text:
Tag Archives: Republicans
Persuasion: Who and Whom
Who Persuades and Who Should be Persuaded? Gorgias and Socrates
Socrates, Plato and Aristotle in different ways undermined the importance of sophists because the latter concentrated more on argumentative technique and less slavish subservience to what they considered an elusive goal, tying those techniques to virtue. In the contemporary world, ironically, in the teaching of humanities, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle are far more revered as stars in the stellar universe of the Athenian intellectual world than Protagoras or Gorgias, Thrasymachus or Cratylus, even though the premises of the sophists dominate in the contemporary world. Excellence is now attached primarily to the methods used to advance knowledge rather than to a general ideal of how to develop virtuous souls.
The sophists fell into disrepute for many reasons, but perhaps the most important one was the war waged by their philosopher allies to undermine them. Further, a number of sophists had, in turn, used their techniques to teach how a public could be manipulated and not just influenced. They were ancient precursors to our current set of psychometric gurus who employ mass data and feedback loops. Teachers like Socrates used this reality to paint all sophists with the brush of corruption, with catering to populism rather than the pursuit of truth, as if those two were the only dichotomous options.
The reverse was more descriptive of reality. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, all apologists for an aristocratic political system from different perspectives, used rhetoric to turn the term "sophist" into an epithet of abuse, to heap contempt upon these teachers. They accused the sophists of being servants to false facts in service and subservience to undercutting ideals and traditional values. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, in their turn, became apologists for what we would now call the resurgent right.
Look at the case of Protagoras, perhaps the greatest of the sophists who taught relativism in opposition to a search for absolute Truth, Beauty and Justice. Reality was a matter of interpretation. Each person experiences the world in a different way and understands that world differently because of the frame brought to understanding the world. What we know are constructs. "Man is the measure of all things," was the distillation of his most famous aphorism. More fully, he claimed that, "Of all things, the measure is Man, of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not." The rules of determining what is true and what is not true are constructed and made by humans. So, one might conclude, there is no Truth.
In fact, sophists were generally agnostic on that question. The more important issue was not whether the standards for establishing Truth were absolute, but that both the Constructivists and the Realists by and large generally adhered to a common body of rules. The methods for establishing truths as distinct from falsehoods were shared. In the end of days, whether knowledge was a matter relative to experience, judgment and interpretation, or about absolute values, did not have to be determined.
In Plato's dialogue, Gorgias, like the dialogue Protagoras, there is a conversation between Socrates and his sophist rivals. The topic of Gorgias is rhetoric itself. It is about the art of persuasion. Gorgias himself happened to be a foreigner who had immigrated to Athens, attracted by its intellectual and artistic reputation as well as its political solidity. The nub of the debate was Socrates' contention that rhetoric had to be subservient to philosophy; without the guidance of philosophy, rhetoric disaggregated into techniques of flattery and manipulation. Proper persuasion can only exist within a moral frame, Socrates argued. Otherwise rhetoric only serves the making of money and the acquisition of power and not a higher purpose.
Sounds familiar? In Plato's telling, Socrates traps Gorgias and the sophists by insisting they first provide a definition of rhetoric. If Plato had not been telling the tale, they would have replied, "Look at our practices." You cannot define hockey or baseball or basketball with a simple definition. Each sport is a set of practices and rules. The same is true of rhetoric. But Plato's Socrates in the dialogue Gorgias reveals his true colours. He no longer professes his ignorance as a technique for sucking his opponents into self-contradictions and incoherence. Socrates reveals himself as an evangelist for Truth. In his discussions with three sophists, first Gorgias, then Polus and finally Callicles, Socrates ends up preaching and exhorting rather than arguing and persuading.
However, that is not how he starts out. Speaking of Gorgias, Socrates states, "I want to learn from him what is the scope of his art and just what he professes and teaches." (447c) So the conversation begins with Socrates asking Gorgias to introduce himself, to say who he is and what he does. And when reading the answer, we immediately sense a set-up. For Gorgias comes across as an arrogant know-it-all, as someone who can answer any question posed, and do so concisely; further, Gorgias insists, that he has not been asked a new question in years.
Socrates begins with an argument very familiar from other dialogues – the analogue of expertise. A doctor is called a doctor because he has an expertise in medicine, in treating and healing patients. A shoemaker is designated as such because he has an expertise in making and repairing shoes. Polus agrees and says, "There are many arts…experimentally devised by experience, for experience guides our life along the path of art, inexperience along the path of chance." (448c) We know then and there that we are into a rip-roaring discussion, for Socrates was the last to allow experience to serve as the arbiter of Truth, Beauty and Justice.
Socrates then makes a vital distinction, one between dialogue and rhetoric with the clear implication that he, Socrates, is wedded to dialogue in contrast to the Sophist reverence for rhetoric. At the same time, Socrates uses the distinction to put down Polus before Gorgias, his teacher, and to use irony and sarcasm to put down Gorgias. Socrates is clearly not fazed by dissing his opponents.
The path to logical ruin for the sophists begins with the admission that many arts have to do with words, not just rhetoric, but medicine does not have to do with just words, the skill previously ascribed by Gorgias as characteristic of rhetoric. Therefore, the mastery of the use of words is not specific to rhetoric. Thus, Socrates concludes, "rhetoric is not concerned with every kind of words." (449e) The difference, Gorgias claims, is that rhetoric deals exclusively with words. But then he commits hara-kiri when he asserts, compatible with the character Plato gives him, that the subject matter of rhetoric is "the greatest and noblest of human affairs. (451d) Once Socrates has moved Gorgias from the safe ground of technique to a claim to serve the highest values, Gorgias is finished and Socrates metaphorically murders him with his own words deliberately, systematically and without mercy.
There is a major lesson here. In discussing how to deal with the phenomenon of Trumpism, stick to technique and do not get into debates about the highest and most important values. Stick to falsifying and establishing facts. Stick to the formal and informal rules of argument. Do not get into a debate over values. And the reason is rather simple. If you debate values, one party in Camp B holds the ones they esteem with far more dedication and commitment than you do. For you consider values to be debateable; they do not. They are mostly unbudgeable on those values, especially in dealing with those who have such a weak dedication to ultimate values. Stick to arguments about civility and process, values which many of them share.
In sum, if the persuaders spend their time undercutting one another, the true opposition will move in to occupy the territory left in the vacuum.
In the case of the other party in Camp B, our contemporary cynics, note the following. They can be subdivided into four groups – Tom Friedman in the NYT 22 February 2017 suggested five, but two were the same group looked at from different angles – Trump as entertainer and monopolist of the news day and the essential Trump who holds loyalty to himself as an absolute, exclusive and highest value. These are but two sides of his malignant narcissism.
The second group led by Stephen Bannon, the Rasputin of the White house, along with Stephen Miller and others, represents what Friedman calls Trump crazy. We are not certain to what degree they are part of the backdrop to make Trump look like a relative moderate, or whether they have Trump under their spell with their combination of cynicism and apocalyptic vision or the degree to which Trump is an integral member of that group – a position I tend to take. I believe it is important to make the distinction, but it is one irrelevant to the discussion of persuasion. For Trump and his acolytes and Bannon and his fellow crazies, all are unreachable.
There is another group, not really separable from the Trump narcissistic ideological camp, the incompetents – Betsy DeVos, Trump's Education Secretary, Scott Pruitt, Trump's head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Tom Price, an ex-orthopedic surgeon, head of the Department of Health and Human Services, and Ben Carson, another retired surgeon, Secretary of Housing. They are different members of the crazies in the Trump camp, milder, not so mad, and not as bent on general mayhem and destruction, but more focused in the service they are willing and eager to perform. A few of them possibly could be reached, but it is questionable whether it is worth the effort.
It is the other two groups that are of greatest interest. Friedman conflates two different mismatched groups. There is the clean-up crew, who appear on television, bask in the shared limelight and manage to share extensively in Trump's lying and deception, who are Trump's acolytes. They ae but appendages to Trump's malignant narcissism. They should not be conflated with the Secretary of Defense, Jim Mattis, and Nikki Haley, his Ambassador to the UN. The latter two are NOT clean-up crew. They are independent voices who serve as correctors – a very different function – to Trump's statements, often overtly contradicting his policy preferences. The Secretary of State, Rex W. Tillerson, and The National Security Adviser, Lt. General H.R. McMaster, belong in the camp of correctors and offsetters to the madness and chaos of the Trump enterprise. They will all listen to reason and conduct policy with the same attention to facts and logic as the members of Camp A. They have strong convictions, but are open to communication. This suggests that foreign affairs and defense may be the least to suffer least, at least on the ground, from Trump's rambling, inchoate and dangerous musings.
The other group that is more difficult to make cognitive contact with are members of the traditional Republican Party, including the Tea Party members, who supinely bowed to Trump both before and after his unwanted takeover. Reince Priebus represents this group in the White House and it is questionable how long he can last among the chaos of the competing groups since his greatest quality, his willingness to be a supplicant, is the last one needed to bring discipline and order to the White House. But that is a matter strictly to the benefit of the opposition. For the real centre of power for the party members in the takeover are in Congress. Their pact with the devil to get their favourite priorities through Congress – tax cuts, dismantling Obamacare, appointing right-wingers to the Supreme Court, deregulation – will mean that most of them, except for the bravest such as John McCain, will stay loyal to Trump as long as he advances their domestic agenda.
The bottom line – foreign affairs and defense seem to be in safer hands than the domestic agenda. But the two are conflated when it comes to immigration and refugee policy. Does John F. Kelly belong to the cluster of incompetents in the Trump camp eager and willing to serve as his surrogate in his main enterprise of bashing aliens? Or, given his military record as a Marine Corps General and former commander of the U.S. Southern Command, there is every indication that he is both a loyal and obedient soldier to his Commander-in-Chief and an independent individual, like Mattis and Tillerson. He also has considerable political experience having served as the Commandant's Liaison Officer to the U.S. House of Representatives starting in 1995. However, he has little respect for the "chattering classes" and those who push a softer approach to ISIS. But he does know and understand Islam.
The real danger is that these independent thinkers and doers will be alienated by the opposition if they are regarded simply as Trump supplicants. They are not and will not be. Further, they have their independent and various definitions of what is greatest and noblest in human affairs – from courage and service to country to the ex-Goldman Sachs boys in the Trump entourage who I have not discussed who "judge wealth to be the greatest blessing for man."
Recognizing all of this, how and who can be persuaded to deviate from the mad Trump enterprise if rhetoric is indeed in its sum and substance, the art of persuasion? (452e and 453a) As mentioned above, the constituencies discussed and analyzed above are divided in accordance with whether, and to what degree, they can be appealed to through persuasion. But I must return to the prior issue – the persuaders, for they too are a motley crew and some of them are as likely to undercut the enterprise of persuasion as advance it. I mention here only those who disrupted the meetings of members of congress when they returned to their home constituencies and proved they were more devotees of chaos in their commitment to resistance than to victory for reason and civility.
On the other hand, I listened to the debate among the candidates vying to be chair of the Democratic National Committee. The debate made clear that the issue of how to confront Trump and his supporters and how to develop a unified strategy in Camp A will require much more work. I was very encouraged by the civility, the reasonableness, the understanding of the various candidates and their comprehension from different perspectives of the challenges they face. I did not choose a favourite, though I had my inclinations (they tended to come from the second level rather than the first or third level candidates), but I would be happy with any one of them as leader of the Democratic Party.
I did agree with Pete Buttigieg, the mayor from South Bend, Indiana, that it would be a mistake if too much focus was placed on Trump, which the tactics of the two leading contenders, Labor Secretary Tom Perez, and Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, seemed to stress. I found the Executive Director of the Idaho Democratic Party to be very winning. Generally, they all recognized the need to peel away support from Republicans in general at the grass roots level through hard work and dialogue in areas that the Democratic Party had neglected. The defence of democracy seems to be in good hands.
If the liberals concentrate on expanding their base rather than fighting among themselves, peeling away support from Trump and Republicans rather than insisting on total and absolute resistance and non-cooperation, they can rebuild the opposition into a victory machine. At the same time, they must enter into dialogue in areas and with persons who are reasonable even when they are not Democrats. The commitment to reason, the commitment to civility, the commitment to institutions, all must take priority over partisanship.
With the help of Alex Zisman
Leave a comment Posted in Diplomacy, Philosophy, Politics Tagged acolytes, Donald Trump, Protagoras, Republicans, Sophists
Mad as Hell
"Mad as Hell" can stand for uncensored speech, telling it as it supposedly is in a professed unwavering dedication to speaking the truth. It is also often associated with despair and an unwillingness "to take it anymore." I am mad as hell, but I hope my speech remains sensitive and self-censored (it does not always). Further, instead of leading to cynicism and uncontrolled rage, I hope my anger reignites the fire in my belly and my quest to right the wrongs of the world. Most of all, I trust that the rage will not undermine my dedication to objective analysis and detachment.
I woke up late this morning, very late. I was furious. Not for waking up late. I had slept so long because I was so angry. I am raging. And when I get very emotional, I knock myself out and fall asleep. It is the other side of my sleep condition that allows me to be very productive between 4 and 8 in the morning. It is why my writing is perceived to be objective and cool. This morning I am not cool. I am mad as hell.
First of Four Stories
In the first news item I read, a handsome, young, clean-shaven police officer's picture of Sgt. Paul Parizek from the Des Moines police department appeared above a story that included the following: "There have been at least 49 officers shot and killed in the line of duty this year, according to preliminary statistics from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, a nonprofit that tracks police deaths. In a report released earlier this year, the fund said that more than half the officers killed by that point were shot in ambushes." (my italics)
Is this true – two dozen police officers shot in ambushes in the U.S. this year? I did recall that eight officers had been murdered in attacks in Baton Rouge and Dallas, but this horrendous event was only a quarter of the number killed up to that date in 2016. But it was the fatal shooting of the two police officers this morning that made me sit up and listen, made me pay attention to the pattern. Why I have been so obtuse is another story.
In the United States, there is a war against police officers. Crime has been down. Murder rates are way down. Policing had become significantly safer in recent years. But there has been a dramatic change in 2016. In Urbandale in Iowa, one officer was shot and killed sitting alone in his patrol car next to Urbandale High School. 20 minutes later, a Des Moines police officer responding to that first shooting was also shot and killed.
Modernity is based on the rule of law. Professional police are a key component in maintaining the rule of law. Police have two prime functions. They try to prevent crime in part by capturing criminals and bringing them before courts of justice. But police have a second function. Whether they are engaged in traffic management or the protection of property by demonstrators and potential rioters, they also protect that property, the system in the West by means of which our needs are satisfied. Police are concerned with the well-being of each individual as well as the protection of society as a whole. Our basic welfare and our lives depend on the ability of these men and women to fulfill their job. An attack on the police that now appears systemic and deliberate undermines the fundamental foundations of our society.
