Mediaboss Marketing

Nicole Gelinas

Opinion

By Nicole Gelinas

May 4, 2023 | 3:57pm

Its good that New Yorks progressive elected officials and transit advocates are outraged by Jordan Neelys killing on a Manhattan subway train Monday.

Neelys life mattered and so did the lives of the 27 other people violently killed on the subway since March 2020.

Where was the progressive outrage then?

It might have prevented the latest death.

Monday afternoon, Neely, 30, was menacing people on an F train in Lower Manhattan, according to witnesses, when another passenger put him in a chokehold.

The medical examiner has ruled the death a homicide.

Its up to police and prosecutors and, if it comes to that, a jury to determine whether this killing was justified self-defense or just another subway murder.

Our progressive pols arent willing to wait.

Jordan Neely was murdered, concluded AOC, because he was crying for food. People experiencing homelessness, mental illness, hunger, and frustration need and deserve compassion, not force, tweeted city councilwoman Tiffany Caban.

Does the Mayor, Governor, or any high-ranking MTA official plan to say anything about Jordan Neelys killing today? asked the author of a popular subway blog.

Its good that the progressives are finally interested in a subway killing.

But before Neelys death, from March 2020 until early April, 27 people lost their lives to murder in the subway, many of them, like Neely, were homeless young people.

Before 2019, it took 15 years for New York to rack up 28 murders on the subway, not three.

Where were AOC and Caban when homeless soccer player Akeem Loney, 32, was murdered by a stranger as he slept on the subway, in November 2021?

Where were they when Claudine Roberts, 44, also sleeping on the subway, was fatally knifed by a stranger earlier that year?

Jordan Neely, 30, a homeless man, was strangled aboard a northbound F train just before 2:30 p.m. on May 1, according to police.

He reportedly started acting erratically on the train and harassing other passengers before being restrained and ultimately choked by a straphanger, identified as a 24-year-old Marine from Queens.

The Marine, who was seen on video applying the chokehold, was taken into custody and later released but the DA is mulling charges, which could include involuntary manslaughter, according to experts.

The city medical examiner ruled Neelys death a homicide, noting he died due to compression of neck (chokehold). This will be weighed during the investigation into whether charges will be brought for Neelys death.

Neelys aunt told The Post that he became a complete mess following the brutal murder of his mother in 2007. She noted he was schizophrenic while suffering from PTSD and depression.

The whole system just failed him. He fell through the cracks of the system, Carolyn Neely said.

Law enforcement sources said Neely had numerous arrests on his record, including for drugs, disorderly conduct, and fare beating.

At the time of his death, Neely had a warrant out for his arrest for a November 2021 case in which he was accused of assaulting a 67-year-old woman in the East Village, the sources said.

Mayor Eric Adams has said its important for the DA to complete the investigation into Neelys death and not rush to conclusions.

READ MORE

Oh, yes Caban, even as four people were killed within a month last fall on the subway, including a union steamfitter and a Citi Field worker separately on their way home from work, was dismissing concerns about subway violence, calling it a one-in-a-million event.

In some recent cases, perpetrators have claimed self-defense, perhaps spuriously.

Just in April, an attacker killed 18-year-old Isaiah Collazo aboard a Brooklyn train after Collazos friend pulled the emergency brake, sparking a dispute; the attackers Legal Aid lawyer claims the dispute escalated to the point where he had to defend himself.

Similarly, last fall, the man who allegedly pushed Heriberto Quintana to his death under a Jackson Heights train claimed the move, during a fight, was defensive.

Because, in the latest case, Neely was black and the alleged perpetrator appears to be white, the progressives are all now screaming Bernie Goetz, after the illegally armed man who shot and wounded four people menacing him on the subway in 1984.

We cannot end up back to a place where vigilantism is tolerable, Al Sharpton says.

Actually, the Goetz incident wasnt that unusual. Self-defense, or the claim of it, was common in the 1970s, 1980s, and early-1990s high-crime subways.

In 1979, a 63-year-old man stabbed and killed a 23-year-old who, he said, had tried to rob him.

In 1990, two people died in alleged subway self-defense incidents.

Just like in the latest case, the press and pols only found Goetz interesting because he was white, and his assailants were not.

What kept killings, including purported self-defense killings, on the subways low after the early 1990s? Low crime.

In 1990, with 26 murders on the subway, riders were on edge.

That was the year Bill Bratton launched broken-windows policing underground, stopping low crimes before they became big ones, and crime fell.

By 2019, with one or two killings a year on the subways, riders felt safe.

But now, with killings back up to double-digit numbers annually last year for the first time since the early 1990s, people are scared again.

