Tag: worry

  • House Dems worry Biden ‘can’t keep waiting’ on McCarthy debt meet

    House Dems worry Biden ‘can’t keep waiting’ on McCarthy debt meet

    [ad_1]

    biden ireland 00351

    “They’ve got to do it soon,” Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), a close White House ally, said of a Biden-McCarthy sitdown, adding that while she believes there will ultimately be a clean debt-ceiling increase, the administration “can’t keep waiting.”

    Democratic lawmakers have already pressed that point in private, according to two people close to the discussions, urging the White House to lay out plans to meet with McCarthy for fear that public opinion would turn against the party. And swing-seat lawmakers stressed there’s no harm in starting a conversation, even as they all oppose McCarthy’s opening bid.

    “I don’t think there’s any harm in the two of them sitting down to talk,” said first-term Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio). “The idea that we’re even coming this close to a potential default is insane.”

    Over in the Senate, centrist Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has been pushing Biden for weeks to restart talks. Manchin said in a statement Thursday he didn’t fully agree with McCarthy’s proposal but slammed Biden’s refusal to meet with the Republican leader as a “deficiency of leadership.”

    Rank-and-file House Democrats aren’t going that far.

    “This is not a serious piece of legislation,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.). “That being said, I am happy we are talking about the debt ceiling, because I think it’s very critical to talk, and so do I think the speaker of the House and the president should sit down and talk about the debt ceiling? Of course they should.”

    Democratic leaders aren’t budging, yet. They remain in lockstep with the White House’s position that talks can’t begin until House Republicans release their own budget and fully divorce the conversation about debt from spending. Biden and McCarthy last met on the debt ceiling at the White House in early February, and while both characterized it as a promising start, the meeting didn’t produce any breakthroughs. Democratic leaders believe they should maintain maximum pressure on Republicans rather than strengthen McCarthy’s hand heading into a difficult vote for the GOP conference.

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters Thursday he didn’t expect any Democrats to support McCarthy’s offer and reiterated that they could talk with Republicans once they produced a budget. “I don’t know whether reasonable people would conclude that we should be negotiating against ourselves. That’s not a logical place to be,” he said.

    Biden allies are also salivating over the political contrast they believe the GOP’s debt plan creates, allowing Democrats to position themselves as the bulwark against proposals that would roll back clean energy tax credits and impose work requirements on Medicaid beneficiaries.

    “Ask House Republicans: Do they support Speaker McCarthy’s plan to kill manufacturing jobs in their home districts?” read the headline of a White House memo Thursday detailing more than a half-dozen Republican members whose districts are benefiting from manufacturing projects supported by the Inflation Reduction Act’s tax credits.

    In a speech Wednesday, Biden rejected McCarthy’s proposal as full of “wacko notions” and reiterated his demand for a clean debt ceiling increase.

    Yet while he’s maintained for months that he wants McCarthy to put out a budget before meeting with him again, officials have refrained from saying definitively whether the GOP passing its debt-limit bill would shift that calculus.

    “If you do another meeting, there’ll be an expectation of negotiations,” one adviser close to the White House, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said of the dilemma facing Biden and his top aides. “The White House would have to be able to structure the lead up to the meetings to say, we’re happy to talk to him but we’re not negotiating. … And then the question becomes: ‘What’s the meeting for?’”

    A bipartisan group of lawmakers from the Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed a separate debt framework Wednesday to hike the debt limit without drastic spending cuts. They’re billing it as a potential path to a compromise.

    “Probably everyone’s rooting for the speaker and the president to come to a deal,” said Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.), a member of the bipartisan group. He said he wasn’t going to dictate what the president and speaker should do, but added: “I think more discussion or exploration about where people are, what would work, is helpful — and that’s why we did what we did.”

    Democratic leaders haven’t openly embraced the bipartisan bid, though Jeffries said Thursday he saw it as proof that there are several dozen Republican lawmakers “who disagree with the extreme Republican proposal.”

    Still, others projected optimism that a sitdown between Biden and McCarthy could produce a bipartisan breakthrough.