Second Story
This story began with a simmering fire in my kishkas (look it up) by one of the emails I received in response to my blog the day before yesterday. In part it read, "Trump is a talented leader, who calls out the liberal and greedy elite." [He calls out the greedy, he who is the icon and advertisement for greed!] "Like King David. He likes women like all healthy males including you and me. Most women play to their sexuality through makeup and choice of clothes. Healthy and tasteful. Bill Clinton rapes and abuses women. Hillary destroys women who speak up against her husband's victims so that this power couple can play the corrupt system."
It is NOT natural and healthy to grope women. It is not natural and healthy to force yourself upon women. It is sick. And to boast about it makes it sicker. And to claim your money and power entitles you to engage in such behaviour and allows you to get away with it is sickest of all.
Aside from the libels against Bill and Hillary Clinton that have been repeated so many times that Clinton-haters take for granted that they are true, what really kindled my ire was the description of Donald Trump as being a healthy male who admires women, a man who boasts and has possibly a record of groping women and physically assaulting them, a man who admits that he becomes furious if his dinner is not put on the table by his wife when he arrives home.
That was the kindling. The fire in my belly broke out in full flame when this morning I read a story about Jane Doe who was raped by a champion swimmer, Brock Turner. He was only sentenced to six months in prison and was out on parole after three months. The rape victim's 21-year-old younger sister wrote, "Today I am still sick thinking about it, sick to my stomach every time I am reminded of the incident." And I felt sick to my stomach as I read about the devastation visited on both these women, the rape victim and her sister. The court records showed that Brock Turner had behaved in the same way that Donald Trump boasted of behaving, initially repeatedly trying to kiss the eventual rape victim against her will greeted with an unquestionable and demonstrated lack of interest.
But what set off the roaring fire in my belly that has made me so nauseous this morning is Judge Aaron Persky's sentencing statement and the response of the rapist's father to the rape of a woman who had been left unconscious, naked from the waist down, behind a dumpster. The two sisters suffered at the public humiliation of exposing what happened to the older one in full detail on the internet. The two sisters were both raped over and over again in their minds as they both sat through the court sessions over a six month period. The younger sister addressed Brock Turner directly: "Where has your remorse been? Really, truly: Do you feel guilty because you were sexually assaulting her or because you were caught?"
Male assaults on females are not only despicable and outrageous, they symbolize everything a civilized society must oppose. These assaults have absolutely nothing to do with sex, nothing to do with the pleasurable and passionate intercourse between sexual partners and everything to do with aggression and hatred of women. So this morning a report reads that in Greensburg Indiana, when a woman turned down her boyfriend's offer of marriage, he shot and killed her. Recall that the two Swedish heroes, Peter Jonsson and Carl-Fredrik Arndt, who had seen Brock Turner attacking the victim and ran after him and tackled him after he fled, testified that the victim was motionless on the ground at the time and could not be woken up, totally contradicting Turner's insistence that the sex was a product of consent.
But what happens? The two sisters live with the experience for the rest of their lives. In an open and shut case – which very few are – the judge responds favourably to the letters requesting leniency when there has been no demonstrated contrition nor open admission of responsibility. Just lies. And a father who paints his son as the victim! At least Ari Shavit immediately owned up to his responsibility and expressed deep contrition when the stories of his assaults on women became public.
Third Story
As the Republicans face the real and imminent possibility of a Clinton presidency, they have already evidently begun to plot a campaign of obstreperousness, about continuing the campaign to refuse filling Antonin Scalia's Supreme Court seat, thereby bringing the whole system of justice into disrepute. For the system depends not only on a responsible and empathetic administration of justice, on a conscientious and informed legislative body, but on an independent judiciary at the very highest levels. When ideology dictates how issues of justice are handled, the end of democracy is near. It is not only a break with democratic tradition to refuse to approve an appointment, but an effort to blow up the fundamentals of democracy altogether. When cynicism takes the reins of justice, we are all doomed.
Fourth Story
This tale might seem the most remote from the story of a wanton ambush and killing of police officers, dealing with assaults and rapes of women and sabotaging the whole system of justice when your side is defeated. But in the end, I suggest that it goes to the heart of the matter.
The background of the story is over the use of the Wailing or Western Wall in Jerusalem, not the conflict between Arabs and UNICEF over proprietary rights to religious sites among Jews, Muslims and Christians, but the fight over whether Orthodox Judaism should retain monopoly control over what is now regarded as the holiest site in Judaism – the exposed sector of the old temple wall. In 1967, the government, as a gesture to the religious party allies and an indifference to religious symbolism, had assigned responsibility for administering conduct on the plaza outside the wall to the Orthodox establishment. That establishment maintains a strict separation of sexes and limits even the way women can worship at the wall. Hence the protests by many orthodox women against the patriarchy that controls access. Hence other counter-protests against non-Orthodox Jews who have insisted on a place for egalitarian services at the wall. A political compromise had been forged to build a new section of plaza that would permit that new area of plaza to be used for egalitarian religious services.
The Netanyahu government, under pressure from his Orthodox political allies, in spite of Supreme Court orders, has repeatedly stalled on implementing this compromise. This morning, there was an effort of hundreds of demonstrators led by leading Conservative and Reform rabbis to carry Torah scrolls to the Wall and conduct an egalitarian service. They were resisted by force by Orthodox young men as police stood by and refused to interfere. What followed was unprecedented pandemonium and violence.
Some of the most prominent clergy in the diaspora were shoved, pushed and thrown to the ground. But they persisted. Netanyahu, the same man who refuses to implement the compromise arrived at after years of negotiations, stated that, "unilateral breaches of the status quo in the Kotel harm our attempts to reach a compromise," even though a compromise had been reached and the issue was its implementation. There was no condemnation of the violence perpetrated by the young orthodox men.
When, because ideology and not negotiation and compromise, lawlessness ensues, when courts are ignored, when police choose to remain passive in the face of overt assaults, when politicians practice the politics of inaction, when supreme courts are blatantly ignored, democracy is at stake.
And it all starts with the mistreatment of women and the resentment of many men and women to allowing a woman to become President of the United States. This resentment goes much deeper than even racist attitudes against Blacks. The story goes back to Bereshit and the myth of the birth of history and time in our world and the story of Adam and Eve.
Leave a comment Posted in Ethics, Obama, Politics, Social and Political Musings, U.S., Uncategorized Tagged ambush, Brock Turner, Clinton, Egalitarian, murder, police, rape, Republicans, rule of law, Trump, U.S. Supreme Court, Wailing Wall
The Mid-West Presidential Primaries
We are now in South Dakota in a little town called Chamberlain known for its trout fishing. We will do no fishing, but that seemed to be the main attraction for all the men in Charlys Restaurant & Lounge last evening where N's chardonnay was terrible and her filet minion even worse. I remind myself that we should follow my personal guideline – never order a steak in cattle country because the best meat gets shipped to the high class restaurants in New York. (This conclusion is, of course, based on extensive empirical research.) However, we very much look forward to visiting the Akta Lakota Museum this morning before we set off further west.
Yesterday morning in Des Moines, Iowa, we had an auspicious start. Instead of writing my blog, I got up early to move the top tarp on the packed trailer we are hauling to deliver a load of personal belongings to our son Daniel who has become a farmer in the Cowichan Valley on Vancouver Island. The tarp was luffing and one of the straps on top seemed to have gotten loose. eyes, problematic enough, but because of how I process visual information. I have difficulty recognizing faces, though nowhere as difficult as Oliver Sacks. I had enormous difficulties in medical school in recognizing what I was looking at through a microscope. A neighbour who had helped me finish covering the trailer and fastening the ratchet straps sent me a video with clear and simple instructions on how ratchets worked.
I watched it perhaps five times. It was short, direct and clear, but when I went to translate what I had seen into practice, I seemed to bugger it up every time. I did not tell N what an idiot I had been, but told her that everything was perfectly tied down. For, after two hours – most of the time admittedly not spent on the ratchets – I finally asked a truck driver in the parking lot for help. In less than a minute, he corrected my mistakes and had the straps properly tightened. I relearned what I have learned many times before. I have the visual intelligence of an idiot. I may be terrific with abstract thought and analysis, with absorbing reams of material, but my visual intelligence is sub-moronic. And to think that I was admitted to medical school! Can you imagine all the lives I saved by quitting medicine?
We then had to find and go to an auto shop, for our right brake and blinker light on the trailer were not working. The mechanic had to rewire the connection because the plug was in poor shape and one of the wires had been pinched. Then we stopped at an auto parts dealer to purchase and put on some universal reflector plates for the side of the rear lights on the trailer that had gone missing and that we had been advised to put in to prevent moisture getting into the rear trailer lights. Not to worry. In addition to all the driving, N did the job. Such are the joys of pulling a trailer.
Yesterday was the first day of spring. The temperature rose from 28 degrees Fahrenhei t in the morning – there was frost on the top of the tarp on the trailer – to 65 degrees F. It was a glorious day. However, we are lucky. If we had delayed our departure by two days, we would have run into rain later today and snow tomorrow in Sioux Falls and Sioux City. As it is, the temperature will drop today when we get to Billings, Montana to 42 F and we may get 1" of snow the next day on route to Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, but no high winds or squalls, so we are almost in the clear weather-wise all the way to Oregon.
In the past two days we have travelled from Michigan through the north-west corner of Indiana through Illinois and stayed overnight in Des Moines, Iowa, actually a suburb called Urbandale. Yesterday we traversed the rest of Iowa, the north-east corner of Nebraska and ended up in South Dakota. So in two days we have traveled through six of the fifty American states, not a bad sample size, except het the states come from only a few geographical regions. I have already written about Michigan, but I will first reply to two of the responses for clarification. But first, one correction!
I think the number of electors in the electoral college for each state equals the number of that states number in congress: representatives plus senators. For Michigan, I think it is 16.
Dead on! My apologies.
Response 1:
I would not norm around Michigan. Ohio's a better index for the Dems. From here on in, Hillary should lock up most of the states and especially the big ones. The question lingers: why she captures the votes but not the hearts. It's interesting to hear Jacob on this, because he captures an important, lingering sentiment. It's about trust. People trust Sanders even though his policy program is unrealistic. One is tempted to say this is the hangover from 2008 and Obama's hope pitch.
Is Trump a winner or the GOP a loser? I think it's the latter; as the GOP coalition splinters, Trump benefits. Their worst nightmare was Ohio. Kasich will now stay in the race and continue to splinter the anti-Trump bloc. His latest declaration that Merrick Garland should come up for a vote is part of his gambit to seem moderate. This will only perpetuate the divide. With Rubio gone, which really was the GOP establishment's last, very flimsy, hope, the pathway to Trump is clearer than ever. Neither Cruz nor Kasich can possibly win so long as the other stays in. Once CA and NY vote, and it seems likely Trump will win both, there is no real alternative without shattering the party, which the brass may choose to do: smash it all in order to rescue it. See below, nuclear options.
You have to love the irony of the anti-country clubbers voting for the man who builds country clubs. Literally. What has surprised many observers, though is that the breaks don't go the anti-Trump way — that's to say, when a rival drops out, his backers (or in the case of Carla F, her backers) they don't go to the runner up to Trump; they break in his favor more than many expected.
Hillary could lose to Trump is the right conjugation. But it is implausible. The only demographic he has a chance at winning is white men. That's a small fraction of the US population now. About 35%. So, even if he takes 55% of that vote, he'll get swamped by the tide going the other way. This is the reason why the GOP brass are in a total panic; for the long term health of the party, it's a disaster. Have a look at this report:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Of course, I am mindful of the fact that we should presume the triumph of reason. It's happened before that demagoguery — of the hard and soft kinds — have prevailed.
If Trump runs for president as the GOP candidate and loses, will he then self-describe as a loser? If Trump wins, it is guaranteed more Americans will leave for points south and north. Will that not make him a loser of citizens? If Trump wins as an expression of the ugly, stupid and AND angry American, what can he possibly do to make that contingent happy and calm? Won't they quickly become disaffected and, once again, he is a loser? Bottom line: if Trump wins, isn't that just a loss by another name?
I did not offer Michigan as a norm but as an outlier given the results the following week, but there are lessons to be learned from outliers. You are correct that Ohio is a better indicator for the Democrats, but why did Sanders win Michigan, why were the polls so wrong, and is there any implication for the presidential election even as Hillary clinches the nomination?
Re Jacob's leaning towards Sanders, Gabriel too has for a long time been a strong Sander's supporter' So are his friends who think about politics, but he admits most are uninterested.
In my examination, it is better to keep Kasich in the race since, if he dropped out, many of his supporters would not go to Cruz, who is at least as unrealistic as Trump and much further to the right. Some would go to Trump because he is relatively more appealing to Reagan democrats and working class Republican voters than Cruz. The only way to keep Trump from winning is to make sure he cannot win on the first ballot and then fight for the votes released, particularly from the winner take all states. Given the broader base of Trump supporters, Trump would be a riskier opponent for the Democrats than Cruz.
Is Trump the winner and the GOP the loser? Other than replying that everyone is a loser if Trump wins, including Trump, the real issue the Republicans face is whether they want a very different party or whether they are better off trying to put together the shattered pieces of what is left, especially since, for many Republicans, Trump is believed to be a disaster for America as well as the Republican Party. Though neither Cruz nor Kasich can possibly win as long as the other stays in, it is also true that neither can win if the other drops out. The only way Trump can lose is in a brokered convention, admittedly a nuclear disaster for the Republican Party. Who will blink? Definitely not Trump.
Back to the primaries.
Tonight we will have the results from Arizona which, in the Republican primary, has 75 delegates in a winner-take-all state where Trump is expected to win big. Cruz may win both Idaho (23 delegates) and Utah (33 delegates), but those states are divided proportionately, so Trump is once again expected to be the big winner. As of today, he has 680 delegated to 424 for Cruz and 123 for Kasich, more than the other two put together. Because of carryovers from other delegates in the race and his expected performance in the remaining primaries (South Dakota's is not until 7 June), he is not likely to get the 1237 required, but is expected to come close and to easily beat both his rivals by considerable numbers. So the issue has now become whether the party will observe the will of the largest plurality of voters or behave in accordance with the rules and let the delegates decide on the second and possibly subsequent ballots. I suspect they will not give in to Trump's bluff and bullying and will let the delegates choose, even though Trump is still expected to win even then.
Passing through Iowa the day before yesterday and yesterday, helps recall the state which was a turning point in the primary race. Last night on CNN in an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Trump was boasting he was likely to win a majority of delegates in the primaries and, in any case, would come so close that, given the distribution of delegates among the 17 candidates who started in the race, he would deserve to be crowned as the winner. He also insisted that he had the momentum, winning 4 of 5 states last week and losing to Kasich in his home state of Ohio by only a very small margin. True to Trump's pattern of constructing reality out of his imagination rather than actuality, the vote in Ohio was 956,762 (46.8%) for Kasich to 727,585 (35.6%) for Trump (Cruz received 267,592 votes – 13.1%). When Trump wins by 10%, for him his victory is "huge, really huge," but when Kasich beat him by more than that margin, Trump contends he came "close, really close" and only lost by a small margin. Trump is almost impossible to fact check simply because the number of facts he gets wrong and distorts is so enormous. But mostly he obfuscates and evades.