Neely, with a long history of disorderly and violent behavior, is just the latest example of a trend weve seen for three years: disorder escalates.

Whether Neelys death was justified or not is less important than whether we could have prevented it.

Yes, we could have, by keeping subways as safe as they were in 2019.

Ensuring order on the subway means that Neely wouldnt have been able to act in a way that made people scared; it also makes it less likely that a fellow passenger would react in the same way to feeling scared.

Violent subway crime, though lower than it was during last years horrific fall, is still 28% higher than it was in 2019.

Progressives needed to care about all subway victims to save the one who, sadly, fit their desired narrative of vigilantism.

Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattans Institutes City Journal.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/04/where-was-the-progressive-outrage-when-27-others-were-killed-on-the-subway/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

Read more:
Jordan Neely matters but where were progressives when 27 others were killed on the subway? - New York Post

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribunes daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Voters across Texas are heading to the polls Saturday for municipal elections that are being headlined by several ambitious, progressive-backed ballot propositions.

Mayors in some of the states largest cities are also on the ballot, but few face serious competition. Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson does not face any opponents at all.

That has focused most political attention on ballot propositions in San Antonio, Austin and El Paso that touch on a host of progressive priorities. In San Antonio, the states second-largest city, progressives are pushing a justice charter that promises to decriminalize abortion and low-level marijuana offenses and require tickets rather than arrests for some nonviolent offenses.

In El Paso, progressives are backing Proposition K, or the climate charter, which would set aggressive renewable energy goals and overhaul city policy to make reducing carbon emissions a priority. It has drawn the support of Beto ORourke, the former statewide Democratic candidate and member of the U.S. House from El Paso.

The ballot propositions have drawn fierce opposition from public safety and business groups, which have issued dire warnings about their impact.

The ballot propositions are part of a trend that has Texas progressives turning to local elections to implement an agenda that has been blocked by the Legislature. Republican lawmakers have taken notice and are prioritizing proposals this legislative session to narrow the cities home rule authority.

Polls are open Saturday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

San Antonio is home to the biggest progressive fight in Texas. Proposition A would not only overhaul policing through its provisions on abortion, marijuana and nonviolent offenses, but it would also outlaw no-knock warrants and officer chokeholds.

The city has said only one provision creating a justice director at City Hall is consistent with state law, with the remaining provisions unenforceable.

Supporters are relishing the opportunity to send a symbolic message about the citys values and potentially battle the state in court if the proposition passes. Theyre also branding it as the first time Texas voters get a chance to vote directly on the issue of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, triggering a virtual abortion ban in Texas.

However, much of the campaigning has focused on a proposal to expand the citys cite-and-release policy. Currently, San Antonio police have the discretion to either make an arrest or issue a citation for a range of Class A and B misdemeanor offenses, such as theft from a business of less than $750. Proposition A would require citations for those offenses and expand the list of offenses eligible for citations.

Supporters say Proposition A is needed to reduce jailing and free up resources to focus on more serious crime. But opponents argue it will incentivize crime and damage the economy. Its opponents include Mayor Ron Nirenberg, who has otherwise been a Democratic ally on some of the issues in the proposition.

In El Paso, Proposition K aims to reach beyond the citys operations and attempt to set clean energy goals for the entire local economy: 80% clean energy by 2030 and 100% by 2045. It would call on the city of El Paso to create a new climate department, produce climate impact statements for major city decisions and rethink local policy at all levels to cut greenhouse gas emissions. It would also require the city to explore buying El Paso Electric, which is privately owned.

Its the second climate proposal brought to El Paso voters in less than a year: In November, voters approved a proposition to create a city climate action plan.

The proposition has provoked a bitter fight between economic development groups and local climate activists, including those involved with the national Sunrise Movement. Even in his recent endorsement of the proposition, ORourke said it was not ideal, calling some of the language confusing and vague.

And in Austin, voters will decide on dueling propositions related to policing. Proposition A was placed on the ballot by criminal justice reformers and seeks to increase oversight of the Austin Police Department. Proposition B is similarly worded but backed by law enforcement groups and geared toward maintaining the status quo.

In addition to Dallas Johnson, other mayors up for reelection Saturday include Fort Worths Mattie Parker and San Antonios Nirenberg. While Parker and Nirenberg have multiple opponents, none have posed a serious threat.

The races are nonpartisan, but each mayor has partisan history. Johnson is a former Democratic state representative, while Parker has identified as a Republican but has expressed dismay with the current state of the party.

