Super rich’s wealth concentration surpasses Gilded Age levels

Super rich’s wealth concentration surpasses Gilded Age levels

Ethan Wolff – Mann, Senior Writer                     July 7, 2021
FILE - In this June 6, 2019, file photo Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos speaks at the the Amazon re:MARS convention in Las Vegas. The Amazon founder officially stepped down as CEO on Monday, July 5, 2021, handing over the reins as the company navigates the challenges of a world fighting to emerge from the coronavirus pandemic. Andy Jassy, the head of Amazon’s cloud-computing business, replaced Bezos, a change the company had announced in February. (AP Photo/John Locher, File)

The wealth of the richest 0.00001% of the U.S. now exceeds that of the prior historical peak, which occurred in the Gilded Age, according to economist Gabriel Zucman.

In the late 19th century, the U.S. experienced rapid industrialization and economic growth, creating an inordinate amount of wealth for a handful of families. This era was also known for its severe inequality; and some have called the period that began around 1990 a “Second Gilded Age.” Back then, just four families represented the richest 0.00001% – today’s equivalent is 18 families.

Zucman, a French economist whose doctoral advisor was the historical economist Thomas Piketty, author of bestseller “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” released data this week showing that as of July 1, the top 0.00001% richest people in the U.S. held 1.35% of the country’s total wealth. These 18 families include those of Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

Image

Zucman used real-time data from Forbes for the calculations. In 1913, at the end of the Gilded Age, the Rockefeller, Frick, Carnegie, and Baker families – names all tied to monopolistic power – held 0.85% of the country’s total wealth.

The richest 0.01% — around 18,000 U.S. families — have also surpassed the wealth levels reached in the Gilded Age. These families hold 10% of the country’s wealth today, Zucman wrote. By comparison, in 1913, the top 0.01% held 9% of U.S. wealth, and a mere 2% in the late 1970s.

The increasing concentration of wealth comes as the ultra-rich face more scrutiny for the money they’re not paying in taxes. Recent reports have highlighted that because so much of their wealth consists of unrealized gains in stocks and real estate, they pay little or nothing in income tax. Many CEOs and founders take small salaries given their outsized stock holdings, as lower capital gains tax is preferable to a higher tax on ordinary income.

Seated portrait of John Davison Rockefeller (1839 - 1937), American oil magnate, early twentieth century. (Photo by Interim Archives/Getty Images)
Seated portrait of John Davison Rockefeller (1839 – 1937), American oil magnate, early 20th century. (Photo by Interim Archives/Getty Images)

Zucman gained fame in 2019 as an architect of then-presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax plan, which aimed to address the fact that the extremely rich pay little in taxes compared to their net worth. The plan would have imposed a 2% tax on net wealth above $50 million and 6% above $1 billion.

Since the pandemic began, the stock market’s gains have widened the gap between the wealthy and non-wealthy because stock ownership is largely concentrated among wealthy people. The number of millionaires globally jumped 5.2 million to 56.1 million, according to Credit Suisse. Though the pandemic’s wealth gains largely benefitted the richest Americans, “most” Americans did fare well financially during the pandemic, according to the Federal Reserve. Around $13.5 trillion of wealth was added to all households. Still, while a large portion of the country got somewhat richer, the rich saw most of that, with the top 1% seeing a third of the $13.5 trillion and the top 20% seeing 70% of it.

Ethan Wolff – Mann is a writer at Yahoo Finance focusing on consumer issues, personal finance, retail, airlines, and more. 

The Phrase That Completely Transformed How I Think About Exercise

The Phrase That Completely Transformed How I Think About Exercise

Working out isn't supposed to be torture, but many of us are taught from a young age that it should feel that way. (Photo: Kamon Saejueng / EyeEm via Getty Images)
Working out isn’t supposed to be torture, but many of us are taught from a young age that it should feel that way. (Photo: Kamon Saejueng / EyeEm via Getty Images)

 

For most of my life, I’ve had a tumultuous relationship with exercise.

This was mostly due to the fact that I felt like it was a requirement and I was never any “good” at it. I loathed team sports as a kid, and I’d put more energy into pretending I was sick so I could sit on the bench rather than participating with my peers. I had very little stamina and terrible coordination. Not to mention the fact that I felt like my abilities were being measured against my classmates’.

Those feelings followed me into adulthood. I found myself avoiding the gym or fitness classes because I didn’t want people to see how “bad” I was at working out. And, like many people, I also inherently looked at exercise as a way to counter the food I consumed during the day or what I saw in the mirror.

It took me a very long time to change my outlook on working out ― to not see it as disciplinary or a way to embarrass myself but as something that makes me feel good. I read about a concept a few years ago that helped me get there: Exercise is a celebration of what your body can do.

Stop and read that again.

We’re trained to think we always have to be making gains or shrinking ourselves ― that exercise is for changing our body, not honoring how it is right now.

I spent years thinking I was never “good enough” when it came to exercise. I wasn’t good enough to play sports, wasn’t good enough to use gym equipment, wasn’t good enough with my diet to not need to work out so hard in the first place. Instead, what if I had looked at exercise as a way to celebrate what my own body could do? Even if that varies day-to-day.

