You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘credibility’ category.
SB 79 was put forth as a protection of student data. Everyone voted for it because who would want child predators to have access to children’s data?….. it passed 17-4 in the Senate.(Lavelle, Pettyjohn, Lopez, Richardson scoring the no votes) and passed 40-0 in the House.
They were tricked.
An amendment was offered. SS1. Ostensibly to change typos. “deleting certain definitions; and (9) correcting minor typographical errors.” –– Synopsis.
What was not seen were these few words…. “The Act is substituted for Senate Bill No. 79 and differs from Senate Bill No. 79 by (1) creating a new chapter in Title 14 of the Delaware Code creating the “Student Data Privacy Protection Act”; (2) deleting provisions addressing data security and privacy responsibilities of the Department of Education in favor of establishing the Student Data Privacy Task Force to study and report on those issues as part of a comprehensive evaluation of student data privacy and security within the State’s public education system;
Did you catch that?
The provisions addressing data security and privacy responsibilities currently in code, are deleted immediately, whereas a task force chokes along at turtle’s pace to discuss and develop appropriate safeguards for child privacy. This creates a time gap where data can be shared to anyone with impunity.
A normal policy would be to set up a task force designed to make changes and after voting those recommendations, the new law takes over. The old law continues intact until the new one takes hold. Instead, this bill (SS!) gets rid of the “protections” immediately. and sets up a task force to determine what protections our children need. By then, all data has been downloaded to corporate data banks….. It is as if we just let convicted convicts out of prison while investigating human rights abuses alleged to have taken place upon them..
So currently there is no entity guarding your child’s data.
Below is who paid lobbyists to write and push this bill…. Google. Delaware Business Roundtable, Amazon, Microsoft Corporation, Verizon, Delaware Charter Network,
Here is what is in the bill.
Nothing in this subsection prohibits an operator from using or sharing aggregate student data or de-identified student data
for: The development and improvement of the operator’s Internet website, online or cloud computing service, online application, or mobile application, or other educational Internet websites, online or cloud computing services, online applications, or mobile applications.
The words “or other” means your students info is available to anyone.
for: to demonstrate the effectiveness of the operator’s products or services, including their marketing.
Your child’s data can be freely given to marketers.
The provisions of Section 1 of this Act do not apply to projects relating to the privacy and security of student data approved prior to the effective date of this Act...under the Department of Education’s data governance regulation, § 294, Title 14 of the Delaware Administrative Code, in existence on the effective date of this Act.
This act does not apply to old regulations it just got rid of.
Section 1 of this Act becomes effective on August 1 the first full year following the Act’s enactment into law. Sections 2 through 4 of this Act become effective upon the Act’s enactment into law.
There you have it… Section 1 outlines the general privacy planks of the bill it replaced which are not in effect until one full year after signing.
Section 2: which annuls all previous protections in Title 14 and is effective immediately.
Section 3: establishment of a task force can begin immediately while no protections are in place.
Section 4: establishes that if any part of the act is later deemed unconstitutional or replaced by the General Assembly, the rest of the bill still remains intact. In other words, it is severable. This is in effect now.
Bottom line: your child’s data is already out there in cyber land, thanks to Dave Sokola and Earl Jacques among others.
So how could the General Assembly have been so completely duped? Even the educational watchdogs? Rather easy actually. One has to read the bill with the specific intent of figuring how it will be abused, in order to see it… Since we know the sponsors Sokola and Jacques. We know there had to be something evil in this bill and so we looked at it long and hard to find out how it was constructed and that clued us in where the violation was.
But in the General Assembly, if a trusted official tells you an amendment replaces typos, you tend to believe it. You skim the bill and see that it replaces existing policy. it establishes a task force, it protects children’s data from going to marketers, and you vote for it…
What you missed was in the timing, how there would be a gap between opening the gate and closing it… Very clever actually. And all of them were fooled.
So sorry parents. Pedophiles (among others) now have your child’s data.
