Skip to navigationSkip to content
Paige Vickers

Good morning. Here is your news brief.

Beijing and Moscow team up on Hong Kong

From peacocks to waterfalls, new signs of climate change

Brazil has a gold rush of fintech investment

Looking for a new job?

The UK’s brokerage industry braces for a price war

How to hold Hong Kong's police to account?

Washington had a wild day on Tuesday

...but agreed with him on a trade deal... Democrats are claiming victory after reaching an agreement with the White House on an update to the 25-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement—but the Senate will not take it up this year due to president Trump’s impending impeachment trial, The Hill reports.

McConnell: Senate will not take up new NAFTA deal this year

As of Tuesday, the World Trade Organization's appellate body no longer has enough members to function because the US is blocking new member appointments. So WTO dispute rulings will not be enforceable going forward. With the global trading system under this kind of pressure, regional deals like USMCA

As of Tuesday, the World Trade Organization's appellate body no longer has enough members to function because the US is blocking new member appointments. So WTO dispute rulings will not be enforceable going forward. With the global trading system under this kind of pressure, regional deals like USMCA (new NAFTA) will become an even more important part of trade policy.

...and even insurance companies got in on the act. US health insurers sued the government for denying their claims—apparently failing to see any irony—saying that they are owed $12 billion for losses in connection to Obamacare's "risk corridors."

Health insurers fighting claim denials made some seriously ironic arguments at the Supreme Court

I couldn't help chortling in court today when the attorney for a bunch of US health insurers complained that there was nothing more pernicious than an insurance program that won't pay what's promised. HA! Americans would have had a good laugh if cameras were allowed in the courtroom. But they are not

I couldn't help chortling in court today when the attorney for a bunch of US health insurers complained that there was nothing more pernicious than an insurance program that won't pay what's promised. HA! Americans would have had a good laugh if cameras were allowed in the courtroom. But they are not so few got a chance to see insurers fighting the US government for allegedly promised funds and experiencing what the insured feel when dealing with health institutions.

Blame TV syndication for our addiction to “bad” movies

Journalists love a deadline

Netflix hits and misses

How safe are volcano vacations?

See you

Close
Why Doesn’t the U.S. Build More Buildings Designed to Withstand Earthquakes

Why Doesn’t the U.S. Build More Buildings Designed to Withstand Earthquakes

Read more on The New York Times

Contributions

  • First: great visuals/animations in this article! NYTimes is really the best at this now.

    I've lived in California my whole life, always in seismically active zones and I've been surprised how nonchalant most people are about earthquakes.

    The stat that stands out the most: It costs 4 times as much

    First: great visuals/animations in this article! NYTimes is really the best at this now.

    I've lived in California my whole life, always in seismically active zones and I've been surprised how nonchalant most people are about earthquakes.

    The stat that stands out the most: It costs 4 times as much to repair a building after an earthquake than to seismically retrofit it. Factor in the threat to life, and it seems outrageous that we don't mandate these upgrades.

    Of course, with most things in our country, we'll get serious about it only after a major disaster.

  • "Analogous to America’s debate over health insurance, the American philosophy has been to make more resilient buildings an individual choice, not a government mandate." Which is why when the big one hits, the buildings will fall.

  • Earthquake survivable construction should be mandatory in all cities that sit near fault lines. I am surprised that the techniques used in Japan are not mandatory considering the cost of cleaning up after an earthquake. It is much less expensive in the long run to build earthquake resistant.

  • This is a lingering thought I have had as of late... there are so many storms or natural catastrophes we could prepare for but we can't really prepare for an earthquake—other than construction and architecture like this. Is the office building I'm in safe? Is the apartment building I'm in safe?