. Instead, it means that people have the ability to choose if they want to take the risk of returning.

“The one thing we do know is the virus is still out there,” said Dr. Celeste Monforton, a lecturer in public health at Texas State University. “When some governor said, May 1, we’re opening things up — It’s not like the virus had a calendar and said, okay, I’m going underground again.”

Monforton and Dr. Jaimie Meyer, an assistant professor of medicine at Yale School of Medicine, told Business Insider that they understand why people are confused, as the CDC, the White House, and state governments have released different and sometimes conflicting guidelines.

AP Photo/LM Otero

Both Meyer and Monforton also understand the economic argument for businesses to reopen. And, neither believes everyone should avoid all businesses, all the time.

“I almost would never say anything in absolute, because I think when you say things like that, people just tune out,”  Meyer said. “It’s too hard for people to lose that much control over their lives.”

However, Meyer says people should be aware of COVID-19 cases and the risk of infection in their communities, not simply if it is legal or not for businesses to reopen. While different people have different tolerances for risk, Meyer says she personally is advising family and friends to err on the side of caution.

“There are so many unknowns here,” Meyer said. “Everything that I do, I ask myself, if I got sick from doing this, was it really worth it?”

Certain factors can help determine if a business is safe.

AP Photo/David J. Phillip

As states reopen, these experts say that risks exist on a spectrum.

Meyer and Monforton resisted saying any type of business was definitively more risky than others. For example, a bowling alley where there is constant cleaning and social distancing could actually be safer than a grocery store that hasn’t added any new safety measures since the pandemic.

Instead, there are a few big-picture factors you can use to determine if a business is safer — though not 100% risk-free — to visit.

Questions that can help determine how risky it is to visit a business include: 

  • Can you stay at least six feet away from other people in the space?
  • Is everyone wearing masks? Wearing a mask doesn’t necessarily prevent you from catching the coronavirus — but other people wearing masks reduces the likelihood they will spread it.
  • Can you stay outside or minimize your time indoors?
  • Are workers regularly cleaning the space?
  • Are employees and customers able to wash their hands?
  • Have the number of COVID-19 cases in your community decreased over the last two weeks?
  • Is there limited community spread of the coronavirus in your area?

If you can answer “yes” to all of these questions, there is less of a risk of catching the coronavirus, whether you are considering visiting a restaurant or a mall.

You can also take steps, such as washing your hands and wearing a mask, to make your community safer even when businesses and governments do not require it.

Waiting a few more weeks to go shopping or get your nails done could also help everyone understand the situation better.

AP Photo/LM Otero

At this point, Meyer is encouraging people to behave as if everyone in public is infected with the coronavirus and act accordingly — maintain six feet of distance, wear a mask, and wash your hands regularly if you’re leaving your house.

“If you don’t practice social distancing and hand washing and wear masks, we’re going to experience a major setback and there will be a second wave,” Meyer said.

Still, planning to stay inside for 18 months is a daunting idea.

Instead, Monforton says that she is encouraging people to take things week by week. Every week, scientists and healthcare professionals find out more about the coronavirus. Even one extra week of knowledge can help customers and business owners make better decisions as states reopen.

“We’re going to learn a lot in the next couple of weeks and that’s going to be continuing to inform people about the risk — whether the risk is higher than we expected when things opened up [or] less than we expected,” Monforton said.

Older people and those with preexisting conditions should take more steps to reduce their risk, avoiding activities that people with a higher tolerance for risk may be willing to participate in. Everyone should understand that when they make a nonessential trip to a store, restaurant, or gym, it might not only impact them — if they haven’t been tested recently, they could unknowingly spread the coronavirus in their community as an asymptomatic carrier.

While no specific type of business is necessarily riskier or safer than others, we already know that each category carries different types of risks.

Here is a breakdown of some of the risks that come with different types of businesses, as well as some ways a risky situation can become safer.

Restaurants can be risky, but there are ways to support your favorite spot without endangering yourself.