Bernie soldiers on now, no longer as the surprise real contender but as the leader of a movement rather than a force seeking to be the Democratic candidate. Of course, Ohio was really the end of the road for Bernie, because he could not carry over his victory in Michigan to Ohio and received only 42.7% (513,549) to Hillary's 679,266 votes (56.5%), so the real excitement remains the Republican race. And it ends in Ohio in the convention in Cleveland. One interesting observation in Ohio: Kaslich captured the eastern and southern third (geographically) of the state, while Trump won in the western third. In contrast, in the democratic race, Bernie won a smattering of counties in the south-east, the south-west, the north-west, the centre, but only one county in the north-east.
In contrast to the Ohio primary, where it was hoped that Bernie would come close to or even beat Hillary, Illinois was a virtual tie, with Hillary eking out a very slight psychological victory with only 50.46% of the vote, but only the same number of 78 pledged delegates as Bernie. But Hillary is expected to get 100% of the 22 unpledged or super-delegates. In Illinois where Trump won his "huge, really huge" victory, he received only 38.8% of the vote (exactly as the average of the poll projections) to Cruz's 30.3% and Kasich's 8.7%. Together, his two opponents beat him and both came in slightly higher than poll expectations. However, Trump must get a majority of the delegates. Even more interesting, Trump boasts that he brings out huge numbers of new voters, but his total vote in Illinois was only 556,916. In contrast, Hillary garnered over a million votes.
In Iowa, Ted Cruz was the big winner with 51,666 votes to Trump's 45,427 in a clear two-way race in the Iowa caucus, even though in the polling prior to the vote, Cruz had been trailing by roughly 5%. As we listened to talk radio in Iowa yesterday, the radio host on the phone-in show was a clear Trump supporter. One of his callers was a woman who had just been in a verbal political argument at her chiropractor's office. She had emerged totally frustrated. The media were all against Trump playing one video clip over and over again showing a supporter hitting a protester. (Last night, Trump insisted that they were not protesters but professional agitators.) For the female Trump supporter, Trump was for peace as he said and she ignored the statements (as did Trump) that Wolf Blitzer in his interview cited of his encouraging violence. After all, as Trump said, he opposed any violence at the Cleveland Convention, but if the establishment denied him a victory, the voters were very angry and, he was just saying, you can expect riots. The female call-in supporter said she just would not vote if the Republican Party denied her candidate the right to be on the ballot in accordance with the will of the people.
Nebraska, though it only has a small number of delegates, is interesting because, in a Republican state, in the Democratic primary, Bernie won 57.1% to Hilary's 42.9%. In South Dakota, all the men up early with me in the motel breakfast room were far more interested in discussing fishing than watching or analyzing the replays of Clinton and Trump addressing the AIPAC meeting yesterday. (I did not see any replays of Cruz or Kaisich – perhaps they speak today, and Bernie rejected AIPAC's invitation to address them.) The men at breakfast all seemed to be Republican voters, but rather than enthusiastic for one candidate or another, politics as conducted just seemed to turn them off. Perhaps not one of them would actually vote.
Leave a comment Posted in Obama, Politics Tagged Cinton, Cruz, Democrats, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kasich, Republicans, Sanders, Trump
Nomination Time in the U.S.A. 1. Michigan
There is no magic or appropriate rationale for beginning this exploration of the current electoral mood in the United States except that Michigan is my first stop in my American tour. I begin writing, not in order to predict what will happen in the rest of the presidential nomination process in the U.S., but to understand the process and the factors that have pushed it one way or another and to anticipate possible rather than likely outcomes. The direction of the Southern States is now clear, but not the Northern tier or the Western cluster; Bernie Sanders stands virtually no chance of winning the nomination as the Democratic candidate. Yet without Bernie Sanders, if Michigan is an indication, in a faceoff between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, Hilary could be the loser. That is a provocative assertion, but after I clear the underbrush, I will explain my thinking. But before you get all worked up with anxiety about the future of the leadership of the Western world, keep in mind that I wrote, "if Michigan is an indication."
Given the data, there is an obvious puzzle over why Hillary Clinton, who was projected to win Michigan by a substantial margin according to virtually all polls, lost by a narrow margin. Since the polls for Republican voters were reasonably accurate, what happened? Further, the polls in the subsequent elections in Illinois and Ohio were reasonably accurate, so what happened on 8 March in Michigan, the 24th state to vote
in this year's American primaries? And what is the relevance for the Presidential election in which Michigan holds 242 votes in the electoral college that will select the President?
I begin with the GOP. The Republican race in Michigan was a primary with a minimum threshold of 15% to even win any delegates, a key factor for Marco Rubio. At the half-way mark, with the contenders reduced to four, Michigan was supposed to offer a good indication of the eventual results. Note that although any candidate whose vote exceeds 50% wins all at-large delegates (as distinct from congressional district delegates) from the state, no candidate did.
Understanding the following basic data is important in Michigan where the total number of delegates at stake in the Republican primary was 59 to be distributed proportionally among the candidates receiving at least 15% of the vote.
Ave. Poll
Candidate % Projections Votes Delegates Targets
Donald Trump 36.5 39 483,751 25 345,000
Ted Cruz 24.9 24 330,015 17 345,000
John Kasich 24.3 23 321,655 17 ?
Marco Rubio 9.3 14 121,672 0 ?
A key indicator was whether Ted Cruz could bring on board white voters without any college experience who, in large proportions did not normally vote. Could his formidable ground force of evangelical/Tea Party supporters, using old-fashioned door-to-door campaigning to bring out the vote, achieve their target of 345,000 votes? They came reasonably close. At the same time, could Donald Trump continue his streak of bringing on board large numbers of previous non-Republican voters and non-voters, especially again among white voters, again without college experience. He succeeded beyond his expectations. John Kasich hoped his track record of creating jobs in neighbouring Ohio could stand in good stead in Michigan where underemployment and unemployment were major issues. He did about as well as expected.
The big loser was, of course, Marco Rubio. As the election approached, Marco Rubio was panicking over polls in his home state of Florida and he shifted to concentrate his efforts there. But his decline in the number of expected delegates and failing to achieve the minimal 15% left him branded as a loser that multiplied his troubles in Florida. The shift in resources and surrender in Michigan proved to be a big mistake, compounded by his stooping into the gutter to engage in dissing with a master of the art, Donald Trump. Elections are not simply or even mostly about policies and programs, especially this year's Republican primary. They are about stamina and the communication that the candidate in question is a winner. Rubio made a major mistake and lost the Florida primary to an even larger extent in Michigan.
Mitt Romney, a prince among Republicans, had called Donald Trump a phony and a fraud among a large number of epithets thrown at the candidate leading the Republican pack. Mitt Romney was a former governor of Michigan. Although the combination of unaffiliated PAC ads and candidate-affiliated super PAC ads as a percentage of all GOP ads that were anti-Trump grew from 9% in February to 47% in the first week of March, and given that the pro-Marco Rubio Conservative Solutions PAC accounted for five times as many anti-Trump ads as the next-highest group, the ads were, nevertheless, counter-productive and reinforced the anger against the country club establishment in the Republican Party. Donald Trump benefited more from the Rubio loss of votes than either Ted Cruz or John Kaslich.
Look at the results of the exit polls:
Trump won 44% of male Republicans, 28% from women.
Kasich posted a strong and early lead in the country club counties such as Oakland as expected.
Cruz did well considering that Republican congressional representatives tend to be moderate in a state ranked as very liberal generally; Cruz is at the extreme right in the Party, but so are Bill Huizenga and Justin Amash from Michigan.
The Trump vote increased by 3.5% over projections.
All of the above are critical to understanding the path of the Republican primary vote, but in the last half dozen presidential races, Michigan voters have supported the Democratic Party's candidate. So the primary results may help choose the Republican candidate but probably not the winner in the presidential election where the Democrats are expected to take the 242 Michigan electoral college votes.
That is why the Democratic race with 130 Michigan delegates at stake (340 overall that day) is so crucial to determining the eventual results. Clinton entered the Michigan primary with 677 pledged delegates (59%) to Sanders's 478 (41 %) making her, by far, the most likely candidate to win even if Bernie Sanders took Michigan. Bernie was a long shot, but emerged as a long shot winner, nowhere sufficient to ever catch up to Clinton, but an important psychological victory nevertheless. The primary vote indicated that the younger the voters, the lower the minority population as a percentage of the total and the greater the percentage of educated as well as working-class, the better Sander's chances are.
According to the weighted (based on record of accuracy) average of a large number of polls, Hillary Clinton was projected to win 59.2% of the delegates (range of 52%-66%) to Bernie Sanders 38.3% (33%-47% range). Only one poll came close to the margin of error in predicting Bernie's win, the Mitchell Research and Communications Poll, with52% for Hillary Clinton and 47% for Bernie Sanders. Given the surprise for both candidates at the actual results, it seems that internal campaign polls did not differ from the various external ones. On the other hand, the number of targeted delegates by each candidate indicated that the results were not totally surprising since the Clinton campaign's target was 63 delegates while that of Sanders was 67 delegates. The targets and the actual results were congruent.
As stated above, the results were psychological more than political, boosting morale in the Sanders camp and initiating a recalibration in the Clinton camp, but with no deep concern that Clinton would not eventually win the nomination, though the prospect of a dark horse candidate had now become real even though implausible. Even more significant, according to exit polls, was Sanders increase in support among Black voters – up from 10 or so percent in the South to 30% in Michigan. He was projected to win 21% of Black voters in Michigan, but won 30%. The oddest result was that Sanders, a Jew and a self-declared socialist, did very well among Arab Americans, especially in Dearborn where Sanders won over Clinton by a huge 2:1 ratio (64:36).
Was Sander's increase in the Black vote in part due to his appeal to blue-collar workers because he was so opposed to the free-trade deals which did not provide a net for workers earning good wages and now requiring retraining?
Since self-identified independents also seem to vote for Sanders, does this bode ill for Clinton indicating that these voters might switch to Trump rather than Clinton since Trump also has been very critical of those trade deals?
Further, since Sanders has benefited from much higher turn out of voters, and this is the same phenomenon that has buoyed the Trump campaign, will Trump benefit from a good proportion of these voters?
Aside from the fact that I am in the most liberal part of the state, in Ann Arbor, my personal "extensive" polling last evening and this morning of people exiting, not the polling booth, but the motel, indicates that the largely unexpected results in the race between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in Michigan may have been due to a number of factors:
The polls were inaccurate because younger voters get their news and information from the new social media and it is very difficult to access their opinions using traditional methods so that, when it comes to determining the preferences of younger voters, polls may not be reliable.
There seems to be some overlap between the voters to whom Trump appeals to those flocking to Bernie Sanders, not among the young educated voters, but among the disaffected working class in Michigan that have turned voters against any establishment, Republican or Democratic.
In the primary vote, it was safe to vote for Bernie because he was unlikely to be the presidential candidate and, even if he was, polls showed him beating Trump by an even larger margin than Hillary Clinton, evidently because Sanders was a more formidable competitor for the disaffected vote than Donald Trump.
Local conditions, especially considering the subsequent vote in Ohio, seem to have had a powerful influence on the disposition of the voters in the primary in Michigan.
Let me expand on those local conditions. Perhaps the most important factor has been the reams of stories about the lead poisoning of the water supply in Flint, Michigan, and, even more importantly, the apparent indifference and insensitivity of the previously well-esteemed Republican governor to the plight of the citizens of Flint, Michigan. First of all, it was learned that Michigan authorities adopted cost-saving changes in the city's water supply that caused mass lead poisoning. The governor, Rick Snyder, as a Republican accounting technocrat determined to cut costs. He had set the tone for such policy decisions. In 2013, an official appointed by the Governor decided to save money by changing the water supply for Flint Michigan. Though the problem of lead poisoning quickly became evident in tests of the water supply, it was not until 2015 that the old source of water was reinstated. Contrary to the efforts of Republicans in Washington to blame the Obama administration, states are in charge of enforcing drinking-water standards, not Washington. In fact, the Republican- controlled Congress has hamstrung the federal government and even eliminated the power of the EPA to intervene.
Donald Trump has promised to eliminate the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, as have other Republicans. For voters influenced by issues rather than by assertions of a faith in the strength of the leader, by voters who have come to understand that government, rather than being the source of the problem, is, in reality, the sine qua non of adequate services and the foundation, economic as well as social, for the well-being of a society, "socialism" in the U.S. has subsequently been retired among many as an epithet of abuse, Bernie became the preferred option in the fight over the good versus claimed evil of governance and government.
Another powerful and continuing scandal resulted from the enormous $18 billion municipal bankruptcy of Detroit. In the bankruptcy resolution, just as in the bailout of the automobile industry, the big institutions were protected, but not the salaries or pensions, even of the 12,000 existing retirees.. Not only did pension cheques shrink by 6.7%, but large numbers of pensioners were required to pay back "overpayments" of tens of thousands of dollars, not even spread out over time, but in a lump sum. If the pensioner opted to pay over time, the account was subject to a 6.75% interest charge. To make matters worse, the settlement was initiated in the beginning of March for the repayment for what former Detroit emergency manager Kevyn Orr said was excess interest paid out in special payments on top of the regular pensions.
In Ann Arbor this past weekend, there is a large swim meet with high school students participating from all over the state. The meet has been plagued evidently by poor air quality and consequent skin irritation and rashes for the students caused by the chlorine in the pool mixing with the oil on the skin of the swimmers, exacerbated by large numbers and the desire of the swimmers to compete with dry bathing suits and, therefore, avoiding washing off before they plunge into the pool. However, the problem is evidently easily relieved by a good up-to-date ventilation system, but the school infrastructure is old and has long been in need correction, just one relatively minor item in a very long list of capital improvement deficits that plague states and municipalities given the last three decades of assaults on taxation and governments.
It was not clear to me than any of those whom I questioned who came from the nether reaches of the State of Michigan made any connection between political ideology and current practices and the capital deficits, unemployment and condition of rust-belt America. They tended to blame the problem on the kids for not showering, though they acknowledged that, given the importance of small advantages in competitive swimming, it was understandable why students did not shower properly.
In the process of the discussion, I believe I acquired a greater understanding of why, even if Bernie Sander's campaign to become the Presidential candidate for the Democratic Party may be hopeless, the movement and its long term effects on American society and attitudes is probably more important than even Bernie winning. That is why I believe he is staying in the race.
I write this as more reports on altercations at Trump rallies are being broadcast on CNN this morning. Will these unaffiliated voters be drawn towards a posture of strength in a leader or towards someone campaigning against the critics, not of bad government or of corrupt government, but at government in general? Given Clinton's shifts in her rhetoric recently, perhaps she can win most of those voters to the Democratic camp.
Leave a comment Posted in Obama, Politics Tagged Clinton, Cruz, Democrats, Kasich, Republicans, Rubio, Sanders, Trump


