has anyone from the hospital that treated him confirmed that it was a bullet, as opposed to a fragment from something that shattered? it wouldn't change the overall narrative but it's an important detail ... just asking the question
I'm curious why you view the legislative prioritization of the Biden admin as low long-term value? Maybe it's because these are pet issues of mine, but I view semiconductor and decarbonization related industrial strategy are both hugely consequential in the long run.
The reason Americans are so unhealthy is that they drive _everywhere_ including the drive-thru and hardly ever walk. I just returned from Barcelona and London and in both people walk much more (and take public transit) then drive.
" And if he’d done it that way, then decades later, something like an Estonian independence movement would have been an example of ethnic separatism on a par with Chechnya."
Was Chechnya ever free? Estonia was free between the World Wars, wasn't it?
Yes, Estonia was independent in the interwar era (1919-1940). Ingushetia, Chechnya, and Dagestan were jointly independent for about four years (1917-21) under the name "Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus," before the Soviets reconquered them.
For voters to give a politician credit for passing a big bill, the big bill has to actually help them. Biden's signature policy, the IRA, hasn't! I actually tried to take advantage of it just the other week, for the heat pump credits. Turns out the nominal cost to install a heat pump here is about 2.5x what it was a few years ago. Inflation just utterly crushed the benefits. It's the same story for all kinds of things the IRA was meant to fund: they either haven't gotten started (rural broadband) or costs have risen at least as much as funding (highway construction).
I don’t know if anyone’s going to read down this far, but I got an email this morning from a group calling itself #PassthetorchJoe that says they are holding a protest at 3pm Saturday in front of the White House—I know there are people here who live in DC (I’m nowhere near) so I just thought I’d mention it in case anyone is interested (they’re apparently on Facebook if you want details). It’s so frustrating trying to think of ways to get through to the President about what the people want, it might be worth a try.
I learned recently the depressing fact that the Soviet Union really didn't collapse because it reached some kind of tipping point of system failure, but rather, it fell because a faction (led by Gorbachev) came into power that was not willing to continue propping up the system with military force, because that was immoral. Similarly they were persuaded that the communist system was no longer working and they attempted to convert to a social democracy-type system. I suppose I find it depressing because I had assumed the fall of communism was "inevitable" in some world-historic sense, but really it was a stroke of fortune that "the right guy" was in charge at the right time.
> and does a better job of staffing his administration.
I think it's an underappreciated point that the base level of competence and productivity in this administration has been unacceptably low. A lot of important issues were not given attention. Glad to see Matt recognizing this.
“My sense of both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden is that they were eager to make concessions to the left rather than risk losing to Bernie Sanders, and as a result, gave up too much of Obama-ism.”
That’s WAY too kind. Democrats ought to be shooting for a real “neo-Social Democracy” (what “neoliberalism "said it was going to be but got hijacked by low taxes) rapid growth with greater equity.
Progressive consumption taxes (with much more generous EITC) and a VAT to close the non-investment deficit to replace business taxes and wage taxes.
Immigration reform to massively attract world talent with cost effective border control.
Agency reform to make agencies USE cost benefit analysis.
Taxation of net emissions of CO2 and or use of that parameter in subsidies to technologies that substitute for CO2 emissions and making that the US position at COP.
Free-ish trade with any jurisdiction that’s not axis part of the of evil -- Russia, Iran (possibly detachable), NK, PRC -- or likely to be interdictable by them.
Reform of health insurance subsidies to progressively attract people to ACA.
Fully finance Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA, unemployment insurance and generous child allowance with the VAT.
DEI in service to MEI.
Support for two-state solutions in Israel/Palestine, (all of) Ukraine/Russia, Taiwan/China, NATO operation re-open Red Sea trade route, continued pressure for non-authoritarian regimes in Venezuela, Cuba, Myanmar, Nicaragua.
Non-import-restricting industrial policy for activities likely to become world-class exporters (if any).
[State level]
Policing/prosecutorial reform to deter crime by making apprehension/conviction more certain
Teaching and other K-12 education reforms, probably including many more charter schools
Exclusion of public sector unions from educational and policing policy making.
Land use and building code reforms to make residential/commercial development easier
Per mile and per vehicle class road and street use charges, (real) congestion fees, dynamic parking fees.