Once I adopted that mindset, everything started to change. It helps on those days when I’m looking at fitness as a dreadful obligation rather than a choice.

We’re trained to think we always have to be making gains or shrinking ourselves ― that exercise is for changing our body, not a way to honor how it is right now.

Of course, an affirmation can only take you so far. You also need to put it into practice. Here’s some other advice on how to see exercise as a celebration of your body:

Spend time discovering what movement brings you joy.

The American Heart Association recommends that you get 150 minutes of moderate physical activity per week, which is defined as anything that gets your heart rate 50% to 60% higher than your resting heart rate. Any movement that gets you there works. Avoid the mental trap of thinking that you have to destroy yourself in order for your workout to count; you do not have to engage in any type of exercise that you hate.

“Think of these two categories: Does it make your body feel good, and do you enjoy it?” said Jessica Mazzucco, a certified fitness trainer in New York City and founder of The Glute Recruit. “There are so many formats out there to choose from, including playing tennis, swimming, dancing, biking, weight training, boxing, yoga, running, pilates, etc. If you find yourself excited and wanting to go back and perform that workout again, then you know you have found what works for you.”

Then don’t hesitate to change up your workout routine (even if you used to love it).

I briefly got into running during quarantine. I loved that it was a safe activity that got me outside and that I was able to measure my progress. Now, I’d rather wait in a long line at the bank than even think about jogging.

I’ve gone through similar phases with strength training and cardio. There was a time where nothing could coerce me into cardio; instead, I was going to different weight-focused fitness classes multiple times a week. Today, I prefer cycling and I look forward to spending 30 or 45 minutes on a spin bike.

It’s perfectly fine to switch up your routine. In fact, it’s highly encouraged.

“Some people get bored of the same workout routine day in and day out,” Mazzucco said. “It’s a good idea to add excitement into your routine by participating in different workouts a few days a week.”

Make your workouts a social activity.

Working out with others might feel intimidating, but it actually helps when these get-togethers are a regular part of your social life. I started viewing time working out with friends as a way to catch up with people I love rather than an hour-long torture session. Make a walking date with your partner or spend some adventure time with your best friend trying out an aerial yoga class. It’s a bonding experience that takes you out of the negative mentality you might have toward exercise.

Don’t turn to exercise when you’re feeling bad about what you ate.

I had a habit of telling myself I had to sign up for a workout class or go for a run after eating a big meal. Turning to exercise when I felt guilty about what I ate or how I looked made fitness a penalty rather than a priority. (Not to mention the fact that this mentality also damages your relationship with food.)

In order to have a healthy relationship with fitness, it needs to be unlinked from food and appearance, Mazzucco said. “It’s easier to bring yourself to move each day, and fitness seems like less of a chore and more of an act of self-care,” she added.

Focus on the emotional effects of working out.

A runner’s high doesn’t happen because running itself has some magical powers ― it’s the exercise that brings the mood boost. You can get the same outcome from walking, cycling, dancing in your kitchen, swimming, using the monkey bars or whatever else you choose to do. I constantly try to remind myself that I’m working out for my mental health, and the physical perks are just a bonus.

“I love the mantra ‘love yourself first, love yourself most.’ Exercise is one of the best ways you can love yourself,” said Jennifer Conroyd, a certified fitness trainer, ironman and founder of Fluid Running. “You’re reducing your risk of disease. You’re strengthening your body and your heart. You’re de-stressing yourself and making yourself feel better. Think of exercise as a gift that you’ve been given.”

Remember that your relationship to exercise ― and how often you do it ― will change. A lot.

I’m not some jacked fitness expert who never misses a workout. There are some days that I mentally or physically can’t bring myself to sweat — just today, I set my alarm for a workout and slept right through it. This is to be expected.

“It’s important to remember that our bodies evolve and age, and we have to stop putting harsh expectations on our bodies if they don’t look or perform the way we want them to,” Mazzucco said, adding that you should “accept that you won’t always want to work out, and that’s OK. Even the most motivated exercisers have days where they do not want to go to the gym.”

It’s OK to move your body how you want to move it and when you want to move it. Anything else shouldn’t be called exercise ― it’s punishment.

Related…

Report: Great Lakes region needs about $2B for flood repairs

Report: Great Lakes region needs about $2B for flood repairs

FILE – In this Dec. 4, 2019 file photo, erosion reaches a house along Lake Michigan’s southwestern shoreline in Stevensville, Mich. Shoreline cities and towns in the Great Lakes region will be spending heavily in coming years to fix public infrastructure damaged by recent flooding and erosion, with estimated costs approaching $2 billion, officials said Thursday, June 8, 2021. (Robert Franklin/South Bend Tribune via AP. File)

 

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) — Shoreline cities and towns in the Great Lakes region will be spending heavily in coming years to fix public infrastructure damaged by recent flooding and erosion, with estimated costs approaching $2 billion, officials said Thursday.

Communities already have poured about $878 million into repairs over the last two years, according to the results of a survey by the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, a coalition of mayors and local officials in the region’s eight states and two Canadian provinces.

But the survey of 241 cities, villages and other jurisdictions found that at least $1.94 billion more will be needed over the next five years. The total is certain to be even higher because the report didn’t include all shoreline municipalities, said Jon Altenberg, the initiative’s executive director.