    “They’re both Irish-American. They ought to have a nice dinner, and they ought to get to work and get it done for the sake of the country,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), who represents a district former President Donald Trump won in 2020.

    [ad_2]
    #House #Dems #worry #Biden #waiting #McCarthy #debt #meet
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Adani imbroglio: MVA, locals worry over fate of mega Dharavi revamp project

    Adani imbroglio: MVA, locals worry over fate of mega Dharavi revamp project

    [ad_1]

    Mumbai: As the Adani Group battles its current crisis on multiple fronts, the Maharashtra Congress, Shiv Sena (UBT) and residents of Dharavi on Thursday raised questions over the fate of the ambitious redevelopment project for Asia’s biggest slum.

    In end-November 2022, the state government had finalised Adani Properties Ltd.’s bid to invest Rs 5,069 crore in the Dharavi redevelopment mega project.

    At that time, the Metropolitan Commissioner of Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA), S.V.R. Srinivas, had said that the proposal would be sent for the state government’s approval, a special purpose vehicle would be formed, and if all goes well, “the project shall kick-start by February 2023”.

    When his reactions were sought again on Thursday, Srinivas said that he would not like to comment on the matter right now, “maybe after 2-3 days”.

    However, state Congress General Secretary Sachin Sawant feels that all is not well considering the nosediving of Adani Group shares and its probable cascading effect on the Indian economy.

    “The Maharashtra government must clarify its stand on the Dharavi redevelopment project. Will it allow the fate of lakhs of people to be connected to a company whose fate itself seems to be in jeopardy,” Sawant asked.

    Shiv Sena (UBT) national spokesperson Kishore Tiwari claimed that the erstwhile Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government was ‘deliberately toppled’ (in June 2022) so that the Adani Group could be given various big projects.

    “Why just Dharavi? What about the future of the Navi Mumbai International Airport and other major projects which have been given to the Adani Group? The Centre and the Maharashtra government must immediately clarify and cancel the allotments,” Tiwari demanded.

    The Dharavi Rehabilitation Committee (DRC) representing the local residents is virtually panicking over the fast-paced developments in the financial sector which are grabbing gloomy headlines daily.

    “The Adani Group’s reliability and credibility is now in serious doubt… We feel that they may not be able to take up and complete this project on time. So, we are asking the Maharashtra government to re-tender it and give it to another party,” DRC President Raju Korde told IANS.

    A meeting of the DRC shall be held later on Thursday night to finalise the strategy, besides writing to the state government to call for re-bids and award the project to a financially sound investor or consortium, he added.

    In fact, in mid-January, Chief Minister Eknath Shinde had brought the Dharavi revamp proposal to the global centre-stage in Davos, where he extolled it as “the largest public-private-partnership (PPP) real estate programme for slum redevelopment”.

    Terming it as an “environment-friendly project”, Shinde had said that around 56,000 families would be rehabilitated there with free homes of 300 sq ft to each slum-dweller there”, wowing an influential audience at the World Economic Forum held in the ski-resort in Switzerland.

    With an estimated timeline of around 15 years, the project – bedeviled by many problems and failed attempts for a makeover for over 15 years – will see construction of over 10 million sq ft, giving a total face-lift to the 520-acre locality.

    Dharavi – literally meaning ‘quicksand’ – is notorious as the dirty underbelly of Mumbai, housing over 10 lakh people crammed into a 2.1 sq km corner. But it is supposed to transform itself from an ugly duckling to a glittering district with swank buildings, wide roads, residential and commercial areas, schools, hospitals, gardens, playgrounds etc. planned there.

    [ad_2]
    #Adani #imbroglio #MVA #locals #worry #fate #mega #Dharavi #revamp #project

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • What are we worrying about when we worry about TikTok? | Samantha Floreani

    What are we worrying about when we worry about TikTok? | Samantha Floreani

    [ad_1]

    Is there any platform that creates as much collective angst as TikTok?

