What does a BIDEN Presidency look like?

[The Minsky Moment]

I've met Ted Cruz in non-formal settings, prior to his attaining high political office.  As to political matters, you could not have a reasonable conversation with him.  If anything, he seems to have become a little more reasonable for public consumption.

[Jacob]

I've met Ted Cruz in non-formal settings, prior to his attaining high political office.  As to political matters, you could not have a reasonable conversation with him.  If anything, he seems to have become a little more reasonable for public consumption.

So he's a true believer, basically?

[Valmy]

I've met Ted Cruz in non-formal settings, prior to his attaining high political office.  As to political matters, you could not have a reasonable conversation with him.  If anything, he seems to have become a little more reasonable for public consumption.

So he's a true believer, basically?

Yeah he is a fanatic. I frankly would prefer an old school corrupt Texas politician, we didn't know how good we had it.

[Razgovory]

He's detested by other Republicans.  I think it's possible he's just an asshole.

[The Larch]

Can Iowan and Minnesottan kids do a charming victorian chimney sweep accent?

Iowa, Minnesota considering loosening child labor laws as job market tightens

As local economies grapple with a tight labor market, some state legislatures are looking to loosen child labor protections to help employers meet hiring needs.

Experts say this is part of a continuing trend in labor economics. When employers struggle to find talent, many prefer to hire young, cheap workers rather than raise wages and benefits to attract older adults.

"Because of the high demand for workers, where there are holes in the system, child labor can unfortunately become trapped in keeping some of those holes in the workforce," said David Weil, a professor of social policy and management at Brandeis University and a former professor of social policy at Brandeis University. Wage and Hour Administrator in the Department of Labor.

Legislators in Iowa and Minnesota introduced bills in January to loosen child labor law rules around age and workplace safety protections in some of the nation's most dangerous workplaces. Minnesota's bill would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to work in construction. The Iowa measure would allow 14- and 15-year-olds to do some work in meatpacking plants.

The Iowa bill, introduced by state Sen. Jason Schultz (R), would allow children under the age of 14 to work in industrial freezers and meat coolers, provided they are separate from meat preparation, and industrial laundry. work in

At age 15, they'll be able to work as lifeguards and swim instructors, do light assembly-line work after receiving exemptions from state officials, and load and unload products up to 50 pounds from vehicles And will stock store shelves with discounts. The strength and potential of a fifteen year old.

Iowa's proposal would also expand the hours teens can work during the school year, and protect businesses from civil liability if a youth worker becomes ill, injured or killed on the job.

Schultz did not respond to requests for comment. Critics say the proposal is dangerous and will subject child labor to hazardous environments.

"Do you remember images of children in construction and other dangerous work situations from the early 1900s?" Connie Ryan, executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa, said in testimony to state lawmakers, according to Radio Iowa. "There's a reason our society said it's not appropriate for children to work under those conditions."

Proponents of the Iowa bill argue that lowering the age limit fills a need. During the same hearing at which Ryan spoke, grocery industry lobbyist Brad Epperly argued that "terrible fewer" young people are working. He cited federal data that pegs the job participation rate for people aged 16 to 24 in 2021 at about 56 percent.

New Jersey enacted a law last year allowing teens to work when school is not in session. Wisconsin's state legislature lifted restrictions on work hours during the school year, but Gov. Tony Evers (D) vetoed the legislation. The Ohio State Senate unanimously passed a similar bill, but the measure died in the lower chamber of the legislature.

Federal regulators have scrutinized reports of child labor violations in recent months.

In August, the Labor Department sued a Hyundai supplier in Alabama after Reuters reported the facility used workers as young as 12.

A Nebraska labor contractor for meat producer JBS reached a settlement with the Department of Labor in December to resolve civil charges after regulators accused it of using "oppressive child labor." Law enforcement began an investigation at the plant after an underage worker allegedly suffered chemical burns from cleaning agents used at the plant.

To protect underage workers from hazardous environments and to prioritize schooling, federal law limits the types of work children can do, and the number of hours they can work each week.

States can impose additional requirements, and in the past they have targeted particularly dangerous workplaces.

However, those state laws are withdrawn from time to time for various reasons. Reid Maki, director of advocacy at the Child Labor Coalition, said some state economies depend on industries such as agriculture that rely on immigrant or migrant workers and their families.