“Communities around the Great Lakes face a growing crisis, and we need both the federal governments of the U.S. and Canada to assist with the necessary investments,” Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said. “Our coastal infrastructure is vital to the economic and recreational health of our communities, and coordinated action is required.”

Abnormally high lake levels and severe rains since 2019 have hammered drinking water intake pipes, sidewalks, ports and docks. Parkland, beaches and wetlands have washed away. Portions of roads have crumbled.

Great Lakes levels fluctuate annually with the seasons and historically experience prolonged high- and low-water periods. But scientists say the warming climate may be making those multi-year swings more abrupt and extreme.

Lakes Huron and Michigan reached their lowest levels on record in early 2013, while the other Great Lakes — Superior, Erie and Ontario — were well below average. Then came a turnabout, as wetter weather filled the lakes to the brim. All five set record highs during the past two years.

Although levels have dipped this year, intense storms have brought flooding to some cities on the lakes or rivers connecting them, including Chicago and Detroit.

The cities group is joining other government, business and environmental organizations in pushing for the Great Lakes region to get a generous share of the infrastructure funding proposed by President Joe Biden and under consideration in Congress.

In addition to continued funding of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative cleanup program established in 2010, the groups in a June 24 letter to congressional leaders requested billions for water and sewer upgrades, flood prevention and related needs.

“These investments will address longstanding basin-wide priorities while stimulating economic activity in hard-hit communities throughout our region,” the letter said.

This Texas family overcame hardship to buy a new home, but builder rips up the contract

This Texas family overcame hardship to buy a new home, but builder rips up the contract

After losing their home because of financial problems years ago, Gabriela Lopez and her husband worked hard to rebuild their credit, save money and buy a dream home.

The couple, who have five children and live in a two-bedroom home in the Runaway Bay area about 60 miles northwest of Fort Worth, finally prequalified for a loan. They signed a construction contract in January for a 1,947-square-foot, four-bedroom home to be built in the Wise County community of Boyd, closer to the Dallas-Fort Worth urbanized area.

Construction was slow, but everything seemed to be going OK until June 28, when the builder, Doug Parr Custom Homes, abruptly canceled the contract.

“It feels like they ripped the rug out from under our feet,” said Lopez, a long-time Wise County resident who works as a receptionist and assistant at a Southlake medical office. Her husband, Jose Juan Lopez, works at a rock-crushing operation in Wise County.

Officials from Doug Parr Custom Homes did not respond to messages left with a call taker at the company’s office in Boyd, as well as emails to the company and to Clinten Bailey, Doug Parr director of operations.

Rising construction costs drive trend

This setback for the Lopez family is the latest example of a trend in which North Texans sign contracts with new home builders, only to have the contracts ripped up while the house is under construction. In Lopez’s case and many other instances, the builders cite the rising cost of construction materials such as lumber.

“I’ve been doing this 20 years. I’ve never seen this,” Rick Shelhorse, branch manager of Synergy One Lending in Plano, said in an interview. He said his office has three clients, including the Lopez family, who have been told by a builder they will have to pay thousands of dollars more if they want to keep their home.

In Lopez’s case, she was notified June 25 that the price of her $320,000 home would be raised to about $384,400, and she could either pay the additional money or walk away from her contract. Three days later, before she had notified the builder of her decision, Lopez received a letter notifying her that it was no longer her decision, and the contract had been canceled by the builder.

“I think they’re just taking advantage of the market, and they can do that to people because they know somebody is going to pay it,” Shelhorse said.

In the June 28 letter, Bailey, the director of operations for Doug Parr, wrote to Lopez that the contract was being canceled because “it is clear that certain disputes and/or material misunderstandings between the parties have arisen concerning the Contract, including but not limited to, the escalation of material costs.”

But Lopez and her real estate agent, Ryan Barnes, said there were no such disputes or misunderstandings. Lopez said that when she spoke by phone with company owner Doug Parr on June 25, she expressed concern about whether she would still qualify for a loan that was nearly $65,000 higher than her original loan, but she never said yes or no to the higher price.

Barnes, who works with the Cassie Samons Team and JP & Associates in Justin, said he repeatedly asked the builder for evidence of the price increases, including the dates in which the builder purchased the materials, but was refused. He said he visited the builder’s office in person June 30, but was told to leave.

Lopez, who also holds a second job as a caregiver for an elderly client, said she isn’t sure what to do next. The family can stay at their home in the Runaway Bay area, but it is cramped for such a large family.

She said her children, who had been excited to move into their new, spacious bedrooms, are hurt and confused by the loss of the home.

Experts: Have lawyer review contracts

Prospective home buyers should read their contracts with builders carefully to make sure they are aware of any language that may make it possible for the builder to raise the sales price, several real estate finance and legal experts said. In new home construction, contracts are often drawn up with language that favors the builder — for example, making it difficult for the buyer to cancel the deal, but relatively easy for the seller.

It’s worth spending a few hundred dollars to have a lawyer look over the contract before signing, the experts said.

And, Lopez was even more frustrated to find out that another Doug Parr Custom Homes buyer on the same street is not being asked to pay higher prices because of construction costs. She knows this because her lender, Synergy Lending, also represents the other buyer.