There is also a mayoral race in Arlington, the Dallas suburb that counts as Texas seventh-most-populous city. Mayor Jim Ross is seeking reelection against a realtor, Amy Cearnal, who has received large money in the homestretch and has attacked Ross for donating to Joe Bidens 2020 presidential campaign.

Still, Ross is the favorite to win, much like the other incumbent mayors.

A more pitched battle is playing out farther down the ballot in Fort Worth, where Republican forces are trying to win back a majority on the City Council. Democrats gained a one-seat majority on the council in 2021, and conservatives are trying to take over a newly expanded 11-seat council.

Erin Douglas contributed reporting.

Disclosure: El Paso Electric has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

We cant wait to welcome you Sept. 21-23 to the 2023 Texas Tribune Festival, our multiday celebration of big, bold ideas about politics, public policy and the days news all taking place just steps away from the Texas Capitol. When tickets go on sale in May, Tribune members will save big. Donate to join or renew today.

Read the original:
San Antonio, El Paso voting on progressive propositions - The Texas Tribune

The United States is fighting wars on multiple fronts. Aside from our involvement in Ukraine and the Middle East, a hot war is being waged against economics. This war is being championed by the progressives in the Democrat Party, backed in large part by left-wing sociologists and political scientists. Progressives deny basic economic principles and theory. They deny that incentives matter, that markets work better than government dictates, that scarcity and opportunity costs exist, that the laws of supply and demand are operative, that benefit-cost analyses have merit, and that economic efficiency makes consumers and producers better off.

Incentives matter. Remove penalties for looting and carjacking and more looting and carjackings occur. Establish sanctuary cities and free college tuition for illegal immigrants and expect increased flows of illegals crossing the border. Increase compensation for the unemployed and more unemployment occurs. To deny that incentives matter is to deny inductive and deductive logic. Progressives admittedly march to the music of a different logic. What the tune is isnt clear.

Scarcity means that resources are limited. Getting more of something requires having less of something else. Economists call the best alternative use of resources its opportunity cost. Larry Summers, the well-respected Democratic economist and former secretary of the treasury, wondered if the billions of dollars proposed to be given to individuals who have college debt might be better spent elsewhere (or perhaps not spent at all). His question was roundly ignored by progressives.

Understanding opportunity cost is essential for rational decision-making. Imagine a family operating without regard to opportunity cost. Little Sally might be given her hearts desire while the rest of her family goes without food. No rational family would operate like this. Nor should any nation.

Government commands destroy the benefits from markets. Progressives despise markets. Markets privately allocate resources based on supply and demand through which the costs of production and consumer preferences interact to set prices and efficient levels of output. Progressives think markets produce the wrong things. The old Soviet Union and Chinese command economies announced five-year plans that dictated the production of nearly everything (including the number of nails). Shortages, inefficiency, and economic stagnation followed. Thinking that the geniuses in Washington know best how to allocate resources will set us on the same road.

Economic efficiency raises living standards. Progressives think efficiency is a dirty word. They either dont understand the concept or choose to neglect it because it interferes with support for their public-policy whims. Economic efficiency incorporates a number of basic concepts, and an important one is to avoid producing something that costs more in resources than the value of the final product. Markets generally take care of this. If progressives want something, they dont care how much it costs or how wasteful it is. Take the Green New Deal, for example.

If progressives deny economics, what criteria do they use for decision-making? They rely heavily on the vaguely defined concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-acknowledged socialist and progressive, was recently asked by Bill Maher to define equity. He was stumped. It is best not to define terms that will get you into obvious contradictions. Take the proposed forgiveness of college debt. How does this square with the diversity, equity, and inclusion criteria? It more than smacks of a crass giveaway to buy votes.

The University of Michigan sociologist Elizabeth Popp Berman acknowledges the war against economists and their way of thinking. In her book, Thinking Like an Economist: How Efficiency Replaced Equality in U.S. Public Policy, she claims that economists are the chief obstacles to achieving progressive policies. She hopes that the progressives in Congress will be joined by a range of experts and activists including economists not committed to the economic style [of thinking]. However, is it reasonable to call someone who does not think like an economist an economist?

To be clear, economists can disagree on public policy. But the economic way of thinking allows for a rational debate. Professor Berman is correct that the economic way of thinking has been a chief obstacle to progressive policies. It has saved us from traveling down F. A. Hayeks road to serfdom.

Read more from the original source:
Progressives Are Declaring War on Basic Economics: News: The ... - The Beacon

As Maharashtra celebrates its 63rd Foundation Day, some politicians in the state are causing controversy over the location of a petroleum refinery at Barsu village in the Sindhudurga district. Nothing highlights the hypocrisy and doublespeak of the Shiv Sena, the principal opposition party in the state, more vividly than this. A forward-looking Maharashtra is being forced to close doors to development and take the path of negativism.