AP Photo/Russ Bynum

The good news for restaurants is that experts say even if a worker coughs or sneezes directly in your food, you won’t catch coronavirus from eating the meal.

The bad news is that customers crowding into a restaurant or bar could put everyone at risk of catching the coronavirus. Social distancing can be difficult for workers in kitchens. Many restaurants will not be able to maintain necessary social distancing while also bringing in as many customers as they did pre-coronavirus.

The National Restaurant Association has extensive guidance on how restaurants can reopen relatively safely.

These adjustments could make restaurants safer: 

  • Serving food via drive-thru, takeout, or delivery.
  • Adding more sidewalk and curbside pick-up options.
  • Adding outdoor dining.
  • Reducing the number of tables.
  • Requiring reservations to limit the number of customers.
  • Training staff to monitor for symptoms.

Shopping malls and stores will need to limit how many people are allowed in.

AP Photo/LM Otero

Monforton says she expects stores of all types to follow grocers’ blueprints. Even if Macy’s is selling dresses instead of shoes, things like plexiglass barriers, new cleaning routines, and hand sanitizing stations will transfer over.

Malls create different issues, as customers are likely to visit several stores during one trip. This can make it more difficult to limit how many people enter a store, something that is crucial for social distancing.

Ultimately, the biggest differences between essential and nonessential stores is what they’re selling — not the risk levels. Meyer is encouraging friends and family to avoid unnecessary risks, such as shopping for nonessentials. But, retailers are trying to accommodate those willing to take the risk that is associated with any type of shopping trip.

The National Retail Federation has a full guide for what stores should do to reopen.

Here are some changes that stores can make to become safer to visit: 

  • Limiting how many people are allowed inside to allow for social distancing.
  • Promote “contactless” shopping, such as self-checkout and curbside pick up.
  • Ban people from testing beauty products, unless they are using single-use testers.
  • Stopping services such as alterations and ear piercing.

Risks associated with working out make gyms and fitness centers especially dangerous.

Maranie Staab/Reuters

Meyer said that people should be “especially cautious” at gyms, fitness centers, and other places where people work out as businesses reopen.

“When people are working out and breathing hard, they are more likely to transmit droplets,” which could spread the coronavirus, Meyer said.

This makes cleaning practices and social distancing even more important. So, if you’re willing to take the risk of returning to work out, make sure you can stay at least six feet away from other people and that the business has a strict cleaning schedule in place.

How fitness studios and gyms can make things safer: 

  • Offer virtual classes, instead of having people attend classes in person.
  • Limiting the size of classes or providing one-on-one classes.
  • Offering outdoor workouts.
  • Taking people’s temperatures and making sure they don’t have symptoms before entering a studio or gym.
  • Having people bring their own equipment, such as yoga mats and weights.
  • Requiring people to wear masks while working out.

Salons and barbershops make it difficult to social distance.

Associated Press

One of the biggest risks associated with barbershops, as well as hair and nail salons, is that the nature of the activity makes it impossible to keep six feet in between people.

“If you’re one of these high-risk individuals … it’s probably not safe yet,” even with changes, Meyer said.

The American Industrial Hygiene Association acknowledged that nail and hair salons have been “very challenged” during the pandemic in their guidelines for reopening.

A few ways salons and barbershops can make things safer: 

  • Disinfecting between visitors.
  • Limiting how many people are inside the salon or shop at one time.
  • Employees and customers should wear masks and gloves.
  • Closing the reception area and having people wait outside until it is time for their appointment.

Bowling alleys, arcades, and other interactive indoor spaces are extremely risky.

AP Photo/Paul Newberry

Georgia’s decision to allow bowling alleys to reopen raised some eyebrows. 

“Entertainment is important and, for many people, perhaps bowling alleys are very important entertainment,” Meyer said.

However, Meyer continued, the problem with bowling alleys, arcades, and similar businesses is that they are closed in and high-touch.

In a bowling alley, you are going to be in an enclosed space with other people for a significant period of time, which is risky in and of itself. Additionally, you are touching things that a lot of other people are touching. It is basically impossible to sanitize items like bowling balls every time they touch people’s hands or other potentially contaminated spaces.