He said that during tough economic times, some parents want their children to get jobs or help them work longer hours. And during a period of full employment – ��the US unemployment rate of 3.4 percent is the lowest in decades – employers want a larger workforce to ease their hiring stresses.

Experts say that children taking up these jobs may come at a high cost and could harm their long-term prospects in the labor market.

Shawn Bushway, a professor at the University of Albany, said some of the jobs kids do — babysitting, waiting tables at restaurants, eating ice cream — can be good for them. These types of jobs can teach responsibility, professionalism and financial literacy, said Bushway, who studies the effects of work on young people.

But other, more business-oriented jobs, such as agricultural work, landscaping and construction, can be more harmful, said Debbie Berkowitz, a fellow at Georgetown University's Kalmanowitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. They are less likely to employ middle or upper class children who take up jobs for workplace experience or pocket change.

Instead, Berkowitz and other child labor critics say that low-income families are more likely to hire children for those roles. "Many child labor jobs are menial jobs and those skills are not transferable," Berkowitz said.

Bushway and other researchers have found that the less restrictive state regulations are with youth employment, the more children will work, and the more hours they will work. But limiting the number of hours children work can help their education, Berkowitz said.

"They don't have to go to college, but they can learn a skill and join an apprenticeship program and pull everyone up," she said. "And they can still work for a few hours on the weekend and after school, but they must focus on school."

[FunkMonk]

We could always, you know, reform immigration laws to make it easier to come to this country legally for work. 

[Tonitrus]

We could always, you know, reform immigration laws to make it easier to come to this country legally for work. 

. But, they'll take our jobs!

[Syt]

Can Iowan and Minnesottan kids do a charming victorian chimney sweep accent?

This will improve income of Dependents by 30%, but mortality of peasants, farmers, laborers, and machinists will increase by 5%. Also, literacy will drop.

The Industrialists will approve, while the Trade Unions will be unhappy - since Trade Unionists in the US are a marginalized interest group, though, the latter shouldn't matter.

[Syt]

We could always, you know, reform immigration laws to make it easier to come to this country legally for work. 

. But, they'll take our jobs!

Won't someone think of the children('s jobs)?!

[Syt]

Also, this will probably create the next job categories for the "working poor."

"These jobs were NEVER meant to pay a living wage/were always meant as side income for kids/teens/students - get off your ass and get a proper job, you bum!"

[crazy canuck]

We could always, you know, reform immigration laws to make it easier to come to this country legally for work. 

But that would create more prosperity, which in turn would create a larger tax base, which in turn would provide more funds to government to provide essential services to the citizenry.  And that means less ability to privatize those essential services.  No chance that ever happens.

[Admiral Yi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f55QcO7nKn8

Joe proposes raising Medicare payroll tax from 3.8% to 5% on those earning 400K or more.

[Jacob]

Seems fine to me, but how will that pass the house?

[Admiral Yi]

Seems fine to me, but how will that pass the house?

It probably helps a bit that Republicans are on the back foot because of comments about sunsetting Social Security and Medicare.

[Syt]

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/03/15/americans-misestimate-small-subgroups-population

From millionaires to Muslims, small subgroups of the population seem much larger to many Americans

When it comes to estimating the size of demographic groups, Americans rarely get it right. In two recent YouGov polls, we asked respondents to guess the percentage (ranging from 0% to 100%) of American adults who are members of 43 different groups, including racial and religious groups, as well as other less frequently studied groups, such as pet owners and those who are left-handed.

When people's average perceptions of group sizes are compared to actual population estimates, an intriguing pattern emerges: Americans tend to vastly overestimate the size of minority groups. This holds for sexual minorities, including the proportion of gays and lesbians (estimate: 30%, true: 3%), bisexuals (estimate: 29%, true: 4%), and people who are transgender (estimate: 21%, true: 0.6%).

It also applies to religious minorities, such as Muslim Americans (estimate: 27%, true: 1%) and Jewish Americans (estimate: 30%, true: 2%). And we find the same sorts of overestimates for racial and ethnic minorities, such as Native Americans (estimate: 27%, true: 1%), Asian Americans (estimate: 29%, true: 6%), and Black Americans (estimate: 41%, true: 12%).

A parallel pattern emerges when we look at estimates of majority groups: People tend to underestimate rather than overestimate their size relative to their actual share of the adult population. For instance, we find that people underestimate the proportion of American adults who are Christian (estimate: 58%, true: 70%) and the proportion who have at least a high school degree (estimate: 65%, true: 89%).