One wonders what happened to its much-touted legacy of progressivism. Maharashtra was once known for intellectual giants such as Lokmanya Tilak, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, and C D Deshmukh, social reformers like Mahatma Phule, builders of institutions that revolutionised popular thinking like Dr Hedgewar, Vinoba Bhave, Maharshi Karve and Vithal Ramji Shinde, freedom fighters like VD Savarkar, and politicians like YB Chavan. Recently, Maharashtra seems to be struggling to provide truly honest intellectual leadership.

The reasons for this decline are not far to seek. Firstly, the virus of hypocrisy has seriously afflicted the thinking circles in the state. Not a single politician or social leader who takes pride in Maharashtra's progressive legacy ever forgets to mention that this is the land of Phule, Shahu Maharaj, and Ambedkar. For many, merely mentioning these names has served as an umbrella to hide all their undemocratic, feudalistic, and even obscurantist acts.

It was the era of post-Mahatma Gandhi's assassination that saw the sowing of the seeds of hypocrisy in Maharashtra's politics. The riots and arson, plunder and loot that were witnessed in the state immediately after Gandhi's dastardly assassination met with only feeble condemnation. Selective amnesia and recognising only convenient facts were to become almost permanent ingredients of the approaches of most in the political class in Maharashtra, later!

Many from this so-called progressive cabal have closed their eyes when intellectual untouchability and thought-apartheid ruled the roost. Otherwise, known for tom-tomming about freedom of expression, they chose to look the other way when PB Bhave, a literary giant, was almost thrown out of the Marathi Sahitya Sammelan held immediately after the Emergency. All of a sudden, their liberal values vanished when Ramesh Patange, a senior RSS leader and author, was not allowed to speak at a seminar held by progressives where he was an invited speaker. They were tight-lipped when a needless controversy was manufactured on the subject of Maharashtra Bhushan to be given to historian Babasaheb Purandare. When it comes to politics of hurt emotions, these tsars and tsarinas of Marathi progressivism have always taken a religion-specific approach and silently watched the gagging of the likes of Taslima Nasrin. The duplicity of their approach came to the fore when they remained silent on the ban of the Satanic Verses and created a brouhaha over a complaint against the famous Ghashiram Kotwal, decades before, both cases of alleged hurting of emotions!

What is more appalling is the progressive cabal's willingness to crawl in front of the Thackerays when, in fact, they are asked to bend. Today, whatever remains of the so-called Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA), parties that had opposed the ban on Ambedkar's Riddles in Ramayana have joined hands with those who had advocated the same from the rooftop. Shiv Sena politics was always known as anti-democratic. Balasaheb Thackeray had defended the infamous Emergency of 1975. Besides the party's openly anti-South Indian or anti-Gujarati positions and the Robin Hood brand of politics, which is many times fuelled by protection money mechanisms, there are many aspects of Shiv Sena's style of functioning that no genuine progressive would ever accept. However, simply to cater to their own pathological hatred of RSS and BJP, progressives have been turning a blind eye to Shiv Sena's uncivil activism.

Throughout these years, Marathi progressives have developed a ghettoised mindset. With thought apartheid top of mind, most of them refuse to be seen in the company of a Sanghwala, deny recognition to any artist, litterateur, or journalist with an RSS background, and totally ignore the number of social work projects started by RSS persons. In the land of Phule-Shahu-Ambedkar, the progressives have promoted crass intellectual untouchability, and that too in the name of those who were true epitomes of all liberal values. All this puts a big question mark on Maharashtra's ability to provide thought leadership to the nation.

Thanks to the complete politicisation of the creative and intellectual spheres, dominant sections of the traditional thought leadership of Maharashtra pose a much more serious threat to those who do not subscribe to their brand of progressivism. From theatre to cinema, music to literature, and education to media, these pseudo-progressives try to corner every other recognition and call names when persons opposed to their brand of progressivism are decorated by some award. More often than not, this pseudo-progressive cabal seems to be thriving on a 'you-scratch-my-back; I-will-scratch-your-back' principle. While mutual obligation mechanisms have helped them sustain their grip, the loss of objectivity and non-partisan approach has cost the thinking circles heavily.