Will es80761 work on a 2004 GMC Canyon?
Yes, part number moog-es80761 will hit a 2004 GMC Canyon.
Will part number es80761 fit my 2004 GMC Canyon?
Yes, part number es80761 will fit the 2004 GMC Canyon.
Why no 90-degree zerk to make it easier to lubricate and not have to remove the tire to get the grease gun in place. The zerks I find are too small a fit.
If you have wheels that are not OEM size or in some cases OEM tie rods did not have grease zerks you may have to install a 90 degree zerk fitting. If you have to replace the zerk fitting you would need one that is 1/4x28 threads.


There is nothing funny about having a pain in the neck so if you are suffering and need some help, then contact the Chiropractor Bramhall team.
With long hours spent at a desk, driving, poor posture and everyday stress and strains, modern life can cause havoc with our neck muscles and joints, leaving you in discomfort and with restricted movement. Injury, accident and trauma can also cause long-term neck pain which you may be struggling to manage.
Our neck pain service in Bramhall, Stockport aims to support you to resolve your pain through a full assessment, tailored treatment and effective aftercare – and we will always let you know what to expect from your appointment.
What Does a Chiropractor do for Neck Pain?
If you are looking for effective and long-lasting neck pain treatment in Stockport, then Chiropractor Bramhall are here to help.
The neck (cervical spine) is made up of seven individual bones, which begin at the base of the skull. These small bones support the weight of your head, which can weigh up to 20 pounds. The neck has a large range of motion, which is crucial for our everyday activities, however, this makes it much more susceptible to injury as well as wear and tear.
Through chiropractic and physical therapy, our neck experts can tackle your pain by restoring normal motion in your neck. Before we recommend a programme of personalised treatment, we will conduct a thorough assessment of your condition, including a physical and neurological exam as well as your medical history, lifestyle and previous injuries or concerns. This will ensure we are providing appropriate treatment or referral advice for your specific neck pain condition.