At this point in time, places like bowling alleys — as well as anywhere with crowds of people — are high on the list of places to stay away from if you want to avoid catching COVID-19.

Bowling alleys are never going to be the safest choice. Here is how they can be safer:

  • Constant sanitation.
  • Making people bring their own balls.
  • Having people wear masks.
  • Requiring people to stay six feet away from each other.
Business Insider, Kate Taylor, May. 15, 2020, 07:24 PM
The Corona Virus is Novel. The Global Threat Is Not.

The Corona Virus is Novel. The Global Threat Is Not.

by | Mar 26, 2020 | Books & Talks, Health & Medicine, World Events | 0 comments

Here is Bill Gates from 2015.

“Bill Gates is worth 96 billion dollars. He has been personally funding world healthcare for most of his middle life, but he alone is not capable of funding the trillion dollar + government initiative required to fight these killer virus pandemics. That is, and always has been, the responsibility of the government and individual healthcare and research industries. Now we will pay and hopefully learn our lesson.

Or, will we?

Antibiotics Aren’t the Problem. People Are.

Antibiotics Aren’t the Problem. People Are.

by | Apr 15, 2019 | Environment & Ecology, Government & Law, History, Politics, World Events | 0 comments

In a Poor Kenyan Community, Cheap Antibiotics Fuel Deadly Drug-Resistant Infections

Overuse of the medicines is not just a problem in rich countries. Throughout the developing world antibiotics are dispensed with no prescription required.

Try your luck at writing a caption for this photograph. Better yet, try an analysis of it.

The story headline is bad. The story is bad. On a smaller scale though, I am struck by the photograph of the man on the cell phone. He’s smiling as we walks across mountains of garbage where (he, and his?) people live, raise children, and go about daily living.

In this staggering story, Kenya is referred to as an emerg-ing economy. A develop-ing country. I’ve added the hyphens because in my eyes, as I have read and witnessed this story play out for decades, it is my conclusion, that too many countries in Africa have not emerged from anything. Media and scholars try to be polite and avoid confrontation by using the “ing” after the country’s name’s, because to label them as un-developed, is a smear. But, I don’t see any other way to put it. It is a smear. It is worse. It is atrocious to witness these realities in the modern age of developed economies all around the planet. Its not just Africa. Its in Asia, South America, and to a lesser extent, small pockets in our own country. But nothing compares with this. What goes on here is astounding, and its been going on as long as I have been alive. There’s no emerging. There’s no developing. Any development or emerging that’s going on is on such a small incremental basis, that its no match to the magnitude of the scourge.

Africa is a complex quagmire of dueling, feuding, conflicted, often rudderless countries, who move in and out of exploitative control of its peoples from one masquerading despot to another. I am not worthy to shine a true scholar’s shoes on this subject, but I do know what I see, or don’t see. I do see serious health consequences bordering on the continent of  a nationwide crisis. I don’t see sustained action of several African countries united to work together. Globally, its the same story. Since decolonization, Africa has not been able to rise out of its troubled history of slavery and European exploitation. Yet, they affect us when we stop and take notice when an article like this one lands in front of our eyes. >MB

Link to full article:

In a Poor Kenyan Community, Cheap Antibiotics Fuel Deadly Drug-Resistant Infections

What Is Brexit?

What Is Brexit?

by | Mar 22, 2019 | Politics, World Events | 0 comments

Oh, alright! Here’s what you need to know. Now you can have a conversation with somebody about this mess, and seem all…I dunno…intelligent? Happy now?

But, if you really want to know what the deal is, according to me, make sure you read my thoughts about this…what did I call it…MESS, from my post from 12/12/2018. Then, you’ll really be intelligent!

What Is Brexit? A Simple Guide to Why It Matters and What Happens Next

By BENJAMIN MUELLER, NYTimes

With the European Union agreeing to extend the deadline for Britain’s withdrawal from the bloc, the government remains in crisis, if with a bit more time to find a way forward. The old deadline of March 29 has now been pushed to at least April 12. Next week is certain to be tumultuous in Parliament.