“I assumed they were raising all the prices at the same time,” she said. “Why us?”

“I still don’t understand how you can sign a contract and not mean it,” she said.

Europe is becoming a right-wing continent

Europe is becoming a right-wing continent

Europe.
Europe. Illustrated | iStock

 

For a certain kind of American liberal, it’s almost a reflexive gesture to wish the United States were more like Europe. There, health care is provided on a more egalitarian basis and a university education is much cheaper, if not free; sexual mores are more relaxed and gun ownership is rare; religion is vestigial and militant nationalism is strictly taboo. Widespread European distress over the presidencies of George W. Bush and Donald Trump only confirmed what American liberals knew: that the Old Country was also the dreamland of their imagined liberal American future.

I wonder how it will feel when Europe becomes distinctly more right-wing than the United States.

It’s not an inconceivable prospect. The United Kingdom has a Tory government right now, and based on current polling their position looks increasingly secure. France’s centrist president Emmanuel Macron would likely be re-elected if the election were held today, but Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally party polls considerably higher today in a one-on-one contest with Macron than it did in 2017. Italy’s fragile coalition could be followed by a right-wing coalition of Matteo Salvini’s Lega and the neofascist-derived Fratelli D’Italia.

Even in Germany, where the Christian Democrat Angela Merkel’s 16-year rule is coming to a close, the next government may once again be a coalition led by the CDU/CSU, if not with the center-left SDP, then in a “Jamaica coalition” with a reinvigorated center-right FDP joining the Greens by their side.

Of course polls can and do change, and one election does not imply a radical cultural shift. But the overall political climate in Europe has been trending rightward for some time. After the financial crisis, and the austerity that followed, the traditional left-wing parties began to collapse, and more nationalist and extreme-right alternatives to the mainstream — the AfD in Germany, National Rally in France, UKIP in England — began to arise. The surge in immigration that followed Syria’s and Libya’s collapse into civil war were further sources of fuel. These parties and movements — critical of the European Union, strongly opposed to immigration, frequently more friendly to Russia — were initially and in many cases still are opposed by all the mainstream parties, but that opposition did little to stem their growth. Eventually, in countries like Hungary and Poland, they began to win elections and assume the powers of government.

In Europe today, the most viable traditional parties are often mainstream right-wing parties that have sought to coopt the nationalist right’s issues — most notably Boris Johnson’s Tory Party, which eclipsed UKIP by adopting Brexit for itself — or parties self-consciously constituted around the technocratic center so as to unite the mainstream against the far right. True left-wing parties like Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s in France or Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour have largely fizzled. Meanwhile, the far right continues to produce new phenomena, most recently France’s Eric Zemmour, who has outflanked Le Pen on the right by being even more nationalist than she is.

If the result of all this ferment is a European political realignment that contains the far right by reviving a more inward-focused traditional conservatism, that would be good for Europe and, ultimately, for European relations with America. A Europe that was more oriented around national solidarity than global humanitarianism, open immigration, or free markets is a Europe America could readily live, work, and trade with. If by that means the continent achieved greater political stability and democratic accountability, most observers would consider it far preferable to either a lurch to the far right or a descent into civil strife.

But it might be startling for the American left to hear even centrist European politicians like Emmanuel Macron blame them for undermining national solidarity with their “woke” leftism. They might have to get used to it, though. Nothing is more useful for promoting national unity than a foreign threat. And while America’s foreign policy establishment would likely prefer that China be that threat, it makes far more sense for a Europe turning inward to decry pernicious American influence on their social fabric than China’s threats to Taiwan or its oppression of the Uyghur people.

The question then would be whether America’s left will take a lesson from the demise of their European cousins, and rethink their own approach to politics before they face a similar eclipse, and downgrade cultural questions in favor of bread and butter issues. Or, perhaps, whether Europe’s turn to the right will inspire America’s left to see unique promise once more in our own country’s distance from nationalism of the Old World, and redefine their own vision of a culturally egalitarian future not as a necessary redemption of our nation’s sinful history, but as a hoped-for fulfillment of distinctively American promise.

View Point: Drugs – Where we are at in Sault Ste. Marie

Sault Online

View Point: Drugs – Where we are at in Sault Ste. Marie

overdose

by Peter Chow

In 2020, Ontario saw 2,426 opioid-related deaths, a 60.0% increase from 1,517 deaths in 2019.

By age, the largest increases were among those aged 25 to 44 (61.4% increase from 83 to 134 deaths monthly) and those aged 45 to 64 years (119.5% increase from 41 to 90 deaths monthly).

The Algoma region saw 53 opioid deaths in 2020, up from 17 in 2019. So far, in 2021, we are on track for over 60 opioid overdose deaths.

Sudbury’s per capita deaths by opioid is the highest in Ontario, with over 50 per 100,000, with North Bay, Thunder Bay, Timmins and Sault Ste. Marie close to, or over 40 deaths per 100,000.

There was a rise in the number of overdose deaths with stimulants and benzodiazepines involved in 2020.

The percentage of opioid-related deaths associated with stimulants, such as Crystal Meth or Cocaine, as a contributing factor, increased from 52.0% in 2019 to 60.5% in 2020

Approximately one-third of deaths also involved a benzodiazepine, such as Valium or Xanax.