text:
COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Update - Please click here to learn more about our office's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and how it applies to our clients and our staff.
[email protected]nulldkgcfamilylaw.com
55 St. Clair Ave. W., Suite 203, Toronto, ON M4V 2Y7
About DKGC LLP
Reported Court Decisions
Prenuptial Agreements / Marriage Contracts
Common-Law Marriage
Spousal and Child Support Variations
Domestic Violence and Assault
Marital Hidden Assets and Fraud
Grandparents' Rights
Andrea L. Di Battista
B.A. (Hons.), J.D.
Lisa Katz
B.A., LL.B.
Alexandrea Grant
B.A., J.D.
Efua Cobbina
B. Comm, B.C.L./LL.B.
COVID-19 Family Law Decisions
Hess v. Hamilton
2018 – Ontario Superior Court of Justice
In this case, Ms. Hess sought increased retroactive and prospective child and spousal support from our client, Mr. Hamilton, as well as his contribution to the cost of medical school in the Caribbean. This was a complicated case that involved many legal issues, including but not limited to post-separation increases in income.
Andrea and Lisa successfully represented Mr. Hamilton, and Ms. Hess' claims for retroactive variation of both child and spousal support, for contribution to the child's medical school costs and for increased spousal support were dismissed.
In the decision dated January 28, 2018, the Honourable Justice Faieta made orders regarding prospective child support and section 7 expenses for one of the children. However, Andrea and Lisa successfully sought to correct that aspect of the decision and on November 5, 2018, the Honourable Justice Faieta acknowledged that there had been a mistake and he deleted the provisions in his previous order concerning ongoing child support and section 7 expense contributions. Justice Faieta also made an order for substantial costs in Mr. Hamilton's favour.
Child Support and Spousal Support
Case Facts
This was a complex case with many legal issues
Our client had claims against him for child support, medical school costs and increased spousal support dismissed
We obtained a substantial cost award in our client's favour
Chan v. Town
2014 – Court of Appeal for Ontario
In this decision out of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Lisa along with senior co-counsel successfully appealed the order of the Honourable Justice Skarica dated March 20, 2013, on behalf of their client, Ms. Chan.
Justice Skarica had found the mother, Ms. Chan, to be in contempt of a final order dealing with custody and access. As a remedy for the contempt, Justice Skarica ordered a change in custody (from joint custody to sole custody for the father) and a reversal of the parenting schedule so that the father had primary residence instead of the mother.
Prior to the hearing of the appeal, Lisa brought a motion on Ms. Chan's behalf before the Court of Appeal for Ontario and successfully obtained a stay of the Order of Justice Skarica, which otherwise would have taken immediate effect.
On the appeal, Lisa and her co-counsel provided evidence of the numerous errors that had been made by the Judge of the Superior Court of Justice. The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed the appeal and set aside the contempt order and remedy. The Court also awarded Ms. Chan costs for both the motion and for the appeal.
Appeal - Custody and Costs
The Judge originally ordered reversal of the parenting status quo (giving the other party sole custody)
We brought a motion in the Ontario Court of Appeal staying (i.e. temporarily stopping) the Order
We successfully appealed the Order in the Ontario Court of Appeal on behalf of the mother
We obtained a cost award for our client for both the motion and the appeal
Atout v. Atout
In this case, our client, Ms. Atout sought interim decision making (custody) of the children. Mr. Atout asked that the children be returned to Arizona on the basis that the Ontario Court did not have jurisdiction (or authority) to make a decision regarding the children. The issues of jurisdiction and what custody arrangement was in the children's best interests was before the Court at the Motion.
The details of the case were quite complex and involved addressing whether the Arizona Court, the Court in Qatar, or the Ontario Court had the ability to hear the matter and make an order with respect to the children. At the time of the decision, the children had recently moved to Ontario with Ms. Atout after previously residing in Qatar and briefly visiting Ms. Atout's family in Arizona. Mr. Atout had claimed that the children were kidnapped by Ms. Atout and taken to Ontario without his consent.
Alexandrea was representing the mother, Ms. Atout, who wanted to remain in Ontario with the children. Ms. Atout required a custody order to obtain the children's documentation in Ontario, as well as to enroll them in school. Alexandrea was successful in arguing that the Ontario Court should have the ability to make a decision that was in the children's best interest. Ms. Atout was successful in obtaining interim decision making for the children, as well as being permitted to remain in Ontario with the children.
In the matter relating to costs following the aforementioned decision, Ms. Atout, who was represented by Alexandrea, had succeeded on all of the issues that she had asked the Court to determine at the motion. She wanted to recoup the legal fees she had incurred with respect to the Motion. The Court determined that Ms. Atout was the successful party at the Motion and ordered that Mr. Atout pay her costs of the Motion in full.
We successfully represented a mother seeking custody of her children in a case with a complex jurisdiction scenario
Full costs were awarded in favour of the mother
M.B. v. D.T.
In this case, Alexandrea was representing the mother of three young children. The mother sought custody of the children, as well as a parenting plan that she believed to be in the children's best interests. The matter ended up in a three-day trial.
Prior to trial, the parties were engaged in a nesting arrangement whereby the party who had care of the children for a given week would move into the home and the other would move out. This arrangement had been in place for about a year and was no longer working.
In the months leading up to trial, the Office of the Children's Lawyer (who represented the children and their interests) completed a report which recommended that the parties have joint decision-making regarding the children. The mother did not agree with this recommendation given the high level of conflict between the parties.
After considering the evidence, the Court agreed with the mother that both parties jointly making decisions for the children was not possible. As such, though the parties were granted joint custody, the Court ordered that the mother have final say on health and educational issues if the parties were not able to jointly make a decision in the children's best interest.
With respect to the parenting schedule, both of the parties agreed that the other should have regular and frequent time with the children, but the schedule proposed at trial differed between them. The Court ordered a parenting schedule in accordance with the one proposed by the mother at trial.
We achieved a favourable outcome for a mother who achieved joint custody of her children while being granted final decision-making on health and educational issues
We successfully represented the mother in achieving her preferred parenting schedule
N.A. v. F.M.
Efua successfully defended F.M. against a claim by N.A. to enforce the terms of an order for contribution to the children's post-secondary expenses.
Efua was able to obtain the variation of a temporary order for special expenses (post-secondary expenses) for adult children in a complex case involving parties residing in Canada, Iran and England.
The parties had a temporary, without predjudice consent order for F.M. to pay two children's post-secondary expenses for their second and third degrees in the United Kingdom, however the children submitted budgets that included expenses they did not incur.
After failing to account for tens of thousands of dollars provided for their support, the children sought more money from our client.
N.A. brought a motion to enforce the order and F.M. countered with a motion to have N.A. contribute to half the expenses after experiencing a change in his financial circumstances.
F.M.'s motion against N.A. to require her contribution to the children's expenses was granted. Efua was able to satisfy the Court that a material change in circumstances had occurred in order to change the terms of an order before trial.
Her client was subsequently successful in recovering most of his legal fees.
Our client was entirely successful on his motion
This case involved complex financial and jurisdictional issues
Boutros v. Boutros
In this 2012 trial decision, several matters were addressed including issues related to custody and access, child support, section 7 expenses for the children, spousal support and property issues. The parties were married for 16 years and separated in 2009 after having three children together.
Andrea Di Battista represented the mother, and Paul McInnis represented the father.
The father, who was employed as a physician, was ordered to pay spousal support to the mother who had stopped working after the birth of the children.
The father was also ordered to pay for additional courses or upgrades the mother might take over a period of three years to help her achieve financial independence.
The Honourable Justice Greer's trial decision in relation to property is particularly noteworthy as the mother sought and was awarded an unequal division of net family property, primarily due to losses incurred by the father arising from a Ferrari that he purchased.
Property Division, Spousal Support, Child Support, Custody and Access
At the end of the trial, spousal support and educational support were awarded to the mother, our client
Our client was also awarded an unequal division of net family property, which is quite rare
Fernandes v. Darrigo
2018 – Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court
The father in this case, who was represented by John Syrtash, brought an interim motion in 2017 for sale of the matrimonial home.
In addition to claims made by the mother that would be prejudiced by the order for sale, one of the parties' children had significant special needs.
The court ordered that the home be sold at the request of the father, with costs payable to him by the mother.
The mother, who was represented by Andrea Di Battista, successfully appealed the decision and in 2018 the Divisional Court reversed the decision made to sell the home as well as the cost award made against the mother.
The father was ordered to pay the mother costs of the appeal in the amount of $15,000.00.
Appeal - Sale of Matrimonial Home
We successfully appealed a previous decision against the mother
Significant costs were awarded to the mother to cover legal fees for the appeal
Gilliland v. Gilliland
This was a high-conflict and very complex case. The trial was heard over the course of 19 days in 2009 and addressed issues including child and spousal support section 7 expenses, the validity of a domestic contract and various property issues. The decision was released in 2010.
The parties began cohabiting in 1989, were married in 1995 and had one son together in 2005. Both parties were employed as pilots for U.S. airlines. The mother is Canadian and was represented by Nicole Tellier and Alex Finlayson (who is now Justice Finlayson, having been appointed as a Judge in the Ontario Court of Justice effective August 9, 2017). The father (represented by Andrea) is American.
The mother was unsuccessful with respect to several orders that she sought – including orders for lump sum spousal support, a vesting order and orders in relation to property concerning the estate of one of the father's deceased family members.
The parties reached an agreement regarding parenting in advance of trial, and the father paid child support to the mother. The father was ordered to pay periodic spousal support to the mother and was ordered to contribute to the cost of a full-time live-in nanny in part due to the nature of the parties' employment. The amount of support paid to the mother – including contribution toward section 7 expenses – left each party with 50% of their combined net disposable incomes.
In the decision on costs, despite the fact that there was mixed success for both parties, the court found that the father was by far more successful than the mother and ordered that the mother pay costs to the father fixed at $75,000.00 including disbursements.
The mother then initiated proceedings in the Ontario Court of Appeal and brought a motion which the father successfully defended.
Property Division, Spousal Support, Child Support
The case involved a Canadian mother and American father
We successfully defended the father against various orders sought by the mother, and the father was awarded costs
A subsequent appeal was successfully defended
Ilmer v. Ilmer
This case involved complex issues and there were significant periods of delay in the proceedings.
The parties had one child together, and an order was made requiring the father to pay child support in 2003. In 2015, the mother, who was then represented by Andrea Di Battista, brought a motion to strike the father's pleadings.
The father demonstrated a pattern of ignoring court orders. The most egregious of which was his failure to pay the ordered amount of child support since 2005. The father failed to comply with the Family Law Rules and failed to pay a cost order. His financial statement and financial disclosure were incomplete.
Although pleadings are struck in family law cases only in exceptional circumstances and where no other remedy would suffice, the father's pleadings were struck. He was no longer permitted to participate in the case and he was ordered to pay further costs to the mother in the amount of $8,000.00 for the motion.
Application to Strike Pleadings, Costs
Despite significant periods of delays, we successfully represented a mother in a motion to strike the father's pleadings
Costs of $8,000.00 were awarded to the mother to cover her legal expenses for the motion
Powell v. Powell
In this case, the mother brought an interim motion in 2007 seeking an order for spousal support from the father. The mother sought spousal support in the amount of $625 monthly on compensatory grounds.
The father, who was represented by Andrea Di Battista, took the position that the mother was not entitled to any spousal support, and further that given his responsibility to pay child support and extraordinary expenses for the child of the marriage, he was unable to afford to pay spousal support.
The father was successful and the court ordered no spousal support payable based on both a lack of entitlement and also an inability to pay.
We successfully defended a father against a claim for spousal support due to his inability to pay
Scott v. Scott
In this case, the parties were married for 18 years and had a 14-year-old son. The trial of this matter to determine issues of child support, spousal support, access and equalization of family assets was heard by the Honourable Justice Rogers in 2007 and lasted nine days. The mother was represented by Andrea Di Battista. The father was represented by Gordon Allen.
The trial was chaotic. The father failed to disclose documents until a week before trial, and in some cases, during trial. Examining deductions and the income tax return of the father was found to be impossible because of late or non-existent disclosure. Income was imputed to the father based in part on the lack of clarity about deductions as well as admissions of other sources of money not reflected on the tax return, in addition to the considerable skills of the father.
The mother was awarded custody of the child, and the court would not force the 14-year-old boy to participate in access beyond his willingness. The father was ordered to have access to his son in accordance with the son's wishes, and to enrol him in counselling.
Following the release of the trial decision in 2008, the Court determined the issue of costs. This is a very rare decision where costs were ordered to be paid in part by counsel. In the subsequent decision on costs, Justice Rogers ordered costs in the mother's favour in the amount of $25,500.00 plus G.S.T. Of that sum, the father was ordered to pay 75% ($19,125 plus G.S.T.) and his counsel was ordered to pay 25% ($6,375 plus G.S.T.).
This was a nine-day trial
The case was extremely complex due to unique circumstances
Our client was awarded custody and costs were ordered to be paid in part by opposing counsel, which is quite rare
Santos v. Santos
Efua represented Ms. Santos, who defended a claim for custody and access in this case before Justice Sherr in the Ontario Court of Justice.
Ms. Santos sought an order for sole custody of her young son, and an order that the father, Mr. Santos, have supervised access. Ms. Santos was successful in obtaining sole custody and supervised access.
Justice Sherr heard cost submissions at the conclusion of the motion and despite Mr. Santos' claims that he could not afford to pay any legal fees, Efua successfully argued for and obtained an order for costs in Ms. Santos' favour.
2019 – Ontario Court of Justice Decision
Our client was awarded sole custody and supervised access for the father
We successfully represented our client and obtained costs against the father who claimed to have limited resources
Custody is rarely awarded before trial
Qadeer v. Jaffer
This case involved a claim by the father, Mr. Jaffer, for access and the claim by the mother, Ms. Qadeer, for child support.
Efua successfully argued to have Mr. Jaffer's pleadings struck after he breached court orders for disclosure.
Ms. Qadeer was successful in recovering almost all of her costs from the father, given her success on the motion and the father's conduct.
We succeeded in having the father's pleadings struck (case dismissed) due to breach of court orders
Our client was awarded most of her costs
Cirinna v. Cirinna
The parties in this case had one child together, who resided primarily with the mother after separation.
The mother failed to comply with numerous court orders and took active steps to undermine the child's relationship with his father, including unilaterally denying the father access to the child.
The father, who was represented by Andrea Di Battista, successfully obtained an order on an interim motion changing the child's primary residence from the mother to the father, as well as other relief including an order for costs payable by the mother in the amount of $6,000.00.
Residence, Costs
With our help, the father's home became the primary residence for the child
The father was also awarded legal costs
Amin v. Kabir
In this case, the parties had two young children; the youngest was residing primarily with Ms. Amin and the eldest with Mr. Kabir. There was no order or agreement about the primary residency of the children at the time of the Motion. In her Motion, Ms. Amin sought that the parties' then-7-year-old son who was in the primary care of Mr. Kabir attend Castlebridge Public School in her catchment area in Peel. Mr. Kabir had originally not consented to the child continuing school in Peel, but on the eve of the Motion it was made clear that Mr. Kabir agreed that the child attend Castlebridge PS, but online instead of in person.
At the time the Motion was heard there were no reported decision regarding COVID-19 related in-person vs. online attendance. However, while completing the decision, the Honourable Justice Trimble was made aware of the case of Chase v. Chase, 2020 ONSC 5083 which specifically dealt with this issue. His Honour provided counsel for Ms. Amin and Mr. Kabir with the opportunity to submit further argument as a result of a reported case on the issue.
There was no medical reason as to why the child should not attend in person school, and the Court held that the child's mental and physical well-being would be better provided for if he attended school in-person.
In the end, Alexandrea was successful in ensuring that the child's best interests were met by having him attend school in person.
We succeeded in ensuring our client's child's best interests were met
At DKGC LLP, we fight for our clients and their rights. It's not just our duty, it's also our privilege.
Copyright © 2023 Di Battista Katz Grant Cobbina LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Commitment to Accessibility