Thank you for the response about "end of democracy" etiquette. It infuriates me the lengths that apologists will go to somehow pretend that the issue isn't Trumps history of anti democracy actions, or his public plans against democracy in a second term. His plans put our democracy in so many kinds of danger that it won't be in otherwise and there is no reason to downplay them.
Not that important, but want to call out the Peter Thiel women voting distinction seems a little silly.
Yes, it is technically true that he doesn't say literally "women shouldn't be able to vote." Instead, he says "I think things would be better if women couldn't vote"
Maybe it's a little more than a distinction without a difference, but if it is, not by much.
If I was have a polite conversation with intelligent people and said "whoa whoa whoa! I didn't say I wanted X, I just said the world would be better if X" I would be greeted, at best, with eye-rolls.
That's not what he said at all though. If your made up quote were real then maybe you'd have a point. Here is the quote:
> Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.
I've never understood the fascination with this quote. The fact that women are unlikely to be libertarian seems like a rather banal observation to me.
I think you’re overthinking what the logic reduces to. Yes, he uses a lot more words than I did (that’s the point of simplifying logic). And yes, women have largely shown to not favor libertarianism. That alone is a banal observation.
But the full context is: “The country would be better as ‘capitalism democracy’. And the fact that women are allowed to vote means we can’t have that” which absolutely fits my example logic of “the world would be better if X”.
I am fine if the point is “the thing he said is bad so no need to misquote him” but paraphrasing him as some form of thinking things would be better if women couldn’t vote is 100% in line what that quote.
I don’t think we’d quibble about whether it’s banal OR controversial/bad if, say, a Republican politician got on stage at the RNC or went on TV and said “the only reason we can’t have a GOO utopia is the 15th amendment!”
Technically, it’s a banal observation that, if African Americans couldn’t vote suddenly, republicans would have an easier time winning elections. But like, it would also be very bad to say that our loud for hopefully obvious reasons.
Very bad for whom to say that? I certainly wouldn't vote for a politician who said that, but it's trivially true that Republicans would be better off electorally if African Americans couldn't vote. You just said it, I just said it. Was it very bad to say it? I don't really get what point you're making.
Eh. I personally support democracy even though I think democracy inevitably produces worse results on average than a benevolent dictator who agreed with me on everything would produce because I recognize that (1) it's extremely unlikely that such a benevolent dictator could be found in the first place and (2) even if you found one such benevolent dictator and managed to install them in power, it's really, really unlikely their successor would be so benevolent, so it's better to stick with democracy with a lot of veto points, constitutional guardrails, independent courts, etc. rather than trusting anyone with absolute power. I think that is a distinction with a difference from just, "I support installing a benevolent dictator who agrees with me on everything."
I take Matt's larger points about arbitrary internal borders of the USSR, but Estonia is a bad example. It was an independent country in 1940 and the US never recognized its annexation.
McConnell and Pelosi haven't taken responsibility for 1/6 either. We did law enforcement at the Capitol that day the way Dems think we should. Non lethal engagement. They were absolutely justified in shooting the people trying to enter the building illegal and in many cases physical harming law enforcement in the process. Trump wasn't held to account because of......McConnell and other Republicans. I'm not convinced a lot of Dems didn't agree with them. They wanted him to go away and when he didn't, the prosecutions started. Not a good look.
The end of democracy stuff just isn't believable. Trump needs to treated like a regular Republican. We don't need investigations designed to hamper his ability to govern. We need to negotiate like we always have.
They should have called in the National Guard. They should have made it clear to Capitol Police that lethal force was an option. If the protestors don't back down, then lethal force was justified. I'm not complaining about the girl that got killed. It should have happened to one of those guys beating the door against the officers at the entrance to the Capitol.
The Senate voting to certify is why Trump was saying Mike Pence could "do the right thing," as the president of the Senate. It also led to the spectacle of Gore presiding over his own electoral defeat after the Bush v. Gore decision.
has anyone from the hospital that treated him confirmed that it was a bullet, as opposed to a fragment from something that shattered? it wouldn't change the overall narrative but it's an important detail ... just asking the question
I'm curious why you view the legislative prioritization of the Biden admin as low long-term value? Maybe it's because these are pet issues of mine, but I view semiconductor and decarbonization related industrial strategy are both hugely consequential in the long run.
