RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: Wind Turbines Across a Landscape. North Dakota Oil Workers Are Learning to Tend Wind Turbines Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=35861"><span class="small">Bill McKibben, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Saturday, 08 August 2020 12:07

McKibben writes: "'I enjoy big machinery, and it punched all those buttons,' Jay Johnson told me. 'They really are big, and, if you like machinery, then there you go.' Johnson has one of the jobs that might, with luck, come to define our era."

Bill McKibben. (photo: Wolfgang Schmidt)
Bill McKibben. (photo: Wolfgang Schmidt)


Wind Turbines Across a Landscape. North Dakota Oil Workers Are Learning to Tend Wind Turbines

By Bill McKibben, The New Yorker

08 August 20

 

enjoy big machinery, and it punched all those buttons,” Jay Johnson told me. “They really are big, and, if you like machinery, then there you go.” Johnson has one of the jobs that might, with luck, come to define our era. At Lake Region State College, in Devils Lake, North Dakota, he trains former oil workers for new careers maintaining giant wind turbines. The skills necessary for operating the derricks that frack for crude in the Bakken shale, he says, translate pretty directly into the skills required for operating the machines that convert the stiff winds of the high prairies into electricity. That is good news, not only because it’s going to take lots of people to move the world from oil and gas to solar and wind but because people who work in hydrocarbons are going to need new jobs now that the demand for hydrocarbons is dropping. “It’s impossible to overstate the stillness” in the oil fields now, Johnson says. “Nothing is happening, zero work, and it sure is scary.”

But not in the wind industry. Renewables are now finding capital faster than fossil fuels, which means, for instance, that a single utility, Xcel, adds enough capacity annually across the Upper Midwest to power a million homes each year. Johnson was originally a newspaper reporter, but he left that foundering industry and became a wind tech. He’s been teaching since 2009, instructing students on everything from how to climb two-hundred-foot ladders (the school has a training turbine) to how to use drones for inspections.

“Most of the job is general maintenance,” Johnson says, “when you get up to the top of the tower and get into what we call the nacelle—it’s basically a large gearbox and the generator and some control equipment. It weighs eighty thousand to a hundred thousand pounds. So, there’s a lot of changing oil filters, and lots of inspections, and, to everyone’s chagrin, there’s a lot of cleaning. You use a lot of Simple Green and a lot of paper towels.” He added, “There’s a lot of bolt torquing, too. You have to insure everything is nice and tight. Torquing and lubrication. And if it stops working, there’s troubleshooting to figure out why it’s not. That can be one of the more satisfying parts.”

In May, Neset Consulting, a prominent oil-services company in North Dakota, asked Johnson to train some of its employees, who used to work at jobs as, for example, mud loggers—the people who inspect soil coming up from a fracked hole for signs of oil. The first seven of those employees will graduate from Johnson’s course on August 21st. “Operation and maintenance is a big piece of the business. Neset would like to be able to contract those services to the wind industry,” the company’s operations manager told the Minot Daily News last month. I would have liked to discuss the issue with him, but my phone calls and e-mails to the company went unanswered.

That’s a shame, because the company’s story seems fascinating. Its owner, Kathy Neset, got a geology degree at Brown University, “one of those snobby schools, very ultra-liberal,” she told an interviewer a few years ago. “I survived and I am a testament that if you stay true to yourself, you can maintain your identity.” A New Jersey native, she went West to work in petroleum—she was a mud logger herself, and a rare woman in the oil fields; she married a local man, Roy Neset, and in 1980 they founded the company that she has led since his death, in 2005. “The golden era of the hardy pioneer woman has not faded into a shadowy relic of the past,” she said. “Today she may not be breaking virgin sod with a horse and plow, but there remain plenty of challenges on the prairie for a strong and tenacious spirit to test herself against.” By all accounts, Neset has succeeded: her two sons both work in the industry, and, when the state held a celebration in 2014 to commemorate passing the million-barrel-a-day production milestone, she hosted the event, sharing the stage with the governor. A donor to the Republican Party, in 2017 she was touted as a possible Senate candidate.

Given all that, perhaps it’s not so easy being green for some in North Dakota: on the one hand, it’s pretty clear that the state’s energy future lies with wind; on the other, the current head of the Party, President Trump, believes that windmills cause cancer and that “when the wind doesn’t blow, just turn off the television, darling, please. There’s no wind, please turn off the television quickly.” So, if the technical transition is relatively simple, the cultural transition may take a while.