 

Outside Parliament, companies are jumping ship. Fears of medicine shortages are rising. Prime Minister Theresa May has suffered two humiliating defeats over her withdrawal plan and the calls for her to resign are growing louder.

 

The government is now facing its biggest peacetime decision in decades. Almost every option remains on the table, from a daringly complete break with Europe to abandoning Brexit altogether.

 

What ultimately emerges could determine the shape of Britain and its place in the world for decades. Following is a basic guide to Brexit, what it is, how it developed into the mess it is today and how it could ultimately be resolved.

 

What is Brexit?

 

A portmanteau of the words “Britain” and “exit,” Brexit is shorthand for Britain’s split from the European Union, changing its relationship to the bloc on trade, security and migration.

 

Britain has been debating the pros and cons of membership in a European community of nations almost from the moment the idea was broached. (It held its first referendum on membership in 1975, less than three years after it joined.) In 2013, Prime Minister David Cameron promised a national referendum on European Union membership with the idea of settling the question once and for all. The options it would offer were Remain and Leave, and Mr. Cameron was convinced that Remain would win handily.

 

On June 23, 2016, as a refugee crisis made migration a subject of political rage across Europe and among accusations of lies and fraudulent tactics on the Leave side, Britons voted for a hazily defined Brexit by 52 percent to 48 percent.

 

Not only did that not settle the debate, but it saved for another day the tangled question of what should come next. Now, that day may finally be arriving.

 

How did Britain vote?

 

England and Wales voted for Brexit, overcoming support to remain in the European Union in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland. See a detailed map of the vote.

 

A detailed map of results of the Brexit vote

Why is it such a big deal?

 

Europe is Britain’s most important export market and its biggest source of foreign investment, and being in the bloc has helped London cement its position as a global financial center. Every day, it seems, a major business announces or threatens plans to leave Britain after it quits the European Union, including Airbus, which employs 14,000 people and supports more than 100,000 other jobs.

 

The government expects the country’s economy to grow anywhere from 4 to 9 percent less than it would inside the bloc over the next 15 years, depending on how it leaves.

 

Mrs. May has promised that Brexit will end free movement, the right of people from elsewhere in Europe to move to Britain and vice versa. That is a triumph for some working-class people who saw immigration as a threat to their jobs, but dispiriting for young Britons hoping to study or work abroad.

 

What’s holding it up?

 

Undoing 46 years of economic integration in one stroke was never going to be easy, and the Brexit process has been bedeviled by the same divisions that led to the referendum in the first place. Both Britain’s main parties, the governing Conservatives and the Labour opposition, are divided over what to do, leaving Parliament so factionalized that there may be no coherent plan most lawmakers would back.

 

Mrs. May spent 18 months negotiating a divorce deal with the European Union, shedding one cabinet minister after another in the process. But when she presented the plan to Parliament in January, it was rejected by a historic margin of 230 votes. When she tried again in March, she fared less badly, but the pact was still soundly defeated, 391 to 242.

 

We keep hearing about the
Irish border. What’s that about?

 

The single greatest hangup is the question of Britain’s only land border with the European Union: the invisible line between Ireland, another member state of the bloc, and Northern Ireland, which remains part of the United Kingdom.

 

Mrs. May and her Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar, want to keep checkpoints from going up at the border; that’s a crucial part of the Good Friday Agreement, which brought respite from decades of violence in Northern Ireland.

 

But the method she agreed for guaranteeing that — called “the backstop” — has alienated just about everyone.

 

The backstop would keep the whole United Kingdom in a temporary trading relationship with Europe until a final deal avoiding a hard border could be agreed, something that hard-line Brexiteers fear would never happen. And it would bind Northern Ireland to even more European rules, to the dismay of those who reject any regulatory differences between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. (They include the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, whose 10 lawmakers give Mrs. May her parliamentary majority.)

 

Why is Brexit in the news?