The reason Americans are so unhealthy is that they drive _everywhere_ including the drive-thru and hardly ever walk. I just returned from Barcelona and London and in both people walk much more (and take public transit) then drive.
" And if he’d done it that way, then decades later, something like an Estonian independence movement would have been an example of ethnic separatism on a par with Chechnya."
Was Chechnya ever free? Estonia was free between the World Wars, wasn't it?
Yes, Estonia was independent in the interwar era (1919-1940). Ingushetia, Chechnya, and Dagestan were jointly independent for about four years (1917-21) under the name "Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus," before the Soviets reconquered them.
For voters to give a politician credit for passing a big bill, the big bill has to actually help them. Biden's signature policy, the IRA, hasn't! I actually tried to take advantage of it just the other week, for the heat pump credits. Turns out the nominal cost to install a heat pump here is about 2.5x what it was a few years ago. Inflation just utterly crushed the benefits. It's the same story for all kinds of things the IRA was meant to fund: they either haven't gotten started (rural broadband) or costs have risen at least as much as funding (highway construction).
> something closer to the DLC model
amen amen amen
My first born for another WJC in our lifetime
I don’t know if anyone’s going to read down this far, but I got an email this morning from a group calling itself #PassthetorchJoe that says they are holding a protest at 3pm Saturday in front of the White House—I know there are people here who live in DC (I’m nowhere near) so I just thought I’d mention it in case anyone is interested (they’re apparently on Facebook if you want details). It’s so frustrating trying to think of ways to get through to the President about what the people want, it might be worth a try.
I learned recently the depressing fact that the Soviet Union really didn't collapse because it reached some kind of tipping point of system failure, but rather, it fell because a faction (led by Gorbachev) came into power that was not willing to continue propping up the system with military force, because that was immoral. Similarly they were persuaded that the communist system was no longer working and they attempted to convert to a social democracy-type system. I suppose I find it depressing because I had assumed the fall of communism was "inevitable" in some world-historic sense, but really it was a stroke of fortune that "the right guy" was in charge at the right time.
Chuck Marohn for Trump's next HUD Secretary
> and does a better job of staffing his administration.
I think it's an underappreciated point that the base level of competence and productivity in this administration has been unacceptably low. A lot of important issues were not given attention. Glad to see Matt recognizing this.
“My sense of both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden is that they were eager to make concessions to the left rather than risk losing to Bernie Sanders, and as a result, gave up too much of Obama-ism.”
That’s WAY too kind. Democrats ought to be shooting for a real “neo-Social Democracy” (what “neoliberalism "said it was going to be but got hijacked by low taxes) rapid growth with greater equity.
Progressive consumption taxes (with much more generous EITC) and a VAT to close the non-investment deficit to replace business taxes and wage taxes.
Immigration reform to massively attract world talent with cost effective border control.
Agency reform to make agencies USE cost benefit analysis.
Taxation of net emissions of CO2 and or use of that parameter in subsidies to technologies that substitute for CO2 emissions and making that the US position at COP.
Free-ish trade with any jurisdiction that’s not axis part of the of evil -- Russia, Iran (possibly detachable), NK, PRC -- or likely to be interdictable by them.
Reform of health insurance subsidies to progressively attract people to ACA.
Fully finance Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA, unemployment insurance and generous child allowance with the VAT.
DEI in service to MEI.
Support for two-state solutions in Israel/Palestine, (all of) Ukraine/Russia, Taiwan/China, NATO operation re-open Red Sea trade route, continued pressure for non-authoritarian regimes in Venezuela, Cuba, Myanmar, Nicaragua.
Non-import-restricting industrial policy for activities likely to become world-class exporters (if any).
[State level]
Policing/prosecutorial reform to deter crime by making apprehension/conviction more certain
Teaching and other K-12 education reforms, probably including many more charter schools
Exclusion of public sector unions from educational and policing policy making.
Land use and building code reforms to make residential/commercial development easier
Per mile and per vehicle class road and street use charges, (real) congestion fees, dynamic parking fees.
Let’s get you to the Democratic Convention!
Joke aside I really agree with these.
Thank you for the response about "end of democracy" etiquette. It infuriates me the lengths that apologists will go to somehow pretend that the issue isn't Trumps history of anti democracy actions, or his public plans against democracy in a second term. His plans put our democracy in so many kinds of danger that it won't be in otherwise and there is no reason to downplay them.
Not that important, but want to call out the Peter Thiel women voting distinction seems a little silly.
Yes, it is technically true that he doesn't say literally "women shouldn't be able to vote." Instead, he says "I think things would be better if women couldn't vote"
Maybe it's a little more than a distinction without a difference, but if it is, not by much.
If I was have a polite conversation with intelligent people and said "whoa whoa whoa! I didn't say I wanted X, I just said the world would be better if X" I would be greeted, at best, with eye-rolls.
That's not what he said at all though. If your made up quote were real then maybe you'd have a point. Here is the quote:
> Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.
I've never understood the fascination with this quote. The fact that women are unlikely to be libertarian seems like a rather banal observation to me.
I think you’re overthinking what the logic reduces to. Yes, he uses a lot more words than I did (that’s the point of simplifying logic). And yes, women have largely shown to not favor libertarianism. That alone is a banal observation.
But the full context is: “The country would be better as ‘capitalism democracy’. And the fact that women are allowed to vote means we can’t have that” which absolutely fits my example logic of “the world would be better if X”.
I am fine if the point is “the thing he said is bad so no need to misquote him” but paraphrasing him as some form of thinking things would be better if women couldn’t vote is 100% in line what that quote.
I don’t think we’d quibble about whether it’s banal OR controversial/bad if, say, a Republican politician got on stage at the RNC or went on TV and said “the only reason we can’t have a GOO utopia is the 15th amendment!”
Technically, it’s a banal observation that, if African Americans couldn’t vote suddenly, republicans would have an easier time winning elections. But like, it would also be very bad to say that our loud for hopefully obvious reasons.
Very bad for whom to say that? I certainly wouldn't vote for a politician who said that, but it's trivially true that Republicans would be better off electorally if African Americans couldn't vote. You just said it, I just said it. Was it very bad to say it? I don't really get what point you're making.
Eh. I personally support democracy even though I think democracy inevitably produces worse results on average than a benevolent dictator who agreed with me on everything would produce because I recognize that (1) it's extremely unlikely that such a benevolent dictator could be found in the first place and (2) even if you found one such benevolent dictator and managed to install them in power, it's really, really unlikely their successor would be so benevolent, so it's better to stick with democracy with a lot of veto points, constitutional guardrails, independent courts, etc. rather than trusting anyone with absolute power. I think that is a distinction with a difference from just, "I support installing a benevolent dictator who agrees with me on everything."
I take Matt's larger points about arbitrary internal borders of the USSR, but Estonia is a bad example. It was an independent country in 1940 and the US never recognized its annexation.
McConnell and Pelosi haven't taken responsibility for 1/6 either. We did law enforcement at the Capitol that day the way Dems think we should. Non lethal engagement. They were absolutely justified in shooting the people trying to enter the building illegal and in many cases physical harming law enforcement in the process. Trump wasn't held to account because of......McConnell and other Republicans. I'm not convinced a lot of Dems didn't agree with them. They wanted him to go away and when he didn't, the prosecutions started. Not a good look.
The end of democracy stuff just isn't believable. Trump needs to treated like a regular Republican. We don't need investigations designed to hamper his ability to govern. We need to negotiate like we always have.
Sorry, Pelosi needs to take responsibility for not turning January 6 into Bloody Wednesday? Or what are you saying?
They should have called in the National Guard. They should have made it clear to Capitol Police that lethal force was an option. If the protestors don't back down, then lethal force was justified. I'm not complaining about the girl that got killed. It should have happened to one of those guys beating the door against the officers at the entrance to the Capitol.
My understanding is that only the White House was empowered to call the National Guard, not Congress. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/06/politics/pence-national-guard/index.html
“ The end of democracy stuff just isn't believable. ”
Replay it with JD Vance as VP and Vance refuses to certify the results. What happens step by step?
As I remember it, the House had to vote as to whether to certify. The VP isn't a member of the House.
No, it's the Senate that votes to certify. Remember that photo of Josh Hawley speaking about his vote not to certify, while Mitt Romney stared at him with unbridled fury? https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/editorials/article279386384.html
The Senate voting to certify is why Trump was saying Mike Pence could "do the right thing," as the president of the Senate. It also led to the spectacle of Gore presiding over his own electoral defeat after the Bush v. Gore decision.
Jacob Frey sucks