Of the people who died of overdose in 2020, that were employed at the time they died, 30% were construction workers, more prevalent in this industry than any other. The nature of the industry can lead its workers down the path of addiction.

With workplace injuries not uncommon, prescription painkillers can often lead to drug dependence. The trouble really starts when the doctor cuts off the prescriptions. The addicted worker can’t get the pain killers anymore and that’s when they go to the street.

For those unfortunate people addicted to opiates, there are medicines that work to reduce the effects of withdrawal and  reduce cravings  –  Suboxone, Methadone, and Naltrexone. These medications reduce mortality rates as they significantly reduce the chance of relapse and overdose. All three medicines substantially reduce the risk of dying from an overdose.

Until recently, Methadone was the primary drug prescribed for the treatment of opioid use disorder. However, the chance of an overdose with Methadone is 6 times higher than with Suboxone.

BC and Ontario have now made Suboxone (a combination of Buprenorphine and Naloxone), the primary recommended treatment for persons who have been abusing opioids for years, and it is on the provincial formularies, meaning those who qualify will receive the drug free of charge.

Other provinces will likely follow BC and Ontario.

Buprenorphine is a partial opiate agonist. It binds to the opioid receptors in the brain, relieving symptoms of withdrawal and cravings without producing a high.

The only purpose of the Naloxone in Suboxone is to prevent abuse of the drug by injection.

Suboxone is the safest of the opioid treatment medications. Suboxone is a pill (it goes under your tongue). It is now available as an injectable long-acting implant, but only in the US.

Methadone is used in the case of a severe addiction to opioids where Suboxone does not sufficiently relieve the symptoms of withdrawal. Methadone is a full opioid agonist, like Heroin. It binds to the opioid receptors in the brain, relieving symptoms of withdrawal and cravings.

In the most severe cases where persons on Methadone continue to relapse, pharmacy-grade Hydromorphone (Dilaudid) can be prescribed to  prevent withdrawal and cravings.

In persons motivated to choose abstinence, Naltrexone can be used to manage cravings. Naltrexone blocks the brain cells’ opioid receptors and thus the euphoria from abusing drugs.

Revia and Apo-Naltrexone are the pill form of Naltrexone and must be taken daily. Vivitrol is the injectable form of Naltrexone which lasts one month. Vivitrol is currently not available in Canada and costs about $1,000 per shot in the US. However, physicians may apply to get Vivitrol under Health Canada’s Special Access Program.

Due to a loss of tolerance to opiates from using Naltrexone, there is a high risk of overdose if Naltrexone is discontinued and there is a return to opioid use. Yet surprisingly, these medications are severely underused.

Fewer than 10% of those addicted to opioids are on Suboxone, Methadone or Naltrexone. Bureaucratic restrictions keep doctors from widely prescribing Suboxone.

The Ontario Drug Benefit codes for Suboxone state that prescribers should complete an accredited course on opioid addiction and Buprenorphine treatment before prescribing.

The requirement that Methadone be doled out in person remains, even though evidence shows that allowing it to be taken home reduces subsequent hospitalizations.

Skittishness among non-addiction-specialist doctors limits the use of these treatments, as does a shortage of addiction specialists, especially in rural areas. We don’t have an addiction specialist in the Soo.

Supervised Injection Sites are clean indoor environments where people can use pre-obtained drugs with trained health professionals present to ensure safe drug consumption methods, respond in the event of an overdose, provide counseling and referrals to vital social services and treatment options and test drugs for any trace of Fentanyl.

Extensive research has shown Supervised Injection Sites reduce overdose deaths, increase addiction treatment uptake, and reduce social nuisance.

Although Supervised Injection Sites are not the sole answer to the opioid crisis, they are being set up by Canadian cities as a way to fill an immense gap in the current system of care and engage a highly vulnerable and difficult to reach population – ultimately reducing the public health burden and saving lives.

But polls show that a Supervised Injection Site will likely face the familiar barrier of unfavorable public opinion in Sault Ste Marie, behind the times as usual. Supervised Injection Sites remain highly controversial and stigmatized.

The public and political concerns and fears are clear: that Supervised Injection Sites promote drug use, that they will bring drug users to the neighborhoods they are located in, that it is morally and legally wrong to encourage and allow drug use, and so on.

NIMBY.

This battle illuminates the societal impact of the war on drugs and a country that criminalizes addiction. Calls for “Heroin-Assisted Treatment”, as practised in some European countries, like Switzerland, are going nowhere.

Canada is still not Switzerland.

Even if Canada managed to build 100 Supervised Injection Sites, that might  cover only 1% of actual usage. It’s just not scalable.

Suboxone is scalable.  Needle exchanges are scalable.  Naloxone is scalable.  Anonymous drug testing is scalable.  That’s what public health should concentrate on.

Primary Care Providers (PCP), doctors and nurse practitioners, should be fully educated and trained on the treatment of Opioid Use Disorder with Suboxone, Methadone or Naltrexone.

Two measures alone, Anonymous Drug Testing (to screen for Fentanyl-tainted drugs) and increased access to Suboxone, would do more than anything else to immediately reduce harm and deaths from opioids.