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Whether you're prepping, serving or storing, a Glass Mixing Bowl Set is a must for every kitchen. The wide bases and thick rims make it easy to mix even thick batters, while the clear glass shows you when your ingredients are completely incorporated.
Set of three: 2 qts., 3 qts. and 4.5 qts.
Made of clear, tempered glass.
Bowls nest for compact storage.
To remove stubborn residues, soak in hot, soapy water and wash with a nonabrasive sponge or cloth by hand. Periodically deep clean to maintain appearance of bowl by cleaning with a cloth dampened with vinegar or lemon juice. Then rinse and thoroughly dry. Do not use abrasive cleansers, such as steel wool, scouring pads or cleansers with chlorine bleach as this may scratch the glass.
Bowl is dishwasher- and freezer-safe. Bowl is microwave-safe and oven-safe to 350°F (180°C). Do not take directly from freezer to oven.
For microwave use: Center bowl to allow for proper rotation.


text:
Q: SQL Server connection issue from DMZ machine - We are getting the following error from a DMZ machine which has access to the DB server, however we are getting the following error -
A connection was successfully established with the server, but then an error occurred during the pre-login handshake. (provider: TCP Provider, error: 0 - An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.)
A google search hasn't helped thus far.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Everyone's favorite empathy-fueled public personality, Ira Glass, is coming back to Baltimore (he was born here) to deliver this year's commencement speech at Goucher College.
I saw Glass speak back when I was in college, and he was — predictably — great. He's got a way with an anecdote, and a talent for sneakily shifting the silly til it's suddenly profound. This makes him pretty much perfectly suited as a commencement speaker. Good job, Goucher!
Other local schools — Johns Hopkins included — have yet to announce their commencement speakers. But no fear, we'll stay on top of it — and let you know if anyone else exciting is coming to town.