Yet recalcitrance about the necessary transition to renewables isn’t confined to the right. Labor unions whose workers build pipelines have historically kept the Democratic Party from a more full-throated backing of renewable power. This time four years ago, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. came out strongly in support of the Dakota Access pipeline, even after indigenous protesters had been attacked by security guards with German shepherds at Standing Rock. As Richard Trumka, the president of the federation, said at the time, “Pipeline construction and maintenance provides quality jobs to tens of thousands of skilled workers.” In 2018, young activists persuaded the Democratic Party to stop taking money from the oil-and-gas industry—but the A.F.L.-C.I.O. leaned on Party leaders, who quickly reversed course after, as Tom Perez, the head of the Democratic National Committee, put it, “hearing concerns from Labor that this was an attack on workers.” Just last month, North America’s Building Trades Unions issued new reports insisting that, in the words of Sean McGarvey, the organization’s president, “Today’s oil and natural gas jobs are better for energy construction workers across the country in both the short and long term.” He added, “The research confirms what our members tell us: the career opportunities for renewables are nowhere near what they are in gas and oil, and domestic energy workers highly value the safety, reliable duration and compensation of oil and gas construction jobs.” And, in May, the Los Angeles Times reported that gas-union workers, rattled by proposed legislation in the city of San Luis Obispo that would encourage new buildings to use electricity for heating and cooking, threatened a mass protest “with no social distancing.”

All of this is understandable, especially since some clean-energy entrepreneurs, such as Elon Musk, have decided to be anti-union. But, given climate change and its outsized effects on the most vulnerable communities—Phoenix set a new record last month, averaging a temperature of ninety-nine degrees for July; a quarter of Bangladesh is under water; and Arctic sea ice is, per usual, at record lows for the date—organized labor needs to be a big part of the solution. That’s already beginning to happen: as more wind energy starts to move offshore, massive new projects are increasingly unionized. Just last month, New York State—in whose waters a lot of turbines will be built—told bidders that they will need to pay prevailing wages and make good-faith efforts to sign contracts with unions. A “focus on labor” is “integrated into the DNA of our marquee renewable-energy program,” Governor Cuomo’s climate adviser, Ali Zaidi, said.

Large chunks of Joe Biden’s energy plan are devoted to helping labor make this transition, and one hopes that those trends will continue, because the environmental and economic logic of clean energy is growing steadily more obvious. In many ways, it produces jobs at least as good as those in the oil fields, where boom-and-bust cycles make stability hard. Even climbing ladders may not be an obstacle much longer. “Almost every new turbine has some kind of elevator, some kind of individual personal lift,” Johnson said. “It takes a lot of training to develop wind techs, and you can’t afford to lose someone because they’re long in the tooth. You’ve got to make things a little bit easier for them as they mature. And we’re at a point now where people can retire as a wind tech.”

The new industries, at their core, are much simpler than the old, and as a result they’re going to relentlessly undercut established ways. Every forecast shows rapid growth in the world’s electricity demand, even as we near (or perhaps have already passed) peak oil. Instead of finding a distant pool of petroleum and fracking the subsurface geology to make it flow, instead of shipping the crude to a refinery, and then to a gas station, and instead of pumping it into a car tank whose pistons must then explode it in small bursts to power a ton of sheet metal down a road—instead of all that, you can let the wind turn a blade, take the resulting power down a wire and into a battery, and run a far simpler motor of a car, or a bus or a train.

“Or a Cat or a dozer,” as Johnson points out. Big machinery.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Democrats Worry Barr Has an 'October Surprise' in the Making Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=5910"><span class="small">Carrie Johnson, NPR</span></a>   
Saturday, 08 August 2020 11:21

Johnson writes: "Attorney General William Barr has promised the Justice Department will not take any action to influence the upcoming election. But Democrats and department veterans aren't so sure about that."

William Barr. (photo: Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
William Barr. (photo: Joshua Roberts/Reuters)


Democrats Worry Barr Has an 'October Surprise' in the Making

By Carrie Johnson, NPR

08 August 20

 

ttorney General William Barr has promised the Justice Department will not take any action to influence the upcoming election. But Democrats and department veterans aren't so sure about that.