The challenge now is that the nature of addiction has transformed into something deadlier in recent years—and not just because of potent synthetic opioids like Fentanyl and Carfentanil. (Carfentanil’s potency is 10,000 times that of Morphine and 100 times that of Fentanyl.)

It is because of the rising abuse of other types of drugs as well  –  stimulants (Meth and Cocaine) and “Benzos.”

In 2011, 19% of opioid drug users said that they also used Crystal Meth (Methamphetamine);  by 2019 that number had grown to 60%.

Opioids such as Heroin, Oxycodone and Fentanyl depress the nervous system and have a sedative effect.

Methamphetamines, on the other hand, are stimulants and have the opposite effect, making people euphoric and feeling like they have endless energy.

Like Cocaine, Crystal Meth makes a user high by releasing the neurotransmitter Dopamine into the brain. But with Crystal Meth, the effects are more pronounced, last longer and keep users awake for extended periods of time. In fact, people who are homeless, living in shelters or crowded, unsafe spaces, seek out Crystal Meth in particular.

To protect themselves and their belongings, they need to stay awake;  and in order to stay awake, they use Crystal Meth daily.

The availability and use of Crystal Meth is still increasing rapidly because Meth is so cheap, and people get such a quick and powerful rush of euphoria that can last for 12 hours or more.  A “hit” with what is almost 100% pure Meth can cost as little as $5..

According to the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), the going street rate for Meth in Northern Ontario, as of 2020, was $10 to $30 a “point” (one-tenth of a gram). Dealers operate on the principle of supply and demand, so communities plagued by addiction — like Sault Ste Marie — are an attractive market in which to sell a cheap drug.

It is not confined to any particular socio-economic group, but found everywhere in every strata of society. Nor is it exclusively an urban issue. No community is immune to it, especially rural and First Nations communities.

One community struggling with the Crystal Meth epidemic is the Montreal Lake First Nation, where an estimated 60% of residents are addicted to the drug. Winnipeg, Calgary and Regina are in the grip of a Crystal Meth crisis that is only getting worse.

Meth is a key factor driving crime rates, both violent and property related.

In 2016, Crystal Meth hit with full force and crime rates — primarily thefts of items people were selling to feed their addiction — increased dramatically.

The Calgary police chief says;  “Fentanyl is a community health crisis, Crystal Meth is a crime and safety issue.”

Crystal Meth use makes treatment more complicated. There are no well-developed pharmaceutical therapeutics for addiction to Crystal Meth.

Doctors have started using Olanzapine, an antipsychotic drug, to try to provide immediate relief for patients suffering distressing symptoms from Meth use. “Olanzapine sort of gels their brain a bit,” one ER doctor said. “Their brain is firing all over the place, and if we can help just bring it together a little bit so that we can start working and talking through it, that’s helpful.” If that doesn’t work, and safety is a concern, patients sometimes have to be sedated further, or even physically restrained.

After the patient has settled down, there’s little more that healthcare workers can do.

The doctor said it’s upsetting to watch patients leave the emergency department knowing that their Meth-induced mood swings, paranoia and hallucinations can last for days — not to mention the “cravings that come afterwards.”

“All of that sets somebody up to use again very quickly.”

“The understanding of how to treat somebody who is interested in stopping Meth is very, very minimal,” she said.

Unlike opioid replacement therapy — which uses Suboxone or Methadone to relieve withdrawal symptoms — Meth has no pharmaceutical solution to reduce cravings. “It’s a whole other area of substance abuse and addiction that is so difficult.”

Deaths due to “Meth toxicity” (with no evidence of opiates) increased,  from 38 cases in 2015 to 54 in 2018, Dr. Dirk Huyer, Ontario’s chief coroner said. In those cases, a Meth-induced irregular heartbeat rhythm could be a possible cause of death.

84% of deaths involving Meth also involved an opioid in 2020.

Last year marked the first time Ontario has included stimulant-related deaths in its overdose-death data, which has typically counted only deaths caused by opioids. In total, there were at least 300 overdose deaths that involved both stimulants and opioids, every month in Ontario from May to October in 2020  –  the equivalent of 10 people dying every day.

Today, more people using Meth are at risk of dying from overdoses than ever before. Just as drug dealers have cut opioids like Heroin with Fentanyl or Carfentanil, they have also mixed them into other types of drugs, including Meth.

For one Meth user, life has become a seemingly unbreakable cycle, in which he commits crimes to feed his addiction, goes to jail, comes out sober and then relapses, starting all over again. Without a trace of resentment or self-pity, he acknowledges that jail has been the only place where he’s been drug-free for long stretches.

“As much as, like, nobody wants to go to jail, it’s really the only place where I can grow as a person,” he said.

Europe is becoming a right-wing continent

Europe is becoming a right-wing continent

For a certain kind of American liberal, it’s almost a reflexive gesture to wish the United States were more like Europe. There, health care is provided on a more egalitarian basis and a university education is much cheaper, if not free; sexual mores are more relaxed and gun ownership is rare; religion is vestigial and militant nationalism is strictly taboo. Widespread European distress over the presidencies of George W. Bush and Donald Trump only confirmed what American liberals knew: that the Old Country was also the dreamland of their imagined liberal American future.

 

I wonder how it will feel when Europe becomes distinctly more right-wing than the United States.