Here are the lobbyists so you can recognized their names when they publish op-ed pieces defending their actions…
- Christopher V. DiPietro
- Rebecca Byrd
- Robert L. Byrd
- Kimberly B. Gomes
- Jordan Seemans
- Rhett Ruggerio
- Melissa Hopkins
- Cheryl Heik
- Rhett Ruggerio
- Kim Willson
- Jeremy Kudon
- Scott Ward
- Deborah Hamilton
- Paul Herdman
- Ron Barnes
It appears the prime motive behind this bill is to allow charter access to explicit private specific data files on public school children so they can be hand-picked, culled, marketed to, and manipulated into signing onto charter schools.
That motive would explain this best. But due to the broad nature of this bill it also now allows pedophiles with enough money to buy reports,, the same exact same access to your child’s data at least for this one year.
These regulations are effective September 21, 2015…
The easiest way to break this, a massive revolution of “opt out”… This unconstitutional provision (10th Amendment specifically prohibits any federal involvement in education at all, and especially purported “mandates.) cannot be enforced if enough people opt out the test… Ok yo black people. YOU (and you know who you are.)..who were misled against “opt out” by this establishment…. what say you now?
This is not fun and games. This is real war… They are coming for you through your child……
Compare these to a $40 million dollar flop of the fantastic four….
Tonight’s State of the Union, unfortunately not seen by many Americans, but don’t worry if you missed it; your grandchildren in the future will be able to tell you all about it…
I really didn’t know that much about them. So I looked them up.
Did you know that one has to go back as far as James Garfield to find a Commander in Chief who has used less vetoes? (And he was in office only 6 and half months).
Did you know that Barack Obama, our commander in chief, has to veto up to 633 vetoes these next two years before he ties the record of the most by any one president (FDR: 3 and a half terms)? Does that not put a damper on any argument of over-reaching his authority?
Can you name all the presidents who have the same or fewer vetoes than our current commander in chief? I’ll try.
- James Garfield (6 months as President)
- Milliard Fillmore (2.8 years as President)
- Zachery Taylor (1.3 years as President)
- William Harrison (32 days as President)
- Thomas Jefferson (2 terms)
- John Adams (1 terms)
All with zero. He is tied with George Washington, at two.
Now can you name the top ten presidential veto-ers? Again, I’ll try.
- Franklin D Roosevelt 635
- Grover Cleveland 584
- Harry Truman 250
- Dwight Eisenhower 181
- Ulysses Grant 93
- Theodore Roosevelt 82
- Ronald Reagan 78
- Gerald Ford 66
- Calvin Coolidge 50
- Woodrow Wilson 44 (tie)
- Benjamin Harrison 44 (tie)
- George H.W. Bush 44 (tie)
And just out of curiosity. Know who had the most vetoes overridden? The first guy who got impeached: Andrew Johnson with 15.
It is quite clear that a veto is just another tool put at the president’s disposal.. If the president is provided the opportunity to weld it, one must, both out of Constitutional necessity and a considerable amount of precedence. And if today’s Republicans are thinking of black-balling our president with excessive vetoes, they should think again. It also appears that vetoing insane pieces of legislation will provide zero negative fall-out, either politically or against ones legacy.
Most Republicans smoked dope in high school. Some libertarians did also. Democrats, maybe, but not so much. Therefore in America at least 47% of the voting public in General Election years, and 51% of the voting public in off-years, is ignorant about American History… The important stuff.
America was founded on freedom, and whenever that fails to work well, our law making bodies add a regulation… Regulations like everything else can be bad or good, but for the most part, the regulations we do have all had to be voted into being by a widely diverse group of people, and therefore there is probably some good reason we have them.
With Dodd-Frank, the reason is obvious. But Republicans seem to have forgotten both crash deregulation brought on, and their catastrophic loss of both chambers of Congress and the Presidency because of it.