 

Just about the only clear decision Britain has made on Brexit since the 2016 referendum was to give formal notice to quit under Article 50 of the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty, a legal process setting it on a two-year path to departure. That happened on March 28, 2017, which meant that this coming March 29 was initially set as the formal divorce date. Now that has been moved to April 12 — or May 22 if Parliament votes for Mrs. May’s deal next week, to give time to pass the other legislation it would require.

 

But Mrs. May and her government have yet to find a way to overcome seemingly impossible parliamentary arithmetic and get lawmakers to back her agreement with European leaders. The fantasy that Brexit would be easy is crumbling, and lawmakers who made lofty promises to their constituents are having to face the hard reality of a vote.

 

So far, Parliament has decisively knocked down Mrs. May’s deal, but also decided against removing her from power entirely. Mrs. May has yet to find a problem-free way forward. She could tack to the center by committing to a permanent trading relationship with Europe — a customs union — that would do away with tariffs and quotas. That way, she would solve the Irish border dilemma and possibly win some votes from opposition Labour lawmakers.

 

But that would also risk splitting her own Conservative Party, which she wants to avoid at all costs. So she has instead tried to win over right-wing lawmakers in her own party by acceding to their demand for measures that would risk anger in Brussels and a hard border in Ireland. Toward that end, she won some concessions from the European Union on the Irish border, but it has not been nearly enough to change the minds of a meaningful number of people in her own party.

 

Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, who has worked hard not to commit his party to a distinct course on Brexit, has expressed a willingness to back a second referendum under certain circumstances.

 

What comes next?

 

Mrs. May is now basically cornered. She wanted to bring her withdrawal plan for a third vote in Parliament, only to be unexpectedly denied by the House of Commons speaker, John Bercow.

 

Mr. Bercow, citing ancient precedent, said it would violate parliamentary rules to present the same legislation for another vote in the same parliamentary session, unless it had been substantially changed.

 

Mrs. May now hopes the extra time approved by the European Union will allow that third vote to happen (even if few analysts believe it will pass).

 

The other question is whether Parliament will finally take over the process. Earlier this month, lawmakers narrowly voted down an amendment that would have given Parliament the power to hold votes on other possible scenarios to find if there was a majority for a softer Brexit.

 

No one knows how things will turn out. Hard-line Brexiteers, who have been seeking a no-deal exit, may still come around to Mrs. May’s deal if they feel it is their only chance to achieve Brexit.

 

They fear that if nothing is approved by new April deadline, the government could be forced to seek a much longer extension on the withdrawal date – which could give backers of a second referendum time to build support for what currently seems a long-shot option. That could end in Britons reversing their decision to leave the European Union altogether.

 

There are other possibilities, too, like a general election that could put Mrs. May on more solid footing in Parliament — or lead to a government led by Mr. Corbyn that might negotiate a soft Brexit deal that would keep Britain closer to the bloc.

 

One thing is certain: It is a mess.

 

Visit our more detailed guide to what could happen next.

 

A more in-depth guide to what could happen next

 

No Process. No Progress

No Process. No Progress

by | Dec 12, 2018 | Politics, World Events | 0 comments

It certainly is true that Brexit, and the relationship with the EU is complicated. But, the reasons why this leave/don’t leave conflict has become a two year long fiasco mess that it is today, is not as complicated.

The general public, the voting masses of citizens, the vast electorate, the rank and file, the mainstream who hold ordinary jobs, many who struggle to provide, survive, and most importantly, do not own a life of politics, all too often fail to study a societal problem to the depths it requires.

Ignorance, naïveté, laziness, misguided trust, or, even given proper analysis, just flawed reasoning, all fill the bucket of excuses that explains these events.

Combine these habitual very human shortfalls with millions of impassioned, clashing opinions, and you get a vortex of downward spiraling conflicts that drags everything into it.

Politicians, government legislators, for all their flaws, their corruption, their weaknesses, their lies, and their greed, are genuinely driven, dedicated individuals, who have a very specific job to do. Research, study, and analyze a problem or situation, and form an informed opinion of action to address that situation or problem. Whether their ultimate position serves them, or their constituents selfishly, or with a measure of greater good thinking, is besides the point.