It’s not an inconceivable prospect. The United Kingdom has a Tory government right now, and based on current polling their position looks increasingly secure. France’s centrist president Emmanuel Macron would likely be re-elected if the election were held today, but Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally party polls considerably higher today in a one-on-one contest with Macron than it did in 2017. Italy’s fragile coalition could be followed by a right-wing coalition of Matteo Salvini’s Lega and the neofascist-derived Fratelli D’Italia.

Even in Germany, where the Christian Democrat Angela Merkel’s 16-year rule is coming to a close, the next government may once again be a coalition led by the CDU/CSU, if not with the center-left SDP, then in a “Jamaica coalition” with a reinvigorated center-right FDP joining the Greens by their side.

Of course polls can and do change, and one election does not imply a radical cultural shift. But the overall political climate in Europe has been trending rightward for some time. After the financial crisis, and the austerity that followed, the traditional left-wing parties began to collapse, and more nationalist and extreme-right alternatives to the mainstream — the AfD in Germany, National Rally in France, UKIP in England — began to arise. The surge in immigration that followed Syria’s and Libya’s collapse into civil war were further sources of fuel. These parties and movements — critical of the European Union, strongly opposed to immigration, frequently more friendly to Russia — were initially and in many cases still are opposed by all the mainstream parties, but that opposition did little to stem their growth. Eventually, in countries like Hungary and Poland, they began to win elections and assume the powers of government.

In Europe today, the most viable traditional parties are often mainstream right-wing parties that have sought to coopt the nationalist right’s issues — most notably Boris Johnson’s Tory Party, which eclipsed UKIP by adopting Brexit for itself — or parties self-consciously constituted around the technocratic center so as to unite the mainstream against the far right. True left-wing parties like Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s in France or Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour have largely fizzled. Meanwhile, the far right continues to produce new phenomena, most recently France’s Eric Zemmour, who has outflanked Le Pen on the right by being even more nationalist than she is.

If the result of all this ferment is a European political realignment that contains the far right by reviving a more inward-focused traditional conservatism, that would be good for Europe and, ultimately, for European relations with America. A Europe that was more oriented around national solidarity than global humanitarianism, open immigration, or free markets is a Europe America could readily live, work, and trade with. If by that means the continent achieved greater political stability and democratic accountability, most observers would consider it far preferable to either a lurch to the far right or a descent into civil strife.

But it might be startling for the American left to hear even centrist European politicians like Emmanuel Macron blame them for undermining national solidarity with their “woke” leftism. They might have to get used to it, though. Nothing is more useful for promoting national unity than a foreign threat. And while America’s foreign policy establishment would likely prefer that China be that threat, it makes far more sense for a Europe turning inward to decry pernicious American influence on their social fabric than China’s threats to Taiwan or its oppression of the Uyghur people.

The question then would be whether America’s left will take a lesson from the demise of their European cousins, and rethink their own approach to politics before they face a similar eclipse, and downgrade cultural questions in favor of bread and butter issues. Or, perhaps, whether Europe’s turn to the right will inspire America’s left to see unique promise once more in our own country’s distance from nationalism of the Old World, and redefine their own vision of a culturally egalitarian future not as a necessary redemption of our nation’s sinful history, but as a hoped-for fulfillment of distinctively American promise.

Utah’s Great Salt Lake is in trouble

Axios

Utah’s Great Salt Lake is in trouble

 

Utah’s Great Salt Lake is in trouble, with serious ramifications for one of America’s fastest-growing areas.

Why it matters: It’s the largest natural lake west of the Mississippi River and has been shrinking for years, with the mega-drought making it even worse, reports AP’s Lindsay Whitehurst.

Get market news worthy of your time with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free.

  • The lake’s levels are expected to hit a 170-year low this year.
  • Wildlife is suffering from the decline, especially birds and shrimp.
Visitors stand in the shallow waters in June. Photo: Rick Bowmer/AP

The waves have been replaced by dry, gravelly lakebed that’s grown to 750 square miles. Winds can whip up dust from the dry lakebed that is laced with naturally occurring arsenic.

Tourism is also at risk: The dust from the lakebed could speed up snowmelt at Utah’s popular ski resorts.

  • And once-popular lakeside resorts are now long shuttered.

People swim at Saltair in 1933. The resort once drew sunbathers who would float like corks in the Great Salt Lake’s extra salty waters. Photo: Salt Lake Tribune via AP

The bottom line: To maintain lake levels, diverting water from rivers that flow into it would have to decrease by 30%.

  • But for the state with the nation’s fastest-growing population, addressing the problem will require a major shift in how water is allocated.

The ‘Good’ Republicans Are Bad, and the Bad Ones Are Batshit

The ‘Good’ Republicans Are Bad, and the Bad Ones Are Batshit

Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/Getty
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/Getty

 

Chip Roy from Texas’ 21st Congressional District didn’t vote to overturn the election of the 2020 election, which made him slightly better than 147 of his colleagues who voted to change the election results because they didn’t like them.

Roy released a statement with a small group of Republican reps who wanted to follow the law despite the fact that their guy lost, warning that trying to overturn the election would “strengthen the efforts of those on the left who are determined to eliminate it or render it irrelevant.” He even went as far as to challenge the seating of representatives from states where members of his party were challenging the results of the election—a pretty bold move considering one of the people who was challenging the results was his old boss Ted Cruz.