Dodd-Frank simply puts a limit on gambling… No, you can’t bet your domicile at Delaware Park. No, you can’t sell your car there and bet it on roulette. No you can’t put your kids into prostitution to feed your gambling habit.
We have to regulate things like that. Otherwise if we don’t and someone does them, they can keep doing them without a law to stop them.
That is why the idiocy of cutting regulations is just that idiocy.. Perhaps I can grant that with Google now, we can search and find perhaps one or two regulations that would benefit society if we removed them. But they certainly would not be in Dodd Frank.
Those are there to prevent what happened in 2008 from happening again… That’s impossible you say… It was 80 years between both Great Depressions… That is a lifetime… Nothing happened in between!
Exactly,! Because laws like Dodd-Frank were held in place which limited the amount of our money one could gamble. Two bills repealed that oversight and bam, in 2008 we were in crises.
- In early America there was a major panic or recession every 2 years. 1795 – 1833.
- From then up to the Great Depression, we averaged a major recession or panic every two years.
- Since the great Depression we have registered recessions on the average one recession every 5 years.
And now, we want to return to the instability of those years prior to the Great Depression of 1932?
Some regulation are on the books for a reason… such as regulating derivatives. While derivatives were regulated, gas stayed at 99 cents a gallon for 8 years… Remember that? And just as soon as we deregulated Derivatives, it climbed all the way to $4.25 a gallon before the collapsing market dropped the price down to real market, which we shockingly discovered was just $1.70 a gallon. The Dodd-Frank regulation on derivatives has returned us again to low prices (faster due to help from our Sultanic friends in the Gulf),
And as soon as it gets removed, the hedge funds buy it low…. wait and sell it high…
We played this game before: the year 2000, the end of Clinton’s term. The spending bill passed in September were held up through December in conference committee by Sen. Phil Gramm. The Omnibus funding bill that year, had a rider that deregulated all derivatives from government oversight. Over those 4 months leading up to passage, parts of the government had been officially unfunded. Government employees wondered if they could even spend for Christmas. Finally on the very last day of that Congress. by a voice vote only seconds before adjournment, all conference committee (Phil Gramm) changes were approved and the bill got sent to Clinton.
Unfortunately he signed it… and we paid those hedge fund investors a lot more than we should have been paying for our gasoline. Up to $2.50 on every single gallon! We also sold bad mortgages as derivatives, world-wide… and when those mortgages failed (as we knew they had to), the world economy collapsed.
We should not make the same mistake again. We really cannot afford that same mistake again. With hindsight, a new democratic Congress would have been sworn, and could rectify that before Clinton left office… But tired and in the last waning days of his presidency, one cannot blame him for not doing so. Who wants to end with a pie-fight?
And I’m sure it seemed like a good idea … up to 8 years later. But is was wrong. It was dumb, and we paid dearly for it. How we paid dearly for it…
Veto the changes, and then see if they can find 70 Senators willing to go on public record while all America is watching and screw over the American people.
Removing good regulation will be our downfall.. Don’t let that happen.
Yesterday, the first day of the Republican Congress, a bill was rushed through the House and passed: requiring the Congressional Budget Office to use dynamic scoring when figuring out future budgets…
Republicans have been saying lower taxes cause the economy to grow and that growth generates more revenue. They’ve said that for years… We’ve tried it for the past 15 but things got worse for all of us, instead of better…
Last couple of years, under Paul Ryan (that little whiz-boy from Wisconsin), they tried writing budgets for their first time and found, that everything they have been saying, was indeed wrong… The math would not work out…
The reason the math would not work out, is because of a simple fact that when you don’t pay your bills and instead splurge and waste that bill-money, at some future point there will be a reckoning. Like if you choose spend your mortgage, electricity bill, water bill, gas bill money on big-ticket orgies, there comes a point where you are left dry, cold, in the dark, and have no domicile.
This is terrible they said… What can we do… ..