The definition, or outcome, of right or wrong is not relevant. The point is, there was a very specific, step by step process that is undertaken to help make a decision, take a stand, or propose a solution to the situation or problem.

In the UK, as in the U.S., and increasingly, around the world, the citizenry aggregate, is unwilling, uncommitted, to put the same work into understanding and executing this same process before they present their own opinions.

Until this changes, there will be more crisis and havoc before there is resolution and stability.

MB

Theresa May Survives Leadership Challenge, but Brexit Plan Is Still in Peril

Two and a half years after Britain’s referendum on whether to leave the European Union, the country remains divided. We met with voters on both sides of the debate — those who voted to leave and now feel betrayed, and those campaigning for a second referendum

By Stephen Castle, NYTimes

But the victory celebration, if any, is likely to be short-lived.

While Mrs. May survived to fight another day, the future of her stalled plan to leave the European Union looked bleaker than ever.

She still lacks the votes in Parliament to pass it. She stands little chance of winning the concessions from Europe that she needs to break the logjam.

And the surprisingly strong vote against her within her own party underscores the difficulty she faces in winning approval for any plan for Britain to leave Europe, or Brexit, as the deadline for withdrawal looms.

For one moment, however, after a week of humiliating setbacks, the prime minister could savor her win.

Prime Minister Theresa May outside 10 Downing Street after she survived a confidence vote on Wednesday.

“Here is our renewed mission,” she said outside her offices at 10 Downing Street after the vote on Wednesday. “Delivering the Brexit that people voted for, bringing the country back together and building a country that truly works for everyone.”

But even that moment was tempered by loss.

Mrs. May won the vote only after promising that she would step aside soon after the Brexit agonies were over, according to reports from a meeting of Conservative Party lawmakers preceding the vote. That pledge removed the generally unwelcome possibility that she would stand as party leader in the next general election.

Mrs. May, said George Freeman, a Conservative lawmaker, had made clear “that she has listened, heard and respects the will of the party that once she has delivered an orderly Brexit, she will step aside for the election of a new leader.”

In the vote on Wednesday, on a confidence motion called by her own Conservative Party, Mrs. May won the support of 200 Conservative lawmakers, while 117 voted against her. The protest vote exceeded many forecasts, and is expected to compound her difficulties in Parliament, where her enemies were already pressuring her.

“This was a terrible result for the prime minister,” said Jacob Rees-Mogg, a leader of the hard-line pro-Brexit faction.

The vote does give her some breathing room. Under the Conservative Party’s rules, she cannot be challenged again by her own lawmakers for another year, which at least offers some stability for moving the Brexit plan forward. Had she lost, the Conservatives would have been thrust into a divisive, drawn-out process that would have stretched well into the next month.

Graham Brady, the chairman of the 1922 committee, the body that represents Conservative backbenchers, announcing that Theresa May survived the confidence vote.

The delay would have threatened the country’s ability to reach a deal by the March deadline, potentially resulting in the messy prospect of a no-deal Brexit.

Nevertheless the victory came at a price, laying bare the opposition within her own party ranks to Mrs. May, who leads a government that has no parliamentary majority.

The confidence vote was called after weeks of discord when at least 48 Conservative lawmakers submitted the letters of protest required to force it. Mrs. May canceled a trip to Dublin where she had hoped to talk to her Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar, about changes that might help build support in the British Parliament for her Brexit proposals.

But it had already been clear that she was in deep political trouble, battered from multiple directions by her management of the European Union withdrawal. In particular, many hard-line Brexit supporters within her party believed she was not making a complete enough break with the bloc.

In recent days, she suffered two embarrassing setbacks. Last week, the House of Commons voted her government in contempt of Parliament — the first time any prime minister had been censured in that way — for failing to release the advice her government’s lawyers had given on Brexit.