Rachel Nichols of The Jump details the struggles of the Philadelphia 76ers early in the 2018-19 NBA season, with Joel Embiid starring but Ben Simmons still struggling with his jumper and Markelle Fultz not living up to his No. 1 draft pick slot, before winning an impressive road game vs. the Indiana Pacers. Tracy McGrady and Paul Pierce then discuss whether this was a turning point for Brett Brown's group, with Dario Saric playing particularly well but now without Marco Belinelli and Ersan Ilyasova.
What the hell happened to Markelle Fultz?
This is Why the 76ers HAD to Trade For Jimmy Butler. Jimmy Butler has finally been traded from the Minnesota Timberwolves and he's now playing with Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. The NBA's Eastern Conference is a bit tougher now. Do you think they are better than the Boston Celtics, Toronto Raptors or Milwaukee Bucks? Subscribe to CaineLovesCali: youtube.com/cainelovescali?sub_confirmation=1 ►TWITTER: https://twitter.com/CaineLovesCali ►INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/cainelovescali/ ► MUSIC- Instrumental produced by Chuki. http://www.youtube.com/user/CHUKImusic) RETRO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWl-VWdCcEs SOAR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmt-uVJRbmw SWITCH: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te7Hk2Jf0CU Ryan Little - amusement park: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVOuqPefo8Q Outro music: HXNS https://soundcloud.com/hxns https://soundcloud.com/hansworld/july-1-forget-it Ross Bugden Music: https://www.youtube.com/c/rossbugden Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license.


text:
La Lagan est un fleuve d'Irlande du Nord. Traversant les comtés d'Antrim et de Down, ainsi que la ville de Belfast, il se jette dans l'océan Atlantique au niveau du Belfast Lough.