The most accurate estimates involved groups whose real proportion fell right around 50%, including the percentage of American adults who are married (estimate: 55%, true: 51%) and have at least one child (estimate: 58%, true: 57%).

Misperceptions of the size of minority groups have been identified in prior surveys, which observers have often attributed to social causes: fear of out-groups, lack of personal exposure, or portrayals in the media. Yet consistent with prior research, we find that the tendency to misestimate the size of demographic groups is actually one instance of a broader tendency to overestimate small proportions and underestimate large ones, regardless of the topic.

If exaggerated perceptions of minority groups' share of the American population are due to fear, we would expect estimates of those groups' share that are made by the groups' members to be more accurate than those made by others. We tested this theory on minority groups that were represented by at least 100 respondents within our sample and found that they were no better (and often worse) than non-group members at guessing the relative size of the minority group they belong to.

Black Americans estimate that, on average, Black people make up 52% of the U.S. adult population; non-Black Americans estimate the proportion is roughly 39%, closer to the real figure of 12%. First-generation immigrants we surveyed estimate that first-generation immigrants account for 40% of U.S. adults, while non-immigrants guess it is around 31%, closer to the actual figure of 14%.

Although there is some question-by-question variability, the results from our survey show that inaccurate perceptions of group size are not limited to the types of socially charged group divisions typically explored in similar studies: race, religion, sexuality, education, and income. Americans are equally likely to misestimate the size of less widely discussed groups, such as adults who are left-handed. While respondents estimated that 34% of U.S. adults are left-handed, the real estimate lies closer to 10-12%. Similar misperceptions are found regarding the proportion of American adults who own a pet, have read a book in the past year, or reside in various cities or states. This suggests that errors in judgment are not due to the specific context surrounding a certain group.

Why is demographic math so difficult? One recent meta-study suggests that when people are asked to make an estimation they are uncertain about, such as the size of a population, they tend to rescale their perceptions in a rational manner. When a person's lived experience suggests an extreme value — such as a small proportion of people who are Jewish or a large proportion of people who are Christian — they often assume, reasonably, that their experiences are biased. In response, they adjust their prior estimate of a group's size accordingly by shifting it closer to what they perceive to be the mean group size (that is, 50%). This can facilitate misestimation in surveys, such as ours, which don't require people to make tradeoffs by constraining the sum of group proportions within a certain category to 100%.

This reasoning process — referred to as uncertainty-based rescaling — leads people to systematically overestimate the size of small values and underestimate the size of large values. It also explains why estimates of populations closer to 0% (e.g., LGBT people, Muslims, and Native Americans) and populations closer to 100% (e.g., adults with a high school degree or who own a car) are less accurate than estimates of populations that are closer to 50%, such as the percentage of American adults who are married or have a child.

Does correcting misperceptions of group size change peoples' attitudes on related issues? Current research suggests it does not. In a series of studies (one of which used a survey fielded by YouGov), political scientists John Sides and Jack Citrin attempted to correct inaccurate beliefs about the size of the U.S. foreign-born population, both subtly, by embedding the accurate information in a news story, and explicitly, by providing survey respondents with Census Bureau estimates. They found that while providing this information did somewhat improve people's knowledge of the number of immigrants in America, they did not make people more supportive of immigration.

Below we display median estimates of group sizes, which tended to be more accurate than mean estimates, but with differences from the true estimates in the same direction.

Methodology: This article includes findings from two U.S. News surveys conducted by YouGov on two nationally representative samples of 1,000 U.S. adult citizens interviewed online from January 14-20, 2022. The first survey included questions on groups involving race, education, income, family, gender, and sexuality, while the second survey included questions on religion, politics, and other miscellaneous groups. The samples were weighted according to gender, age, race, and education based on the 2018 American Community Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, as well as 2016 and 2020 Presidential votes (or non-votes). Respondents were selected from YouGov's opt-in panel to be representative of all U.S. citizens. Real proportions were taken from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, YouGov's internal poll results, and the results of other well-established polling firms. Most estimates were collected within the past three years; the oldest is from 2009. Because the real estimates presented cover a range of time periods, they may differ from actual population sizes at the time our survey was conducted.

Median estimates of group sizes relative to actual population estimates
Estimated proportions median weighted responses (ranging from 0% to 100%, rounded to the nearest whole percentage) to the question "If you had to guess, what percentage of American adults..." True proportions were drawn from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and polls by YouGov and other polling firms.