The answer obvious to any 5 year old, is to pretend. We can pretend that we will get tons of money later and pay our debts off then…
So we convince ourselves that IF we spend $10,000 over budget, we will soon be making $100,000 more so we can pay it back then. IF we get a $10,000 raise every year, then next year we just run the same as this, and have $10,000 extra dollars with which to pay it back.
Now this does work if you are indeed guaranteed to get $10,000 increases every year… What dynamic scoring does is make the assumption we will set-in-stone increases to our salary by $10,000 every year for ten years straight. So your yearly income will climb like this:
- Base rate: $40,000 per year
- After Year One: $50,000 per year
- After Year Two $60,000 per year
- After Year Three $70,000 per year
- After Year Four $ 80,000 per year
- After Year Five $90,000 per year
- After Year Six $100,000 per year
- After Year Seven $110,000 per year
- After Year Eight $120,000 per year
- After Year Nine $130,000 per year
- After Year Ten: $140,000 per year
Then what they do is add all these together and come up with an argument like this… We can easily afford this orgy and hire Taylor Swift to sing for it because look, over ten years we are going to earn $990,000 so we can easily pay back the $10,000 we blow on ourselves right now… ( Now if you’ve been a Republican shut out from parties for a long while, not being invited to do the bump with Jerry Jones) just hearing this may make you decide to jump in, no clothes and all.
====
But here is reality… You probably are not going to get a $10,000 (25%) raise… Let us look at this logically.. How long have you been working? How many $10,000 raises have you ever gotten before? Did any of your costs also rise with that raise, so you really didn’t have all that money to spend? Across history, was there ever a time when $10,000 raises per year were the norm? If not, why would they suddenly start now?
So what usually happens in households that pursue false dreams, is that if they do not tie expenses to actual income, they usually come up short and that shorted gap grows bigger and bigger.
Here is what to expect in reality… The first year we spend $10,000 over what we make. It is either loaned to us, or we simply just skip paying our bills for one year… The next year we not only again spend $10,000 more than we make, but we still make the same $40,000… So that year on our $40,000 income we owe $10,000 from year one, and $10,000 from year two. We can’t live on just $20,000 in order to pay it all back… So, assuming we will get much more income the following year, we stretch the loan a little further… But again, no raise comes that year.
Where we pretended that we would be making $60,000 by that year (year 3) {and over the three year span would have accumulated $150,000 (40,000 + 50,000 + 60,000), enabling us to pay back three years ($30,000) of $10,000 overdrafts having $120,000 left over}… Instead due to a lack of “pretended raise” amounts, we only got $120,000 over those three years, and borrowed $10,000 each year, so our net balance is $90, 000, which as you see divided by 3, equals $30,000 per year, whereas our regular living expenses continued at the original $40,000 per year.Yet we live like we are making $50,000, $60,000, $70,000 each subsequent year due to our over-extended loans….
This is dynamic scoring…. It should be illegal, and until yesterday, it was.
It is possible, it can work if the assumptions work out… So one must look at the assumptions very carefully to see if they are realistic… Dynamic scoring has only one reason for existence. To convince people who don’t want to spend that hard earned money of theirs on a risky venture, to go ahead and spend it on that risky venture by consoling them it will be painless when looked back upon from the future.
And the” risky venture” this time, is again take the bulk of your money and hand it over to the top one percent, giving them even more power over you… If you do that these people say, money will just grow for them and everyone will be rich…. give them your money; give it to them now.
Alas we’ve tried that already… We didn’t get rich. For it, we got a very deep recession, We got the 1% owning more than ever; the 99% owning less. We got 80% of our population living day to day, week to week, just a little above subsistence… We went backward. Now with this Congress we are about to have a new battle of inequality on a level unseen in America, And this time: it will all take place up within the top 1%… Who among them will win the final championship monopoly game?.. Who will lose?… It matters little to most of us, Most of us were eliminated long time ago.