And on Monday, she postponed a vote on the Brexit agreement she had negotiated with the European Union, acknowledging that it stood to be defeated by “a significant margin.” In fact, lawmakers say, views on the topic, which has dominated British politics for nearly three years, are so fragmented that no approach has majority support in Parliament, and probably not even among Conservatives.

May’s Brexit Deal Is Probably Still Going to Fail. What Happens Then?

Nobody knows, really. But these are the likeliest scenarios.

Mrs. May argued Wednesday morning that the only beneficiaries of a vote of no confidence would be the opposition Labour Party.

Having survived it, she now faces an uphill task to garner sufficient support for her withdrawal agreement with the European Union, a lengthy legal document that Brussels has warned is the only deal on the table.

John Springford, deputy director of the Center for European Reform, a London-based research institute, said that the size of the vote against her “is an even clearer signal that she won’t be able to get her deal through Parliament, and makes it even more likely that when she puts the deal to the vote she will lose that.”

On Thursday she is scheduled to travel to Brussels to meet leaders of the 27 other European Union countries to try to secure some reassurances that might help her win a vote on the Brexit plans. She has promised to allow lawmakers to decide the matter by Jan. 21. If there is no agreement then, Britain could be facing a chaotic departure on March 29.

Or not. There could be a second referendum, a mutually agreed extension of the negotiating period or even, as Mrs. May has warned her party, no Brexit at all. What does not seem to be in the cards, for now, at least, is the general election that the opposition Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has been angling for throughout the Brexit process.

While Mrs. May has maintained a public face of optimism over securing some pledges from the European Union intended to reassure her own lawmakers, she is unlikely to win any game-changing concessions.

Mrs. May in the House of Commons on Wednesday

Her strategy appears to be to delay the critical vote — now probably in the middle of January — and to hope that the growing risk of a disorderly departure brings some lawmakers back into line. But many doubt that will work.

“Clearly, her last throw of the dice is count down the clock and try to bounce people into voting for it,” Mr. Springford said. “But I am not convinced she will win that vote. I don’t think that she can get meaningful concessions from the European Union that would be enough to get her over the line.

“The best hope is that everybody calms down over Christmas, that they start to really worry about no deal, and that some more moderate people signal that they will support her. But everyone is now so high up their pole that I am not sure they can climb down.”

In Brussels, diplomats said they could see little benefit from Mrs. May’s travails, and that no new British leader would be able to change the fundamentals of the 585-page divorce agreement negotiated so painfully.

That applies to the so-called backstop that the pro-Brexit lawmakers are particularly incensed about. That provision would insure the free movement of goods over the Irish border in the event that a free-trade agreement is not reached in the two-year transition period after Brexit. What is especially galling for the Brexiteers is that it would continue indefinitely, or until the European Union decides it is no longer needed.

The main fear is that there is no majority in Parliament for any kind of Brexit deal, one diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity according to diplomatic protocol.

“Even the funny elements of this are actually tragic,” said another diplomat. “I still hope Beckett, Kafka and Havel are not those who will finish writing this piece.”

Steven Erlanger contributed reporting from Brussels.

North Korea says it will not denuclearize until the US eliminates ‘nuclear threat’

North Korea says it will not denuclearize until the US eliminates ‘nuclear threat’

by | Dec 3, 2018 | Politics, World Events | 0 comments

These two guys with nuclear bombs in their hands. Yea, this is good.

It is only a surface observation to make this a conversation about two men. I was probably six years old when I decided that nuclear bombs had no rational place in humanity. Soon after, as I realized the magnitude of nuclear weapons on our planet, and reflected on the wars after wars that killed its people, I concluded the human animal was, if nothing else, an irrational, flailing form of so-called intelligent life. How else could it be oblivious to its own self destruction?

(CNN)North Korea will not relinquish its nuclear weapons until the US eliminates its own “nuclear threat,” according to a commentary published by state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

“The proper definition of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is completely eliminating the American nuclear threat to North Korea before eliminating our nuclear capability,” the commentary says.
The US and North Korea are deadlocked in negotiations over how Pyongyang will denuclearize in return for the easing of sanctions.