In contrast, the approach of RSS towards this needless ideological polarisation and untouchability deserves mention. Firstly, many in RSS recognise unhesitatingly that even beyond RSS, there are many honest and passionate social workers serving society. Secondly, RSS has always tried to build bridges across ideologies. Many, not subscribing to the RSS view in its entirety, have routinely graced the Vijaya Dashmi function as Chief Guests. No gatherings of the so-called progressives have ever seen an avowedly RSS person being invited to grace and given respect.

What is more deplorable is the fact that this thought apartheid has led to a near-total demise of authentic journalism. It has become fashionable to talk about what they call "Godi-Media" today. In reality, many media persons in Maharashtra seem to toe the line of Shiv Sena. Generally speaking, whether in power or opposition, Shiv Sena continues to influence not just the news but also the edit pages of key print-media publications. So much so that the popular impression of journalists indulging in a different kind of politics, including that of vocabulary, punctuation, headlines, and placement of news items, is gaining ground with every passing day.

Apart from being caught in the web of politics of fear and crass partisanship, Maharashtra also seems to be in the grip of the politics of patronage. Movie directors, theatre artists, and quite a few men of letters have been, although obliquely, given a clear message that to wear a badge of progressivism, you have to be anti-RSS and BJP. Not just that, those obliged by the progressive echo system are made to see no wrong in dynastic politics, open threats of violence given by some 'upcoming' leaders or denigration of Veer Savarkar. The silence of a powerful section of opinion makers on issues like sugar barons exploiting sugarcane growers, or diverting waters from particular dams to select areas in an unjust manner, speaks volumes.

With the spirit of accommodation now shrinking, the days of a genuine exchange of thoughts and ideas have become a thing of the past. The trio of Phule, Shahu, and Ambedkar must be cursing all those who swear by them and behave exactly opposite to their ideals.

Vinay Sahasrabuddhe is former MP, Rajya Sabha and columnist, besides being President of Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.

Waiting for response to load...

Go here to see the original:
Opinion: The Hypocrisy Of Maharashtra's Progressives - NDTV

New You can now listen to Insurance Journal articles!

Despite posting a year-over-year net income increase of 45%, Progressive Corp. shared first quarter financial results on Tuesday that showed the company falling short of its combined ratio goal for 2023.

The firms CR for the quarter was 99 with March alone posting a CR of 106.2 while the companys profit objective is to have a calendar year CR of 96.

Through the first quarter, were not on track to achieve our calendar year goal of a 96 combined ratio, Tricia Griffith, President and CEO of Progressive, said in an earnings call. Given our extensive history of meeting our stated goal, this has prompted many questions about how we got here and where were going.

Factors in continued elevated loss costs included inflationary pressure, reserving development, additional weather-related losses as well as recent law changes in Florida that impacted loss estimates and prompted increases to Progressive reserves.

Loss severity was up nearly 10% compared to the first quarter of 2022. Prior accident year reserves developed 4.6 points on the companywide CR and catastrophe losses contributed 1.8 points to that number, compared to 1.2 points for the same period last year.

Griffiths letter to shareholders says that Progressive is re-evaluating rate plans and intends to be aggressive with raising rates over the remainder of the year. In addition, course-correcting action is being taken to reduce advertising spending. By tightening verification, underwriting standards and limiting bill plan options, Progressive aims to reduce growth in segments company leadership believe cannot be written at the target margin.

Record Growth

First quarter growth reached an all-time high for the company, Griffith said.

Companywide net premiums written totaled $16.1 billion a growth of 22% compared to Q1 2022 and policies in force growth was 9%. Progressives net income of $450 million was up 45% from the $310,000 million reported in the first quarter of last year.

The companys personal lines business grew but fell short of the profitability target with a CR of 98.7 for the quarter. NPW grew 25%, with policies in force growth of 10%. Commercial lines grew NPW 15% with a CR of 98.4.

While policy growth may be slowed by Progressives actions, Griffith said we are focused on growing policies that we believe will meet or exceed our target margins.

Catch Up Quick

Progressive reported first quarter net income of $450 million, though the insurer booked a nearly $152 million loss for the month of March.

At the end of February, Progressive recorded net income of about $150.3 million for the month, with nearly $600 million of net income for the year as of Feb. 28.

The downturn in March, Progressive explained, was due to unfavorable prior-year reserve development of $146.5 million during the month about 55% attributable to its personal auto product and a majority from recently passed legislation in Florida, said the insurer.

Some of the unfavorable development in March is from higher than anticipated severity on previously closed claims, Progressive said.

In addition, commercial auto products represented about 30% of the unfavorable development for March due mainly to late reported claims and changes in reserve estimates.

Get the insurance industry's trusted newsletter

Follow this link:
Progressive Falls Short of Goal in Q1 - Insurance Journal