But first, for all of this to occur, they first have to change the way we do math itself in order to justify it, because it doesn’t work out their way using real numbers. And that, my friends,… is what was done yesterday.
Came across an amazing chart from the Paris School of Economic’s database. It allows you to customize your search for any time or place over the world.
My area of expertise is within the US and here is what I wanted to see: the percentage of national income earned by the top 0.01%…. not just the top 1%, but the top-tip 0.01%.
This shows the past 100 years of national income percentage earned by the top 0.01%. There are some very striking facts noticed by those looking at this data for the first time.
1) The year 2012 was one of the record highest, beaten only by two years during WWI when the rest of the world was embroiled in war, and our top echelon were selling to both sides…. If one extracts that exception, then in 2012 we gave the top 0.01% (one hundredth of one percent) more of our national income than at any time previously recorded.
2) The Great Depression did little to affect the income percentages (1928-1932); Roosevelt however (1933-onward), did a lot.
3) During America’s most prosperous times ever, after WWII made us the sole global economy, the incomes of the top 0.01% stayed under 1% of national income across the next 43 years. (1943-1986)
4) The Reagan Tax Cut of 1986 caused a doubling of the top 1%’s income in just 2 years. from 1% in 1986 to 1.99% in 1988.
5) The percentage again dropped under 2% after Clinton’s tax hike in 1992 causing a robust expansion, but passed that 2% mark in 1997 never to return.
6) During the “w” Bush years, the percentage continuously climbed peaking in 2007 and would have peaked higher in 2008 but the recession clipped the last two months off that year. Despite that, 2008 was the 2nd highest grossing percentage up to that time (discounting the WWI anomaly) across almost 100 years of data.
7) The Great Recession (2008-9) as did the Great Depression (1929-32), had little effect on the top 0.01% percentage of national income. At no point did their yearly take dip below 3%, a mark first crossed in 2005 (if one continues disregarding the anomaly of the First World War).
8) The rebound ability of an economy at large is hampered when more money collects at the top and is not returned as investment to the bottom. Though small in percentage points, those difference of those 3 percentage points ( from under 1.0 to 4.0) translates to $500 billion that did not impact our economy because it went to less than 31,000 Americans. Considering our TARP was passed only for $800 billion, we only saw $300 billion net running through our economy. because $500 billion of the $800 billion was handed over to less than 31,000 people then quickly whisked away to foreign bank accounts beyond the reach of the IRS.
9) Although difficult to state through all the multiple influences that impact economies daily, the extensive overview shown by this chart makes it clear that were we to have another great recession, we should first use the incomes of our top 0.01% to first rebuild our national economy as did Roosevelt, and not assume that those wealthy will do so voluntarily as did our creators and negotiators behind this current rebound.
10) Data from 2013 will be most interesting. The Bush Tax Cuts for the top 0.05% were rescinded that year, and at that point, our economy took off ( at least when Republicans weren’t threatening to shut it all down). If it does indeed show a drop in the top 1%’s income, then we will know that in order to have robust recoveries, those at the top need to be taxed more, not less.
As for politics, this needs to be taken to heart. Anyone who argues for less taxes on the top 1%, be they Democrat or Republican, needs to be shown the door…. We now have sufficient data to know with certainty, and from it, we can see all evidence points that higher marginal tax rates do benefit the middle class and subsequently the economy at large…..
This historical chart rings that out, clear as a bell at the end of a day’s trading…..
Courtesy of Arte Johnson
As the Republicans have said, one party rule has gone on long enough… At least here in Delaware…This makes sense… If there are two parties and one is evil…. by comparison… the other appears good… That happened to the Republican Party in 2008 when it was run by the same person who is running it now….
Back then, giving any vote to evil, meant you were hamstringing good.
That is no longer the case… Those in the Democratic Party, due to there being no elected Republicans to suck up large donations, have themselves taken on that undesirable activity. We have Democrats just as bad as Republicans who were kicked out in 2008.