But what a difference six months makes. Roy is no longer Team Electoral College and the Constitution. He’s joined the rest of his party—with the exception of soon-to-be-purged Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney—on Team Own the Libs Even If It Means Killing Your Supporters.

GOP Rep: If Dems Win Senate, We’ll Be in ‘Full-Scale Hot Conflict’

This weekend he was sounding like a mini-Newt, telling a group in a recently surfaced video that “Honestly, right now, for the next 18 months, our job is to do everything we can to slow all of that down to get to December of 2022, and then get in there and lead.” When CNN followed up, “Roy responded to coverage of his earlier comments in a statement standing by his remarks, saying he plans to ‘oppose almost everything that Congress does,’ and pledging ‘to fight with every ounce of my being to stop the radical left—and weak Republicans.’” And then of course there was his weird anti-vaxxer tweet: “come inject it.” A great message when the most contagious delta variant is taking hold and new polling from the Washington Post-ABC shows that 47 percent of Republicans “aren’t likely to get vaccinated.”

This is the Republican brand now: death before decency. What Roy’s colleague Paul Gosar learned from Trumpism is that working with terrifying far-right extremists is totally cool. Gosar is now even more far-right than Steve King, who was censured for his white nationalist statements back when Republicans at least pretended to give a shit.

This Trump Wannabe Just Might Be the Worst of the Rotten Bunch

Now Gosar is being praised by white nationalist Nick Fuentes—and minority “Leader” Kevin McCarthy is fine with that, just like he’s fine with Marjorie Taylor Greene raving about the Jews and Matt Gaetz (R-Sex Creep) staying on the House Ethics Committee so that he could question the head of the FBI while continuing to be investigated by the FBI.

Meanwhile Stop the Steal speaker Mo Brooks is now running for Senate in Alabama. Brooks, who was a planner of the Jan. 6 rally, according to a deleted video from Ali Alexander, claims in a new civil filing that he only spoke at the rally-turned-riot because the White House told him to. That was in the same legal filing in which he said he believes that Trump still won the election (Trump did not).

Since no one in Trumpworld has been punished for anything, Republicans have learned that you do anything at all and no one will ever hold you accountable. Local Republicans continue trying to make it harder for the “wrong people” to vote, including Native Americans in Montana this week. It’s not about racism, they insist; it’s about stopping groups that back Democrats who oppose racism.

Trump taught Republicans that they can be as shitty as they want, and no one will stop them, as long as they don’t cross Trump. Just look at former Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens, who resigned after he was indicted on felony charges after cheating on his wife with a woman he blackmailed and abused. He’s running for Senate now, and a GOP mega-donor just gave him $2.5 million because allegations of sexual assault are no longer a barrier to entry in today’s GOP; they may even be the mark of a “real man.” Just ask Donald.

These people will continue to break rules and wreck our democracy until someone—are you listening, Merrick Garland?—holds them accountable.

If Chip Roy is the best of this rotten bunch, it’s time to toss the whole barrel. William Butler Yeats must have been writing about the Republicans when he wrote that “the best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity.”

Pew Poll: The Republican Party is Literally Dying, With The GOP’s Backbone Now People Over 75. 

The Sierra Madre Tattler

Pew Poll: The Republican Party is Literally Dying, With The GOP’s Backbone Now People Over 75.

thesierramadretattler.blogspot.com              July 7, 2021


Mod: Bad news for Jumbo. Many of the Republican Party‘s most loyal voters are not as young as they used to be, and nobody is exactly rushing in to line up and replace them.

The Republican Party Is Literally Shrinking And Dying Right Before Our Eyes (PoliticusUSA link): A new analysis of voter file information found that the Republican Party’s backbone is people over 75, and that group is becoming a smaller share of the electorate. 

The Week reported, “But Pew also broke the survey down into not just age groups but generational cohorts. And it’s here where you’ll find the most terrifying information for the GOP. According to PewTrump won a decisive majority only with members of the “Silent Generation,” those born between 1928 and 1945 (and the extremely tiny number of living people older than that).”

Trump dominated that cohort by 16 points, 58-42. That means that the only reliably Republican voter bloc will shrink considerably between now and 2024, and that 65- to 74-year-olds must have been a much more blue-leaning group in 2020 to produce Trump’s comparatively narrow 4-point margin with all over-65s.”
The Republican Party is literally dying, These numbers suggest that the Republican base will continue to get smaller, as younger and more Democratic voters take up a larger share of the electorate. 

Given this context, the Republican Party has opted for a strategy of making the electorate as small as possible. The only way that they can win elections, even while the backbone of their party is expiring, is to make sure that as many people as possible can’t vote and participate in elections.

Republicans had a choice after they lost in 2020. They could have opted to reassess their tactics and tried to rebrand themselves to appeal to younger voters, or they could run it all back with an even older and defeated Donald Trump, who is young voter repellent in human form.They have chosen voter suppression and Trump.

The clock is ticking on the Republican Party. They are fighting a battle that they have already lost. The party isn’t just getting smaller, it is literally dying before our eyes.