    For some, TikTok is just a silly video app. For others, it’s a symbol of our most potent social and political fears. What are young people engaging with? Isn’t it collecting a huge amount of data? Are they being dragged down dangerous rabbit holes? And is China spying on them?

    Concerns about data privacy, hyper-personalisation and exposure to content that could be harmful are all reasonable. But sensationalist headlines, reactionary calls for stricter content moderation – or banning the app entirely – risk missing the forest for the trees.

    TikTok is not some strange aberration; it’s the logical next-step on the pathway of platform capitalism that was laid down by those that came before it. It’s a product of a privatised internet that best serves applications ultimately designed not for people, but for profit.

    I confess: I really like TikTok. For me, it’s become a place of joy and absurdity among the rage, horrors, and tedium of its competitors. As a digital rights and privacy advocate, admitting this feels like a dirty little secret.

    The thing is, it’s possible to simultaneously hate a platform but love the people on it and the things they create.

    But my experience of TikTok is likely to be completely different to yours; that’s by design. TikTok’s commitment to algorithmically curated content is one of the reasons it stands out from the rest. The “For You’” page is responsible for its popularity and profitability – but also its harm.

    As with all social media, there are myriad horrendous marks against TikTok. From TraumaTok and content encouraging disordered eating and self-harm to influencer propaganda attempting to recruit Gen Z to the military, there is no shortage of reasons to worry.

    Australia weekend

    There are also plenty of examples of TikTok being used for social good. Labourers have used it to gain visibility and criticise their working conditions; it’s the home of a growing Indigenous creator community; and many young people use it to organise and amplify their voices on critical political issues.

    What are we really worrying about when we worry about TikTok? Most concerns seem to be misdirected anxieties about the broader status quo of the platform ecosystem. Almost all widely used digital platforms threaten the privacy and security of users. They share information with various governments, have the capacity for cultural and ideological influence, and exploit user data for profit.

    TikTok has shifted emphasis away from mass virality and toward maximum niche-ification. Once it has determined what keeps someone on the app, it takes them deep into the obscure content trenches. Perhaps they lingered on a couple of sad heartbreak videos and now they’re being bombarded with depression content, or re-watching a controversial political video led them to conspiracy theories. Wherever they end up, once there, it can be incredibly hard to get out.

    This is partially why online anonymity is so important – it gives people the grace of exploration and inquiry. It allows people to make choices, change their minds, learn, and grow. TikTok doesn’t make room for this kind of internet exploration; it makes it impossible to have curiosity without consequence.

    TikTok isn’t alone in using engagement and recommender algorithms to curate personalised content feeds, but it does take it to the extreme. This is profitable both because it keeps people scrolling and because there’s very little difference between being able to personalise content and personalise ads.

    Because of its monumental success, other apps are attempting to follow in TikTok’s footsteps, giving us a glimpse into the current trajectory of social media. Instagram recently faced backlash when it started prioritising recommended short-form videos, and just last week, Twitter made the algorithmic feed the default. With a business model this lucrative, it’s not enough to fight TikTok alone.

    Let’s go down our own rabbit hole: if you’re worried about algorithms showing people problematic content, you should be worried about targeted advertising. The logic of personalised engagement is the same. And if you’re worried about targeted advertising, you should be worried about the way data is collected for profit under surveillance capitalism. That’s what enables it.

    And if you’re worried about surveillance capitalism, you should be worried about regular old capitalism. Profit is what drives companies toward invasive data collection and developing algorithms that keep people on their apps for longer.

    But online spaces run for profit aren’t preordained. This is a choice, and we could make a different one. What might social networking look like if the incentive to make money was removed? What might be built if it was in the hands of the people, with the motive being connection, creativity, or community, rather than market competition?

    This is not a call to apathy, but rather, to think bigger. It’s an invitation to take those concerns about TikTok and reorient them. It’s time to broaden our collective political imagination of the kind of online experiences that could be possible if we break the profit-motive stranglehold and make room for publicly owned and collectively controlled social technology.

    [ad_2]
    #worrying #worry #TikTok #Samantha #Floreani
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )