Monthly Archives: January 2017

Trump says his travel ban will make America safer. Our research shows it will do the exact opposite.

By Nour Kteily and Emile Bruneau

Khulud Fidama, 26, of Dearborn, Mich., stands with her family on Jan. 29 outside the McNamara Terminal at Detroit Metropolitan Airport to protest President Trump’s travel ban for refugees and citizens of seven Muslim-majority nations. (Elaine Cromie/Detroit Free Press via AP)

With the stroke of a pen, President Trump signed into law this week a series of executive orders that have sent reverberations around the world. Making good on some of his most controversial campaign promises, Trump started on Wednesday the process of building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico. On Friday, he instituted a ban on refugees and halted admission to all foreign nationals — including those with visas — of seven Muslim-majority countries, including Syria, Iraq and Iran.

By early Saturday, refugees were being detained at the border, and some legal permanent residents were turned away. In short order, massive crowds demanding that the policy be revoked rallied at the airports of many of the nation’s largest cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Boston.

It is clear that Trump’s policies reflect a sea change in the American approach to national security — but do they “make Americans safe again?”

Our research suggests they could do exactly the opposite. By dehumanizing minority group members in word and deed, Trump’s rhetoric and policies may promote the very actions that they purport to prevent.

During the presidential primary process, we collected data from two large samples of several-hundred Americans online. We assessed their political leanings, their attitudes about Mexican immigrants and Muslims, and their support for several of Trump’s actual border policies (taken directly from his campaign website).

Specifically, we assessed participants’ overt dehumanization of Mexican immigrants and Muslims, first by asking Americans to place these groups where they thought they belonged on the popular “Ascent of Man” diagram representing …read more


Resistance to US travel ban grows

President Donald Trump enters the second week of his presidency facing a growing political backlash — with protesters in the streets, lawsuits mounting and his own party fracturing over his executive order banning travel to the United States from seven Muslim-majority nations.

…read more

Source:: CNN US News

‘Apple would not exist without immigration’: Companies at Trump’s tech summit react to his travel ban

By Brian Fung and Herman Wong

From left, then-Vice President-elect Mike Pence, PayPal founder Peter Thiel and Apple CEO Tim Cook listen to then-President-elect Donald Trump during a meeting at Trump Tower in New York in December. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

In less than two months, technology companies went from making nice with Donald Trump at his December tech summit to confronting his travel ban.

In internal and public statements, the heads of Apple, Alphabet and Facebook have expressed concern for their employees while also criticizing Trump’s executive order. Their responses have been characterized as tepid.

Many other Silicon Valley firms who did not attend Trump’s tech leaders meeting have also spoken up or taken action. Netflix chief executive Reed Hastings wrote in a Facebook post that Trump’s actions are “hurting Netflix employees around the world, and are so un-American it pains us all,” he wrote. “Worse, these actions will make America less safe (through hatred and loss of allies) rather than more safe..”

Lyft has pledged to donate $1 million to the American Civil Liberties Union over the next four years, while Airbnb says it will provide free housing to those affected by the ban.

Airbnb is providing free housing to refugees and anyone not allowed in the US. Stayed tuned for more, contact me if urgent need for housing

— Brian Chesky (@bchesky) January 29, 2017

Meanwhile, Uber became the center of a political battleground Saturday even as its CEO said he will be sure to raise the issue on Friday when he and other business advisers are expected to meet with Trump.

Here is what each of the companies who had sent high-level executives to the Trump tech summit has said, either internally to their employees, in statements to the press, or on social media.


Google chief executive Sundar Pichai late …read more


The stock market has boomed under Trump. What happens next might scare you.

By Lawrence H. Summers

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, U.S., on Friday, Jan. 27, 2017. U.S. stocks declined Friday as benchmark indexes slipped from records reached earlier in the week and data showed economic growth slowed more than forecast last quarter. Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg

This week the “Trump Rally” continued as the Dow Jones Industrial Average crossed 20,000, and our president issued a celebratory tweet. How much does this mean? To what extent is it a vindication of the economic policy approaches pursued by the new Administration? Will the post-election rally continue? No one knows these answers, and market timing is a fool’s game, but I remain persuaded that markets and the economy are most likely enjoying a sugar-high that will not last a year.

First, Dow 20,000 is a meaningless benchmark and crossing it means little. Its numerology, not analysis, to focus on round numbers. The Dow is an odd and arbitrary index which weights companies by their share price not their market value. It is highly limited in who is included, with Goldman Sachs accounting for over 20 percent of the gain in the 30 stock index since Election Day.

Second, as then Treasury secretary Bob Rubin constantly reminded his colleagues in the Clinton administration, “markets go up, markets go down” and it is a mistake to judge policy on immediate market reactions rather than concentrating on fundamentals. The observation that the best post-election pre-inauguration performance of the stock market in the last 100 years occurred during Herbert Hoover’s transition underscores this point as does the market’s poor performance during the Roosevelt and Obama transitions.

Third, there are indicators in markets of possible trouble ahead. While financial stocks have been very strong over the last several months, insider sales have …read more