In opinion pieces and letters, they warn that Barr might be preparing to spring an "October Surprise." There's one big reason for that: recent testimony from the attorney general himself.

Democrats are monitoring the status of an investigation by prosecutor John Durham, who appears to be looking at intelligence gathering and other actions by the Obama administration in 2016. Barr tapped Durham to look into the origins of the Russia investigation in May 2019.

When Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, D-Fla., asked Barr whether he would commit to not releasing any report by Durham before the November election, Barr said bluntly, "No."

Durham has been on the job for more than a year now, leading some lawyers familiar with the investigation to believe he may be close to the end. One such source told NPR that Durham has asked to interview former President Barack Obama's CIA director, John Brennan, confirming a report by NBC News.

That source said both sides are trying to iron out details for the interview, which largely involves technical questions. The source added that Brennan has been told he is not a target of prosecutors.

Areas of interest

For his part, the attorney general said Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden, who's now running for president, are not targets in the case either, and that criminal investigations are focused on others.

One may be former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who allegedly doctored an email used as part of a process to secure court approval to renew surveillance on onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Those surveillance applications contained major errors identified by independent Inspector General Michael Horowitz and highlighted by Republicans in Congress.

A second area of interest may be the leak of sensitive information to a Washington Post columnist in early 2017 about conversations that incoming Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn was having with the Russian ambassador after the election.

The full scope of Durham's probe is a closely held secret. Barr has said he expects the prosecutor will put some findings in writing in the form of a report that may be made public.

Barr told the House Judiciary Committee on July 28 that he's well aware of the longstanding Justice Department policy that bars taking action that could produce uproar in an election year. "Any report will be, in my judgment, not one that is covered by the policy," he said.

Lessons from 2016

Amid uncertainty about Durham's fact-finding, and what Justice Department leaders will do about it, looms a recent historical precedent. Four years ago, actions by then-FBI Director James Comey did seem to hurt presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

This time around, Democrats said they're suspicious of Barr. They said he misrepresented the findings of an earlier investigation, by special counsel Robert Mueller, to benefit President Trump.

"Is there such a thing as a predictable surprise?" one attorney involved in the Durham matter asked.

In the past year, Barr has told interviewers that the Durham probe has turned up surprising and damaging information. But the Justice Department typically avoids making comment about ongoing investigations.

This week, Fred Wertheimer of the left-leaning group Democracy 21 appealed to Durham directly in the form of an open letter on the blog Just Security. A public release of Durham's findings, or indictments, will become a campaign issue with political consequences, he said.

"If your investigation is not complete, you should not complete it until after the election," Wertheimer wrote in the Thursday letter. "If the report is complete, you should publicly oppose any release of your report before the election."

The letter said that if Durham gets overruled, by Barr or others, he should withdraw from the case, to avoid actions that could interfere with the presidential election and taint his "long and distinguished career."

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Coming Next: The Greater Recession Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51503"><span class="small">Paul Krugman, The New York Times</span></a>   
Saturday, 08 August 2020 08:34

Krugman writes: "One pretty good forecasting rule for the coronavirus era has been to take whatever Trump administration officials are saying and assume that the opposite will happen."

Paul Krugman. (photo: MasterClass)
Paul Krugman. (photo: MasterClass)


Coming Next: The Greater Recession

By Paul Krugman, The New York Times

08 August 20


The suspension of federal benefits would create damage almost as terrifying as the economic effects of the coronavirus.

ne pretty good forecasting rule for the coronavirus era has been to take whatever Trump administration officials are saying and assume that the opposite will happen. When President Trump declared in February that the number of cases would soon go close to zero, you knew that a huge pandemic was coming. When Vice President Mike Pence insisted in mid-June that “there isn’t a coronavirus ‘second wave,’” a giant surge in new cases and deaths was clearly imminent.

And when Larry Kudlow, the administration’s chief economist, declared just last week that a “V-shaped recovery” was still on track, it was predictable that the economy would stall.

On Friday, we’ll get an official employment report for July. But a variety of private indicators, like the monthly report from the data-processing firm ADP, already suggest that the rapid employment gains of May and June were a dead-cat bounce and that job growth has at best slowed to a crawl.

