USAID Spends $89.7 Million Finding Jobs for 55 Afghan Women

Afghan women walk with their children / Getty Images
Afghan women walk with their children / Getty Images

“A federal government program to promote gender equality in Afghanistan and help women find employment is costing taxpayers over $200 million but has only found jobs for 55 women.”

‘The USAID program, Promoting Gender Equity in National Priority Programs, or Promote, is a five-year $216 million effort. USAID has spent $89.7 million in three years but “has not demonstrated whether the program has made progress” toward its goals…’

A 2017 goal of the program was to help 420 women find new or better employment, enroll 1,968 women in the internship program, and have 900 program graduates. By halfway through the year, Promote had only found new or better employment for 39 women, or 9.2 percent of its goal.”

Continued: USAID Spends $89.7 Million Finding Jobs for 55 Afghan Women

How US Sugar Subsidies Bring a Red Tide of Algae to Florida’s Shores

“Though other factors play a role in the algae bloom crises, one of the most significant involves the sugar industry. A combination of federal sugar subsidies, federal regulations on pollution, and federal control of Lake Okeechobee (a giant lake in southern Florida) runoff guidelines has created a recipe for disaster.

The federal sugar subsidy prevents Americans from buying sugar from Cuba and other sources. This means that we have to produce our own sugar and that we pay the world’s highest price for sugar. It also means that we grow sugar and sugar substitutes in a high-cost fashion using a lot of fertilizer!

…the solutions are simple and straightforward. End the sugar subsidies and the EPA and its protection limits. Restore the right of the people to sue polluters that cause demonstrable harm.”

Story: How US Sugar Subsidies Bring a Red Tide of Algae to Florida’s Shores

Why Empathy Is Bad

It can distract us from rational thought and meaningful compassion.

Photo: Sal Pellingra/EyeEm/Getty Images
Photo: Sal Pellingra/EyeEm/Getty Images

Excerpted from article by Jesse Singal (linked below)

“Empathy is bad” sounds more like trolling than a substantive argument … If I’m honest with myself, despite having a great deal of respect for Bloom as a writer and thinker, I went into Against Empathy eagerly anticipating the holes I’d be able to poke in it.

The holes didn’t materialize. Instead, over the course of a brisk 250 pages, [Paul] Bloom laid out what really does feel like a tough-to-crack case against an idea that most of us have long known is key to repairing the world.

As Bloom points out early in the book, there are many subtly different definitions of empathy, so he goes with this one: “Empathy is the act of coming to experience the world as you think someone else does”. His critique of empathy centers most notably on two of its features: empathy has a “spotlight effect” and entails a certain “innumeracy.” The two ideas aren’t wholly distinct. The spotlight effect simply refers to the fact that the act of feeling someone else’s pain causes us to zoom in on that pain and want to do something about it, often at the expense of other, more important causes. When, to take a real-life example Bloom invokes, the Make-A-Wish Foundation spent thousands of dollars to let a terminally ill child be Batman for a day in San Francisco, that was the spotlight effect: The focus on a single child’s suffering (and joy) led good people to spend a sum that could, put to more efficient use, save many lives. (This argument only holds, of course, under the assumption that had those donations not gone to the Make-A-Wish Foundation, they could have gone to some other worthy cause. Throughout Against Empathy, Bloom is fastidious about acknowledging these sorts of caveats and counter-arguments. None of his shots are cheap.)

Continue Reading…

U.S. Spends Nearly $1T Per Year To Fight Poverty

Did you know that the U.S. spends nearly a trillion dollars every single year on anti-poverty programs? And yet somehow 47 million remain in poverty…
 
$668 billion spent by 126 federal anti-poverty programs.
$284 billion spent by state welfare programs.
$952 BILLION TOTAL SPENT PER YEARThat’s $86,000 per family of four in poverty.

Meals on Wheels: Donations Surge After Trump Budget

The public has already responded to President Donald #Trump’s America First budget plan. #MealsOnWheels’ average amount of daily donations increased by 50 times on Thursday after the White House proposed cuts to some of the program’s funding, a spokesperson for the group said, according to CNN…

Continued: Meals on Wheels: Donations Surge After Trump Budget


Related story: “President Trump’s first budget proposal to Congress last week specifically identified steep cuts to hundreds of domestic programs, but Meals on Wheels wasn’t one of them…” | Truth about Meals on Wheels in Trump’s budget President Trump’s first budget budget proposal to Congress last week…

Ex-Shell CEO Says Big Oil Can Live Without Subsidies

February 11, 2011 Large oil companies don’t need tax subsidies when oil prices are high, a former CEO of Shell Oil said Thursday.

“In the face of sustained high oil prices it was not an issue—for large companies—of needing the subsidies to entice us into looking for and producing more oil,” John Hofmeister told National Journal Daily.

Hofmeister retired from Shell in 2008 and founded the group Citizens for Affordable Energy. He testified to a House subcommittee Thursday on how Egyptian unrest affects oil prices.

Before that hearing, he told Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., in a private conversation that big oil companies don’t need government help. Markey mentioned Hofmeister’s comment in a news conference later Thursday when introducing legislation eliminating $5 billion worth of subsidies to the major oil and gas companies. “He told me that privately [Thursday] but that he would say that in public if asked to do so,” Markey said after the news conference.

The issue didn’t come up in the hearing, but Hofmeister confirmed to National Journal Daily he had said that to Markey. “I told him that my overall position on that topic has not changed from testimony I gave back in 2008 when we had the very high gasoline prices,” said Hofmeister, who testified in several hearings during the spring and summer of 2008 when he was CEO of Shell. He noted that other executives of major oil companies who testified then echoed the sentiment.

Hofmeister’s comments come at a time when Democrats in both chambers of Congress are calling out Republicans for their continued support for the subsidies while pledging to slash funding in almost every area of the federal government. Republicans have not and almost certainly will not cut the subsidies despite this political pressure. The GOP and the American Petroleum Institute say that the subsidies are necessary so jobs in the industry aren’t lost or shipped to other countries.

For the major companies like Shell, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips, and Exxon, that doesn’t appear to be true.

Hofmeister said the range at which large oil companies don’t need subsidies is around $70 a barrel or higher. Brent crude oil closed Thursday at slightly higher than $100 a barrel.

“The fear of low oil prices drives some companies to say that subsidies should be sustained,” Hofmeister said. “And my point of view is that with high oil prices such subsidies are not necessary.” Hofmeister stressed that he was not talking on behalf of Shell or any other oil company.

“If prices revert to very low levels, it may take such subsidies to keep drilling,” Hofmeister added.

He also pointed out that small companies need the subsidies at all times. “Independent companies operate under different economic parameters and generally don’t have the resilience and a big expensive well that they can depreciate quickly.”

To that end, Markey’s legislation, which is co-sponsored by other House Democrats including Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., excludes small, independent companies. Yet Hofmeister said that proposal would be illegal since it targets specific companies over others.

“I think that’s discriminatory,” he said. “It’s a much more complicated subject. Any bill that is discriminatory against specific companies would be found to be illegal.”

Hofmeister made headlines this month when he predicted gasoline prices could reach $5 per gallon by 2012. His prediction is only getting closer in light of heightened unrest in Egypt and President Obama’s continued push for what Hofmeister sees as a backward offshore drilling policy.

“If we stay on our current course in this country where we refuse to drill, we make it even more difficult to acquire new leases in this country coupled with international turmoil, the current path is only aggravating that and making it worse,” Hofmeister said. “We could reach that [$5 gasoline] sooner.”

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20150102140723/http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/ex-shell-ceo-says-big-oil-can-live-without-subsidies-20110211