Tag Archives: politics

Mexico Says It’s Not a Safe Country?

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump has said that the US and Mexico have reached an agreement—at least in principle (although Trump is his usual more definitive self)—that those seeking asylum in the US will remain in Mexico until their asylum cases have been heard and acted on by the US.  The Washington Post has claimed to quote incoming Interior Minister Olga Sanchez Cordero as saying so, too.

However, Sanchez Cordero says that she said no such thing to WaPo.  In fact, she says that no such deal, no Remain in Mexico program—”of any sort”—exists.  Given that newspaper’s record of honest reporting, I believe Sanchez Cordero.

What interests me about her statement, though, is this:

The future government does not consider […] that Mexico assumes the status of “safe third country” for Central American migrants, or from other countries, who are on Mexican territory or for those who will reach it in the future[.]

There are a few interpretations for this statement.  One is that Mexico doesn’t consider itself to be a “safe” country of any sort—a recognition that would be consistent with the corruption rampant in the Mexican police at all jurisdictional levels and with the broad power held by the several drug cartels that operate freely throughout Mexico.

Another is simply that Mexico doesn’t want the legal liability that would accrue from accepting that status.

A third is that rejecting the status is not the same as declining to make an exception for the current “caravan” of persons claiming to seek asylum in the US after having explicitly rejected Mexico’s offer of asylum.

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Volatility in the Market

Posted on by
Reply

Some folks worry about the return of turbulence—their term—to stock market pricing.

Market turbulence is leading some investors to call on the Federal Reserve to halt its campaign of interest rate increases….

No need.  The Fed needs to get its benchmark rates back to levels historically consistent with its goal of 2% inflation instead of its heretofore artificially suppressed rates.  It’s getting close, but the Fed isn’t there yet—it has a couple-three more rate increases yet to go.

Those investors need to understand a couple of things about volatility—or turbulence—in the market.  For short-term traders, volatility presents buying opportunities.  For long-term investors, volatility is just noise in the system, well worth ignoring.  For yield chasers, volatility represents opportunities to go broke in short order, culling the herd for the benefit of the rest of the trading/investing population.

Nevertheless, we get guys like Stanley Druckenmiller, who once ran a George Soros hedge fund and has hectored the Fed to raise rates from those artificial lows, saying

I would pause and see if the market knows something we don’t[.]

It’s almost always the case, though, that the market knows something we don’t.  And I include my august self in that “we.”

The Fed needs to stay the course, or if a change in pace is warranted, the Fed needs to get quickly to those historically consistent levels.  In either case, the Fed then would need to sit down, be quiet, and let the market do what it knows more about than the rest of us.

EU Counterproductive Meddling

Posted on by
Reply

Italy is standing tall on its budget for the next fiscal year, despite the European Union’s disapproval of it.

The EU Commission has again rejected Italy’s proposed budget on Wednesday, paving the way for financial sanctions to be applied in the next few months.

The specific bone of contention centers, mostly, on projected budget deficits as a per cent of GDP.  The Italian budget deficit works out to 2.4% of GDP, the Italians say, which is well within the 3.0% EU limit; however, the EU Knows Better: the Commission claims the deficit will exceed 3.0% by 2020.  Whom to believe….

One indication of integrity is this.  Italy’s debt-to-GDP ratio currently stands at 130% of GDP, which is well above the EU-recommended upper bound of 60%.  In the Commission’s view, though, that recommendation is an EU mandate, and it’s demanding that Italy also act to reduce its debt-to-GDP ratio.

Or there will be consequences.

 [I]f Italy still fails to comply [on the budget deficit matter], the Commission can apply financial sanctions, which can include fines up to 0.2% of GDP….

Another indication. The EU thinks the Italian government is spending too much, so it will punish the nation by making the Italian government spend even more.

Other member nations need to take notice as they contemplate their own future in the EU.

A Necessary Start

Posted on by
Reply

Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is on the verge of issuing actual rules (not “guidance” letters) directing the way in which colleges and universities must handle accusations of sexual assault.  These rules will include

  • the right of every survivor to be taken seriously and the right of every person accused to know that guilt is not predetermined
  • both the alleged victim and the accused would be able to inspect and review all evidence
  • All Title IX hearings would include cross-examination, which could occur in-person or by live stream, with campus adjudicators allowed to observe the demeanor of witnesses as they assess credibility
  • statements of anyone who refuses cross-examination could not be considered in the final determination Title IX judges would be required to consider both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.
  • acknowledges that schools’ “treatment of both complainant and respondent could constitute discrimination on the basis of sex”
  • both the alleged victim and the accused would enjoy the same opportunities for appeal, and, if both parties agreed, administrators could offer informal resolution processes like mediation
  • universities could still use a weaker “preponderance of evidence” as the standard of proof, similar to civil cases, rather than a higher “clear and convincing evidence” standard.

The proposal is a good start toward redressing the inequities of the Obama administration’s infamous Dear Colleague Letter, but there remain a couple of serious weaknesses.

One is the continued use of the preponderance of evidence standard.  The problem with this is that accusations of assault, whether sexual or other, are accusations of felonies.  That demands the clear and convincing evidence standard.  Related to this is the investigation and adjudication itself.  Such accusations demand the police and a criminal court conduct the investigation and trial, not the school and its administrators.  Sexual harassment accusations also need a more serious standard of proof than 50%-plus-one-minim of belief.

And: as long as acquittals—however a college/university wants to style them—are appealable by the accuser, there still is no justice possible in the proceedings or the rules that structure them.

That Progressive-Democrats object even to this nod toward justice, though, is instructive for 2020 and what a Progressive-Democrat Congress and White House will do to individual liberty.

Bullying

Posted on by
Reply

You can’t wear the clothes you can afford to buy, that are good quality, and that look nice without being ostentatious (you can’t wear your ostentatious rags, either, come to that).  That’s bullying, don’t you know.

That’s the attitude of the Church of England’s Woodchurch High School in northwestern England (it’s across the Mersey from Liverpool—yes, that Mersey).  They’re pretending to “poverty proof” their school, so they sent a letter to their students’ significant overseers (the institution actually refered to “parents/carers”:

As you are all aware from an email that was sent out yesterday, pupils will not be permitted to bring in Canadian (sic) Goose and Monclair (sic) coats after the Christmas break.

In the name of anti-bullying, then, this school’s management is going to bully a different group of kids.  Because clothes make the child, not what he’s taught about character.

Their hypocrisy stinks.