READ MORE

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Trump Administration's No-Blanks Policy Is the Latest Kafkaesque Plan Designed to Curb Immigration Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=31562"><span class="small">Catherine Rampell, The Washington Post</span></a>   
Saturday, 08 August 2020 08:34

Rampell writes: "What do you do if immigrants learn how to navigate the latest booby trap you've set for them?"

An immigrant looks on with his children as they wait to hear if their number is called to apply for asylum in the United States at the border in Tijuana, Mexico, Jan. 25, 2019. (photo: Gregory Bull/AP)
An immigrant looks on with his children as they wait to hear if their number is called to apply for asylum in the United States at the border in Tijuana, Mexico, Jan. 25, 2019. (photo: Gregory Bull/AP)


The Trump Administration's No-Blanks Policy Is the Latest Kafkaesque Plan Designed to Curb Immigration

By Catherine Rampell, The Washington Post

08 August 20

 

hat do you do if immigrants learn how to navigate the latest booby trap you’ve set for them?

If you’re the Trump administration, you set that trap for someone else those immigrants must rely on — such as law enforcement or medical personnel, who submit evidence for certain visa applications.

Last fall, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services introduced perhaps its most arbitrary, absurd modification yet to the immigration system: It began rejecting applications unless every single field was filled in, even those that obviously did not pertain to the applicant.

“Middle name” field left blank because the applicant does not have a middle name? Sorry, your application gets rejected. No apartment number because you live in a house? You’re rejected, too.

No address given for your parents because they’re dead? No siblings named because you’re an only child? No work history dates because you’re an 8-year-old kid?

All real cases, all rejected.

President Trump’s “wall” has been built not of steel or concrete but of paperwork and red tape. This no-blanks policy was just the latest bureaucratic change made without consent from Congress nor the (legally required) formal rulemaking process.

Asked how this persnickety processing change serves the public interest, a USCIS spokesperson emailed, “Complete applications are necessary for our adjudicators to preserve the integrity of our immigration system and ensure they are able to confirm identities, as well as an applicant’s immigration and criminal history, to determine the applicant’s eligibility.”

Seems more likely it’s about preventing eligible immigrants from getting visas.

“It’s death by a thousand paper cuts,” says Cecelia Friedman Levin, senior policy counsel at Asista, a nonprofit that represents immigrant survivors of violence.

After an initial flood of confusing rejection letters, immigration attorneys wised up. Lawyers spent additional hours combing through every field, meticulously typing “N/A” or “none” in all blanks even when doing so seemed superfluous.

In certain fields, it’s not possible to digitally type in the magic words “none” or “N/A,” because USCIS coded the PDF to allow entries of numbers only. So, attorneys began handwriting “N/A” across forms. Some scrounged up typewriters. Others special-ordered “N/A” rubber stamps.

All this busywork took up a tremendous amount of time. But at least applicants had a way to jump through this hoop.

So USCIS adapted — by requiring unsuspecting third parties to clear the same hurdle.

In late June, new fine print appeared on USCIS’s website. It said the no-blanks policy would extend to at least one document that must be filled out by law enforcement officials — someone over whom immigrants and their lawyers had no control. These officials must complete and sign a form certifying that immigrants applying for the crime-victim (U) visa are assisting with an investigation or prosecution.

Immigration attorneys say that even when they have good relationships with law enforcement, completing these certifications can require months of nudging, cajoling and begging.

“Sometimes the police department is like five people,” said Josh Doherty, a lawyer at the nonprofit Ayuda. “Understandably, if you are an agency of five people, and you’re responsible for public safety and traffic enforcement, and all these other different things, you might miss an email or letter.”

Now, attorneys must persuade these law enforcement agencies to please, please, please, redo all the forms they already signed, and fill out “N/A” everywhere possible, no matter how gratuitous it seems.

“These are officers who have sometimes already gone above and beyond to recertify the case during covid, and now we have to bother them again to ask for these cosmetic changes,” says Safiya N. Morgan, senior staff attorney at the New York Legal Assistance Group.

Separately, in recent months, at least two other attorneys have received denials from USCIS for blanks on other forms filled out by third parties — in both cases, a medical examination report required for green card applications. That document is signed by a USCIS-certified physician and submitted to the agency in a sealed envelope. Immigrants are not allowed to even view the completed form to make sure the doctor left nothing blank.