It seems like partisan means nothing anymore… Education is one example, Environment is another, curtailing the police is a third, and in Wilmington, improving the police is a fourth…
The big things are almost done. Gay marriage is firmly in place. FOIA is prevalent throughout our state government. Marijuana is almost legal.
Left to do are a registration process for our guns, higher taxes on the one percent and corporations, and re-engaging the pursuit of an offshore Windfarm miles off Bethany Beach, and especially the elimination of Common Core as a curriculum and the abolishment of the litany of stupidized standard tests.
These things have protractors and detractors in both parties. David Sokola is tied with Greg Lavelle as being the worst human catastrophe for the educational system in our state… One is a Democrat, the other Republican. Both should go.
We have a former office phone answerer running for State Treasurer who is a Democrat, versus an experienced hedge fund manager who is a Republican… In this case, voting for the Democrat is a disservice to this state.
We have a long-term Republican auditor who has done nothing… And one of the top minds in the state who will do much, if given the opportunity… This one needs to go Democratic.
In the 22nd representative district, Pike Creekish area, we have one of the best minds in the state, Steve Newton, running as neither a Republican or a Democrat.. but a Libertarian… This is one non-major party person that we need to get in; for both your sanity and mine…
In Sussex we have extreme conservatives who have split from the Republican party and are running on Ipod… If you are any bit of a Conservative at all, they REALLY need your vote to carry your ideas forward. From this far out, it looks like next year there will be zero conservative representation period (RINO’s don’t count), that is if Sussex Countians don’t leave the Republican Party in droves and vote for these Independents… These guys need to be voted in by Conservatives otherwise Conservatism in Delaware is DEAD.
I’ve been struggling to find a big picture to all of this and the best one I can find, is that if your candidate is a patsy for BIG MONEY, regardless of party, he needs to be replaced by the better candidate… that candidate who fears you and will listen to you, more than Jack Markell…
We can see it in education. Where the big money lines up the center, and instead of legislators being there to express your views and concerns, they act more like bureaucrats and figure how they can finagle things through a vote so you neither know or care what happens.
Big money which ruined Washington, is now ruining Delaware. Some incumbents are good. Bryan Townsend, John Kowalko, Ernie Lopez, Cathy Cloutier, come to mind. Some Democrats, some Republicans. All these fight to take on the issues that are endorsed by the Governor, because that is what their constituents want…
But other candidates have been bought. Greg Lavelle, Senate 4th, condemned your child to the Smarter Balanced Assessments for a guest appearance our governor got for him on Politico with Chuck Todd. Many in General Assembly (represented by both parties) are in cahoots with banks, insurance houses, and charter school organizations. All pursuing cash dollars and not your interests…
What I’m saying is that (and some Democrats will freak) that it does not matter who controls the House or Senate this term by party… What does matter is that you put in the best person you can… A person who wants to run to represent you, and not someone having his bills paid by someone so he can represent them…
How can you tell? There is one vote that gives it away… Those voting for the Smarter Balanced Assessment, a test that will hurt and destroy your child, care only about the money… Those voting against, again, represented by both parties, care deeply about family values and children in general…
YOU can check out the House vote here... and the Senate vote here… This litmus test, of who is bought and who is not, can help you make the right choice when you go into the booth and push some buttons to make little lights light up…
Time to lighten up all of Delaware by getting rid of the junk just taking up weight…. If you see a Y… it is safe to remove them, no matter what party they call home….
This election needs to be decided by a district to district vote. Not a statewide partisan one. Each citizen needs to do some ground work and learn about their two candidates and then vote their conscious… Forget about affiliation… Party loyality is just an arbitrary designation designed to establish clarity… Right now, clarity actually shows us that those who were bought out, need to be replaced by those who cannot be….
Democratic. Republican. Independent. Libertarian… This time parties don’t matter. Please look hard and vote for the best person because they will listen to you, and please ignore the bought-out governor and his masters.
kavips 