Voir aussi

 Liste des cours d'eau d'Irlande
 le Belfast Lough

Notes et références

Cours d'eau en Irlande du Nord
Géographie de Belfast

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


We speak to The Body herself, Ayesha Noon, on getting that bikini bod for the summer - and for life.
I started working out in my A Levels. Back then, I would just go to the gym and run and run. There was only Shapes and Gymkhana in Lahore; no concept of bootcamps or personal training or anything like that. I started reading up online a lot, and learning about food and exercise. But my focus back then was not food, and what I am putting into my body, it was just exercise. I would even eat McDonalds two or three times a week, but eventually I developed an understanding of how bad all this is for you. Although back then I would work out for two hours a day, I feel that the results I get now are much better because I've learnt about myself, my limits, and my strengths. People think being thin or having a small waist is it, but no, you can still be skinny-fat, which is being thin but having high levels of body fat, which is what 90 percent of women I talk to have. Being healthy is a complete and wholesome approach to life. You can't just single out diet, sleep or exercise and think that focusing on that one aspect will get you to your goal. You can't starve and not exercise, or go the gym but eat whatever you want, and expect to get results. Make health and fitness your life. Be honest with yourself. Investigate and get to know yourself. Take out a couple of months and understand what types of foods and what kinds of exercise works for you. Know your physical makeup, and make sure you're always feeling great.
Don't make so many rules for yourself and don't corner yourself, because you will fail. Your whole day cannot be a huge effort to you. Take it a step at a time. Be conscious of what you're eating and don't make it difficult for yourself. Remember: you want to look good, right? So you have to be willing to put in a lot of effort to get those results. So when I know I'm invited out or dinner, I will have something before I go, so that I'm not starved by the time food is served, as usually at such events, dinner is served late. Remember, it's the little things and the small changes that you have to make that you set yourself up to succeed. You have to think: what are my goals? And what am I doing to achieve that? It helps to write things down. Do you want to be thin? Or flexible? Do you want to build muscle? From there, you can see what exercise and foods work best for you. If you want to get ripped then maybe yoga isn't the best choice for you; weight lifting is. You have to make conscious and informed decisions. Also, be careful about stress eating or emotional eating. If your body isn't hungry, don't just eat for the sake of it. Listen to your body. When you're exercising, be mindful of if you're feeling it in the muscles you're supposed to. Check that your form and posture is okay. And obviously, don't smoke and do drugs.
First and foremost, eat clean. And by that I mean eat well, because I don't believe in diets. Diets are the biggest lie fed to the world! It's all about eating the right things at the right time, and eating what you know works for your body. Don't eat healthy two days and then eat badly. On a healthy day, I will wake up and have my cup of tea which I really can't do without. There's no white sugar in my house. I don't really have a sweet tooth, which really saves me. I have honey when I crave something, and that honey comes from our farms because what you get off the shelves in stores is pure sugar. For breakfast, I have two fried eggs and grilled tomatoes with some toast. For lunch, I eat home cooked food with very little oil. Everything in my house is cooked in olive oil. If I work out in the morning, I usually follow it with a protein shake, which is really helping me achieve the results I want. When you finish working out, your body is in overdrive in terms of calories you're burning and energy your muscles need so whatever you take in at that time is absorbed very efficiently. It's also the best time to have carbohydrates as they're processed and broken down very well. I'll have one or two smoothies a day, and I have a veggie juice once the day when I feel like I want to snack. I am proud to say, I haven't had McDonalds in over ten years.
I think my only food vice is Coke. It's very difficult for me to give it up, even though I'm trying now to reduce my intake. I would have 3-4 cans a week easily, but now I have a couple of sips after a meal. I try to substitute Coke with soda water or Perrier or gassy water, but it's tough, because I love Coke! Another weakness is French fries. It's very difficult for me to refuse them when they are on the table. I don't deprive myself of food, though. If you do that, you will most probably binge later. I really love my paratha's also. There was a time when it was difficult to not even order fattening or unhealthy foods, but now it's not that tough to not have it. I guess you have to train yourself to eat these things in moderation and load up on healthy foods more.
To be honest, when I was pregnant, I ate whatever I wanted. I was exercising throughout and I made sure to stay active. I would carry things, go up and down the stairs, do grocery shopping myself, etc. People treat pregnancy like a disease here, and that kind of thing is actually counter natural. If you think about it, people abroad have no help, they live in small apartments in buildings without elevators, and they take care of their children and go to work. When I went to England to deliver my first child, I realized how warped our idea of pregnancy is in Pakistan. I would see women in their ninth month carrying groceries, running around with kids in the park and what not. Our body is very resilient at the end of the day and we weaken it physically and mentally out of fear. Pregnancy is the most natural thing at the end of the day – women are born to do this. It's not a time of weakness; it's a time of strength. In the rural areas, which women have help? During pregnancies, they cook in the heat, look after their herd of children and even farm, and they're fit because they're so active. I'm not saying if you've never exercised in your life, you should hit the gym as soon as you are pregnant. No way. But you should make sure you're at the peak of your fitness level when you concieve, and you should have a high muscle percentage and low body fat, because after delivering what you were when you conceived is what your body remembers and goes back to.
Build your muscles. Lift weights. Be strong! There is such a taboo around this topic in Pakistan as people think it bulks you up. Even if you lift low weights, you have to lift. Everyone needs muscle on his or her body. And if you have a strong core, you won't have back issues when you're pregnant. Just remember, you need a strong back and strong abs to carry the weight when you're pregnant. You're gaining 30-40 or more pounds, so you have to be strong to carry that weight! You have to have internal and physical strength to do that otherwise your body will give in. Lifting weights is also very important in building bone density.
Women are more prone to osteoporosis as we breast feed, and with time, bones deplete. You should lift weights your whole life, even into your 50's and 60's. Nothing should stop you from being the best you can be. Have a wholesome approach to your life, You should be able to run around with your grandkids when you're older, lift them up, throw them in the air, and have the strength and energy to keep up with them. Why wouldn't you want that for yourself? Being fit and healthy is not just about getting into the clothes you want to, it's also about being able to lift up furniture yourself in the house to move a chair from here to there when the need arises, or pull your suitcase yourself when traveling. When your muscles are strong, you will not have joint issues. Muscles are a cushion of support around your bones. All these things make a difference to your everyday life. It's not just about looking good.
Managing stress is another very, very important thing. Find time to switch off. Watching TV or being on your phone is not switching off. Your mind is engaged. It's important to take 15-20 minutes out of your day and do something you enjoy. Take a stroll in the park every day or every other day, if you don't have time. For me, playing with my children is time off. I love becoming a child with them and running around with them. I also take thirty minutes before I actually wake up to just lie in bed and think and have my cup of tea sans phone. For me, the gym or any physical activity is switching off. My day is incomplete without it. I crave it.
I am very conscious of what my kids eat at home. You can't always control what they eat outside of the house. The idea is to develop their palette and instill eating habits that they will carry with them their whole life. My son Ebrahim is 3 and a half and he has never had McDonalds. If you say the word to him, he will probably start singing Old McDonald instead! It's not something that's a part of my or my husband's life, so it's not something that's a part of his. I make sure he has fruits for snacks, the same way I do, and now it's become a habit for him. I'm just trying that if tomorrow he has a choice of candy or fruit, he will hopefully pick fruit! It's the same as teaching them or conditioning them about anything else, like don't put your hand in fire, etc. I follow a lot of Instagram accounts on fitness, so he sits and watches them with me. If I do push ups, he will sit on my back and try to imitate me and get into it. He knows what bicep curls, squats and lunges are! I want him to be outdoorsy and athletic. His father plays football with him. Kids are like sponges; they absorb everything and learn very quickly. Gear them up to succeed.
Next articleWork, work, work, work, work… OUT!


text:
Engaging the Private Rented Sector in Retrofitting
West Yorkshire Combined Authority, England
Head of Place and Environment
West Yorkshire Mayor Tracy Brabin has pledged to get to Net Zero by 2038. The Combined Authority has begun addressing changes to get to the Net Zero carbon goal across a number of areas such as transport and industry. Decarbonizing domestic heating is a key priority and funding is already supporting social housing retrofitting. The Combined Authority wants to find ways to support retrofitting of all types of housing tenure, including those properties owned by private landlords. The private rented sector in West Yorkshire, now at one million homes, has grown significantly in recent years. And a key priority for tackling the climate and environment emergency is delivering warm, energy efficient, affordable and climate resilient homes. Private tenants who need affordable rents are concentrated in the inner urban areas of the region and, although lower rent accommodation is concentrated in these areas, the supply is in some cases inadequate and in poor condition. With the current energy crisis, fuel poverty, and climate emergency, there is a pressing need to improve the energy efficiency of these homes although, given their quality, they might also be the hardest to retrofit.
Mayor Brabin has committed to delivering a new Better Homes Hub to bring together housing partners, local authorities, and businesses to champion new ways to deliver warm, affordable, low-carbon and climate resilient homes for all. A previous program, Better Homes Yorkshire (launched in 2015), and government funding has enabled work to begin for social/public housing. According to the Combined Authority's leadership, additional work is needed on the private rented sector front to better understand how to target, incentivize, and support this sector; the scale and feasibility of the task at hand; and how the approaches taken might vary by property/ownership type (individual private landlord, institutional private landlord with multiple properties, landlords renting to low-income people whose rent is subsidized by the state, etc.). The summer fellow working alongside the Place and Environment policy team will seek to answer the following key questions:
How many private rented sector properties identified are in need of retrofitting? What are the property/housing types? And where are they located?
Is there a particular property type to prioritize for action, for example, those where the tenant is receiving a housing subsidy/benefit?
What tools, including incentives, connection to existing funding resources, direct investment, and enforcement are needed to ensure standards in private rented sector stock are raised to a Decent Homes level where possible? What will encourage owners, landlords and residents to act?
What additional data is needed to answer the questions above?
To address these questions, the fellow will engage with the Combined Authority's Environmental Policy and Housing teams, conduct data analysis of existing local and national data, interview experts and private landlords, and conduct research on approaches taken by other regions, including any lessons for potential segmentation by property type, age, location, etc. Based on these findings, they may help design a pilot to test approaches for incentivizing a particular landlord type to retrofit their property. Key deliverables include:
Report summarizing key findings from data analysis, promising practices research, and interviews and recommendations for engaging the private rented sector in retrofitting and a potential segmentation/prioritization strategy; this could also include stakeholder maps, summary of additional data needs, and potential funding resources.
Depending on work being undertaken prior to the fellow's placement, scoping of a pilot area.
Presentation to Mayor and senior team in the Combined Authority.
Qualitative interviewing and analysis


The booklet presents a socioeconomic snapshot of Israel in many areas such as education, employment, poverty, and the condition of the elderly. Also included are new findings – for example, half of all Israelis do not pay any income tax.
This is the second year that the Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel is publishing its Picture of the Nation – an original, unique and user-friendly book of figures – that includes one figure per page accompanied by a brief explanation. The booklet provides a bird's-eye perspective of Israel's society and economy in several key areas: primary and secondary education, higher education, labor productivity, poverty and income inequality, the elderly, women in the labor market, Haredi employment, and health. The booklet, written by the Center's executive director, Prof. Dan Ben-David, is based primarily on Taub Center research and highlights areas where Israel excels and those in which a change of direction is needed.