Unlike with the law enforcement certifications, USCIS has not publicly confirmed whether it is systemically applying its no-blanks policy to medical forms, or if those denials were perhaps the action of a rogue official. Alerts on USCIS’s website flag the no-blanks policy only for asylum, crime-victim and trafficking-victim visas, despite rejections lawyers have received for blanks on other types of applications. The agency did not respond to questions about how or when it was deciding to enforce the policy.

This Kafkaesque processing change isn’t merely vindictive. It’s a huge waste of resources, for the people filling out the forms and those processing them. In fact, USCIS is going broke partly because it’s spending so many more person-hours looking for excuses to reject eligible immigrants.

But hey, cruelty and financial mismanagement? That’s practically the Trump brand.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
How Not to Lose the Lockdown Generation Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=43707"><span class="small">Naomi Klein, The Intercept</span></a>   
Friday, 07 August 2020 12:08

Klein writes: "In the panic about this 'lost generation,' there has been a lot of talk about how there is no work for young people. But that is a lie."

Two members of the Fire Department of New York's Emergency Medical Team wheel in a patient with potentially fatal coronavirus to the Elmhurst Hospital Center in the Queens borough of New York City, March 30, 2020. (photo: Robert Nickelsberg/Getty)
Two members of the Fire Department of New York's Emergency Medical Team wheel in a patient with potentially fatal coronavirus to the Elmhurst Hospital Center in the Queens borough of New York City, March 30, 2020. (photo: Robert Nickelsberg/Getty)


How Not to Lose the Lockdown Generation

By Naomi Klein, The Intercept

07 August 20


Lessons from the New Deal point the way forward in the era of Covid-19.

icture this: You live in rural Arkansas and tragedy strikes. A family member has fallen ill with that contagious respiratory illness that has already killed so many — but you don’t have enough space in your small home to quarantine them in a room of their own. Your relative’s case doesn’t appear to be life-threatening, but you are terrified that their persistent cough will spread the illness to more vulnerable family members. You call the local public health authority to see if there is room in local hospitals, and they explain that they are all stretched too thin with emergency cases. There are private facilities, but you can’t afford those.

Not to worry, you are told: A crew will be by shortly to set up a sturdy, well-ventilated, portable, tiny house in your yard. Once installed, your family member will be free to convalesce in comfort. You can deliver home-cooked meals to their door and communicate through open windows — and a trained nurse will be by for regular examinations. And no, there will be no charge for the house.

This is not a dispatch from some future functional United States, one with a government capable of caring for its people in the midst of spiraling economic carnage and a public health emergency. It’s a dispatch from this country’s past, a time eight decades ago when it similarly found itself in the two-fisted grip of an even deeper economic crisis (the Great Depression), and a surging contagious respiratory illness (tuberculosis).

Yet the contrast between how U.S. state and federal government met those challenges in the 1930s, and how they are failing so murderously to meet them now, could not be starker. Those tiny houses are just one example, but they are a revelatory one for the sheer number of problems those humble structures attempted to solve at once.

Known as “isolation huts,” the little clapboard houses were distributed to poor families in several states. Small enough to fit on the back of a trailer, they had just enough space for a bed, chair, dresser, and stove, and were outfitted with large screened-in windows and shutters to maximize the flow of fresh air and sunshine — considered essential for TB recovery.

As physical structures, the TB huts were an elegant answer to the public health challenges posed by crowded homes on the one hand and expensive private sanatoriums on the other. If houses were unable to accommodate safe patient quarantines, then the state, with Washington’s help, would just bring an addition to those houses for the duration of the illness.

It’s worth letting that sink in, given the learned helplessness that pervades the U.S. today. For months, the White House hasn’t been able to figure out how to roll out free Covid-19 tests at anything like the scale required, let alone contact tracing, never mind quarantine support for poor families. Yet in the 1930s, during a much more desperate economic time for the country, state and federal agencies cooperated to deliver not just free tests but free houses.

And that is only the beginning of what makes it worth dwelling on the TB huts . The cabins themselves were built by very young men in their late teens and early 20s who were out of work and had signed up for the National Youth Administration. “The State Board of Health furnishes the materials for these cottages and NYA supplies the labor,” explained Betty and Ernest Lindley, authors of  a 1938 history of the program. “The total average cost of one hut is $146.28,” or about $2,700 in today’s dollars.

The TB cabins were just one of thousands upon thousands of projects taken on by the 4.5 million young people who joined the NYA: a vast program started in 1935 that paired young people in economic need, who could not find jobs in the private sector, with publicly minded work that needed doing. They gained marketable skills, while earning money that allowed many to stay, or return to, high school or college. Other NYA projects including building some of the country’s most iconic urban parks, repairing thousands of dilapidated schools and outfitting them with playgrounds; and stocking classrooms with desks, lab tables, and maps the young workers had made and painted themselves. NYA workers built huge outdoor pools and artificial lakes, trained to be teaching and nursing aides, and even built entire youth centers and small schools from scratch, often while living together in “resident centers.”

The NYA served as a kind of urban complement to FDR’s better-known youth program, the Civilian Conservation Corps, launched two years earlier. The CCC employed some 3 million young men from poor families to work in forests and farms: planting more than 2 billion trees, shoring up rivers from erosion, and building the infrastructure for hundreds of state parks. They lived together in a network of camps, sent money home to their families, and put on weight at a time when malnutrition was epidemic. Both the NYA and the CCC served a dual purpose: directly helping the young people involved, who found themselves in desperate straights, and meeting the country’s most pressing needs, whether for reforested lands or more hands in hospitals.

Like all New Deal programs, the NYA and CCC were stained by racial segregation and discrimination. And the gender roles were — let’s just say that the girls discovered they could sew, can, and heal; and the boys discovered they could plant, build, and weld. Black girls in particular were streamed into domestic work.

Yet the scale of these two programs, which together altered the lives of well over 7 million young people over the course of a decade, puts contemporary governments to shame. Today, millions upon millions of young people are beginning their adulthood with the ground collapsing beneath their feet. The service jobs so many young adults depend on for rent and to pay off student debt have vanished. Many of the industries they had hoped to enter are firing, not hiring. Internships and apprenticeships have been canceled via mass emails, and promised job offers have been revoked.

These economic losses, combined with the decision of many colleges and universities to close residences and move online, have abruptly severed countless young adults from their support systems, pushed many into homelessness, and others back into their childhood bedrooms. Many of the homes young people now find themselves in are under severe economic strain and are not safe or welcoming, with LGBTQ youth at heightened risk.

All of this is layered on top of the pain of the virus itself, which has spread grief and loss through millions of families. And that is now mixing with the trauma of tremendous police violence directed at crowds of mostly young Black Lives Matter demonstrators, compounding the murderous events that precipitated the protests in the first place. In the background, as always, is the shadow of climate breakdown, not to mention the fact that when members of this generation first heard terms like “lockdown” and “shelter in place” related to the pandemic, many of their minds immediately turned to the terrorizing active shooter drills U.S. schools have had them practicing since early childhood.

It should be little wonder, then, that depression, anxiety, and addiction are ravaging young lives.

According to a survey conducted by National Center for Health Statistics and the Census Bureau last month, 53 percent of people aged 18-29 reported symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. Fifty-three percent. That’s more than 13 percentage points higher than the rest of the population, which itself was off the charts compared with this time last year.

And that still may be a dramatic undercount. Mental Health America, part of the National Health Council, released a report in June based on surveys of nearly 5 million Americans. It found that “younger populations including teens and young adults (25<) are being hit particularly hard” by the pandemic, with 90 percent “experiencing symptoms of depression.”

Some of that suffering is finding expression in another invisible crisis of the Covid era: a dramatic increase in drug overdoses, with some parts of the country reporting increases over last year of 50 percent. It should all be a reminder that when we talk about being in the midst of a cataclysm on par with the Great Depression, it isn’t only GDP and employment rates that are depressed. Huge numbers of people are depressed as well, particularly young people.

This is, of course, a global crisis. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres recently warned that the world faces “a generational catastrophe that could waste untold human potential, undermine decades of progress, and exacerbate entrenched inequalities.” In a video message, he said, “We are at a defining moment for the world’s children and young people. The decisions that governments and partners take now will have lasting impact on hundreds of millions of young people, and on the development prospects of countries for decades to come.”

As in the 1930s, this generation is already being referred to as a “lost generation” — but compared to the Great Depression, almost nothing is being done to find them, certainly not at the governmental level in the U.S. There are no ambitious and creative programs being designed to offer steady income beyond expanded summer job programs, and nothing designed to arm them with useful skills for the Covid and climate change era. All Washington has offered is a temporary break on student loan repayments, set to expire this fall.

Young people are discussed, of course. But it is almost exclusively to shame them for Covid partying. Or to debate (usually in their absence) the question of whether or not they will be permitted to learn in-person in classrooms, or whether they will have to stay home, glued to screens. Yet what the Depression era teaches us is that these are not the only possible futures we should be considering for people in their late teens and 20s, especially as we come to grips with the reality that Covid-19 is going to be reshaping our world for a long time to come. Young people can do more than go to school or stay home; they can also contribute enormously to the healing of their communities.

While guest hosting Intercepted this week, I dug into what it would take to launch youth employment programs on the scale on the NYA and CCC — programs that, like their predecessors, addressed broad social needs while giving young people cash, skills training, and opportunities to work and possibly live in each other’s company. Put another way: What are the modern day equivalents of the home-delivered, NYA-built tuberculosis isolation hut?

Delving back in the history of New Deal youth programs, I was struck by how many of its projects have direct application to today’s most urgent needs. For instance, the NYA made huge and historic contributions to the country’s educational infrastructure, with a particular emphasis on low-income school districts, while training many young women as teaching assistants. It also provided significant reinforcements for an ailing public health system, training battalions of young people to serve as nursing aides in public hospitals.

It’s easy to imagine how similar programs today could simultaneously address the youth unemployment crisis and play a significant role in battling the virus. As just one example: We sure could use some of those nursing aides if there is a new surge of the virus this winter. A New York Times investigation last month quoted several doctors and nurses who are convinced that significant numbers of the Covid-19 deaths that took place in New York’s public hospitals could have been prevented if they had been adequately staffed. In emergency rooms where the patient-to-nurse ratio should not have been higher than 4 to 1, one public hospital was trying to get by with 23 to 1; others weren’t doing much better. Nightmare stories have emerged of disoriented patients pulling themselves off of oxygen machines and other vital equipment, trying to get up, and with no one there to stop them, dying alone. More nurses would have made all the difference.

Then there are the public schools, similarly understaffed after decades of cutbacks, that will be trying to enforce social distancing this year. If we weren’t in such a rush to get back to a bleak and diminished version of “normal,” there would be time for a NYA-style program to train thousands of young adults to help reduce class sizes and supervise kids in outdoor education programs.

And since we know that the safest place to gather is still outdoors, some college-age students could pick up the work begun by the NYA and expand the national infrastructure of trails, picnic areas, outdoor pools, campsites, urban parks, and wilderness trails. Thousands more could be enrolled in a rebooted CCC to restore forests and wetlands, helping draw planet-warming carbon out of the atmosphere.

Creating these kinds of programs would be complex, and costly. But the individual and collective benefits would be immeasurable. And as was the case during the Great Depression, many young people would be given the chance to do something they desperately want and need to do right now: Get the hell out of their childhood homes and live with their peers.

On Intercepted, I spoke about this prospect with Neil Maher, professor of history at Rutgers University–Newark and the author of a definitive history of the Civilian Conservation Corps, “Nature’s New Deal.” He told me that in his research into the CCC, he came across many participants describing their time in the program as a kind of sleepaway camp or even an outdoor university: a unique chance to live collectively, away from their families and the city, and become adults. But unlike so many actual university campuses that can’t reopen safely — given the daily commutes of faculty, staff, and many students — modern-day CCC-inspired camps could be designed as Covid “bubbles.”

The program would have to test participants on the way in, quarantine anyone who tested positive for two weeks, and then everyone would stay at the camp until the job was done (or at least their part of it). It could be that rare triple win: Heal some of the damage done to our ravaged planet, offer an economic and social lifeline to people in need, and design what might be one of the most Covid-safe workplaces around.

In the panic about this “lost generation,” there has been a lot of talk about how there is no work for young people. But that is a lie. There is no end of meaningful work that desperately needs doing — in our schools, hospitals, and on the land. We just need to create the jobs.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 Next > End >>

Page 398 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN