Contrariwise, I hate the new "newsletter" style of this post. If I had to compare it to, say, astralcodexten.com or thingofthings.substack.com's linkposts, the problem is that these bullets claim to summarize articles, rather than pitch those articles as something interesting to read in their own right.
(Necroposting a bit, I know, but I just returned from vacation.)
The White House created a “scorecard” that rates hundreds of companies and trade associations on how well they supported Trump’s recent tax and spending legislation.
Right-wing Maoism. A decade ago it was progressives who wanted to be "China for a day," in the words of Tom Friedman. Now, the Right wants to be China.
Wild thought, but maybe the right wanted to do this a decade ago and you and Tom were just misled into believing some nonsense about progressives? Hard to see a lot of evidence of “China for a day” in Biden’s administration and he was also VP a decade ago.
(Sort of reminds me of the “surely the Epstein files will implicate the left” nonsense we’ve been hearing for a decade. At a certain point I think you need to hear stuff like this and think “ah, someone is trying to soften the target environment, maybe I need to stop believing things I read on the Internet.”)
China does some good things and some bad things, it’s not bad to want to copy some of the good things. The abundance agenda (build things, fewer procedural constraints) is a move in a Chinese direction. Other good things are how they managed to redistribute wealth away from the top 1% without hurting innovation and how they don’t bomb third-world countries. We should copy these good things without copying the mass surveillance or Internet censorship. Although under Trump it seems like we’re more likely to get the surveillance and censorship without the good things…
That’s an article about how the GOP isn’t participating in Democracy (back in 2009) by obstructing legislation proposed by a Democratic Congress elected in a landslide. I don’t know what it has to do with progressives wanting to act like Mao.
Did you just miss these sentences: "One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century."
"...it's why I have fantasized--don't get me wrong--but that what if we could just be China for a day? I mean, just, just, just one day. You know, I mean, where we could actually, you know, authorize the right solutions, and I do think there is a sense of that, on, on everything from the economy to environment. "
Even Kathy Hochul is talking about this like it’s a war. And when even squishy Kathy Hochul is talking like this, you can bet this is the new normal. (But, unfortunately, you’re probably going to be right in the end.)
Our corporate masters: "Ladies and gentlemen, our course is clear. The time has come to knuckle under. To get down on all fours and really lick boot. Give MAGA whatever they want a--"
I subscribe to the “orange man is in fact bad” theory of everything, so don’t misconstrue this, but isn’t the +\- what every political group/ admin does?
I totally agree that that the steps the administration has taken are authoritarian (see: universities, law firms, nat guard, law suits, on and on)
I guess I’m just quibbling that the problem is not the taking stock of political allies/foes but rather the steps afterward.
Additional issue is the cowardice of some of these targeted institutions. I find the capitulation in the business community especially irksome given how stridently they’ve fought other (to my mind smaller) things
My proposal for the Alaska Summit: Russia enacts an immediate ceasefire and return to 2022 boarders. US cedes to Russia the Colorado 4th and Georgia 14th Congressional Districts. Allow for Ukraine and California admittance into the European Union.
The Na-Dene language family has roots in Siberia. We should actually use postmodernist and critical theory mumbo-jumbo to claim that Siberia is rightfully America's.
With the benefit of hindsight, one of America's greatest mistakes was settling for peace in fall 1918, instead of sacking Berlin in the spring and then marching on to Moscow.
You may find "Churchill's Secret War With Lenin: British and Commonwealth Military Intervention in the Russian Civil War, 1918-20" by Damien Wright relevant to your interests if you haven't already read it. (I've got lots more recommendations too, if you'd like.)
It's true there's strong evidence linking the Na-Dene language family with the Yeniseian language family of Siberia. But surely that *strengthens* Russia's claims on Alaska!
It was a very powerful, very strong nothing. Joe Biden just did little nothings, very sad and small. This was a huge, large nothing, many people say they had never seen such a big nothing.
What an utter shame today was in our nation’s history. Just like our British friends, we have now literally rolled out the red carpet for a murderous dictator.
I'm holding in criticism until at least the meetings are over. If nothing comes of it, or worse Trump entertains Putin's demands, then you're absolutely right, Anchorage 2025 belongs on the list with Munich 1938.
But if literal red carpets can prevent dead civilians in Ukraine, the distaste can be swallowed. Optimism isn't warranted, but if Putin would rather back out of his war through conversation with the Americans, we should take what we can get.
I don’t mean this as a dunk, but I do sincerely hope that the obvious Chamberlainian comparison — and by extension a really easy way to mock your open mindedness here — is proven wrong.
I have this delusion that if I keep an open mind and let the facts of events present themselves before being hasty with criticism, my Trump supporting relatives will feel some pang of reciprocity and will themselves offer the same generosity to Democrats. More insane, my brain thinks that acting in good faith should be a reason for them to open their ears and consider my criticisms, based on the full accounting, of Trumps behavior and actions being bad, actually.
As I said, there is a hopefully not too deep circle of hell reserved for fools like me.
As opposed to all the other times the US has done it? I doubt anyone even remembers Reagan throwing a state dinner at the White House for mass murdering dictator Suharto who may killed as many as 3 million during his genocides (an order of magnitude more than Putin so far at least).
Something that irks me is the chatter among Salon / Slate / etc types about how blue states pay the most taxes to the federal government and get the least for it — particularly the suggestion it gives blue states leverage. It does not, because California doesn’t pay taxes to the federal government; Californians pay taxes to the IRS, and that’s a huge distinction. There is way too much “how to fight back” talk assuming facts not in existence.
You also have to look at how the folks making such claims are doing the math. One trick is saying a good deal of the federal spending is on military bases that, for a variety of reasons, are in so called red states. That spending is counted a a benefit to only those red states. It's a nonsense argument because the benefit of that spending, namely national defense, is shared by all states.
No, he was a pirate, who later founded the town in the late 1790s/early 18 Aughts after he and group of brave pioneers left Maryland after misinterpreting a passage in the Bible.
Here's what most people get wrong about Jebediah Springfield, it's true that Hans Sprungfeld was a highly dubious and morally dislikeable person, but the legend, the ideal, the belief in "Jebediah Springfield" the myth can mean so much, if only to make such a broken and dysfunctional society like Springfield somewhat better. As political scientist Seth Masket wrote about the massively overrated JFK:
"Pretty much any time I interview a Democratic political activist or officeholder over the age of 60 and ask them why they got into politics, they mention Kennedy and his call to service. The Peace Corps, the space program, his speeches, and more are frequently mentioned as inspiring a generation of young people to get involved in politics and see government as a noble calling.
This sort of inspirational quality is rare among presidents—or anyone, really—and is difficult to quantify. But it shouldn’t be dismissed. Kennedy’s rhetoric and approach inspired people and continues to do so today. We could dismiss all this as just an exercise in branding, but it’s very good branding. And if it’s used to encourage people to try to improve the world in some way, that’s hardly wasted effort.
"Red States (31): The total population of the 31 Red states is approximately 180.8 million. Within this group, there are approximately 37.8 million Medicare beneficiaries. This results in a population-weighted average per capita Medicare enrollment of 20.9%.
Blue States (19 + D.C.): The total population of the 19 Blue states and the District of Columbia is approximately 159.3 million. This group contains about 30.6 million Medicare beneficiaries, yielding a population-weighted average per capita Medicare enrollment of 19.2%.
The analysis reveals a "Medicare gap" of 1.7 percentage points between the two blocs. This means that, on a per capita basis, the Red state bloc has a Medicare population that is nearly 9% larger than that of the Blue state bloc. While a 1.7-point difference may seem modest in isolation, when applied to populations of this magnitude, it represents millions of individuals and translates into tens of billions of dollars in annual federal healthcare expenditures. "
Because if the idea is that “Red States are super unproductive compared to Blue States, look at all the government money they take” and it turns out most of the difference is that Red States are older, that ends up not being the most compelling argument.
No dude, more educated states have drifted left and less educated states have drifted right. It not like Colorado and Virginia have the most amazing schools in the country, or that the quality of their schools has changed drastically since 2004, they're just more educated states, and in a time of education polarization, that pushes them to the left.
I live in Colorado and policy really doesn't seem to be the draw for anyone. Colorado has excellent outdoor recreation and a decently-sized metro area, which means a lot of well-paid jobs.
EDIT: To be clear, I largely prefer 2025 Dem policies to 2025 R policies, and Colorado is fairly well-run. But I don't think these policies are the major pull factors for Colorado.
What does this even mean? Do you think Republicans pay more or less than Democrats in federal taxes? Are you talking about the realignment of some of Silicon Valley towards Republicans, or the realignment of some of Wall Street towards MAGA, or the realignment of Hispanics or young people? Or something else?
The last time Pew surveyed partisanship by income level, Democrats were slightly overrepresented among upper and lower income families but barely underrepresented among upper-middle, but the divide is almost 50-50 across the board. The parties just aren't that divided by class; I'm not sure why you would expect a large gap in tax burden.
I'm not sure this is true though. I know that Democrats are overrepresented among the upper middle class, but the top 1% pay over 40% of Federal income taxes and I'm not sure Republicans are underrepresented there.
That’s a little misleading because it’s not accounting for payroll tax which tops out at about $180,000 of individual income and accounts for about 2/3s of the revenue of income tax; the 1% pay hardly any payroll tax relative to their incomes because it tops out so low so their share of overall tax would be much lower.
Kind of interesting the White House and other senior admin officials are more concerned about an ICE official hit by a sandwich than the CDC after someone shot 500 rounds at it. Wonder what the difference could be. Check out your tax dollars at work:
Nothing can be done about the shooter. But the sandwich grenadier! That’s not protected by the second amendment. Background checks for sandwiches, now!
I didn’t get on the thread in time to comment on it and not get buried this morning, but Matt’s “if tariffs cut growth, interest rates will just come down and revive it” analysis is off. This is because if they’re not accompanied by significant damage to aggregate demand, tariffs are likely to be *inflationary*. If you structurally raise the cost of goods, both businesses and individuals will do whatever they can to pass on rather than eat those costs, and so on, and the entities they pass those costs on to will try to pass on their own cost increases, and so on and so forth— a Galbraithian wage-price spiral. We avoid this in scenarios where demand takes a big enough initial hit to blunt various types of pass-through. But if we try to stimulate our way out of the problem with rate cuts, its inflationary effects will intensify, and if the Fed does stimulative monetary policy into rising inflation (especially accompanied by increasing budget deficits), we’re likely to get both very high inflation *and* a blow-out expansion of the term premium that raises long-dated interest rates and chokes growth. (This is what happened during the 1970s; we started getting into something similar when we stimulated ourselves out of the COVID supply shock, but in that case we at least got both an easing of the shock itself AND a hard monetary policy pivot to constrain inflation, and it’s worth remembering that even with relatively clean execution that averted the worst outcomes and the president not publicly pressuring the Fed chief, the public still hated the whole thing.)
"The Democratic Party, in short, is caught between two groups of postliberal idiots: one that doesn’t care enough about tyranny and another that doesn’t care enough about disorder. Whatever its leaders end up doing will probably backfire."
"'Anarchy wins unless Trump can deploy the Marines to Beverly Hills' is a pitch-perfect summary of the sophistication with which the great and good American people now approach serious problems."
"This is why I say Trump deserves only partial credit for engineering these lose-lose situations Democrats find themselves in. They don’t just make it easy for him; they do most of the engineering themselves."
"how Schumer’s party squandered trust on safety issues ranging from immigration to shoplifting rings to homelessness and public drug use to violent crime. Really, we can boil it down to three steps: Ignore the problem until Republicans take it up, then minimize it, then encourage Americans to get used to it as a nothing-to-be-done inevitability of modern life."
And the suggestion: "The obvious move for Schumer is to meet Trump halfway on crime while trying to turn the public’s skepticism of the president’s tactics to his advantage. If I were him, I’d invite Republicans to name a dollar amount that they think is needed to improve law enforcement’s ability to fight crime nationally, beginning in D.C., and then I’d offer to double it. But in return, I’d demand their cooperation on reforms to limit the president’s powers to deploy the military on U.S. soil. The solution to crime is not monarchy."
Some rhetorical shit, more like. Brokering this deal (if it's even on the table) would ease public concerns about Trump's executive overreach and almost certainly hurt Dem performance in the midterms. So it really only makes sense to do something like this as a last-ditch effort to prevent imminent authoritarian takeover. But if Catoggio thinks such existentialism is warranted, why isn't he and all these secretly anti-Trump Republican legislators willing to offer something substantial as an olive branch? Like at least throw in a national ban on gerrymandering or something.
I'll tell you what it looks like, it looks like a conservative trying to pull a fast one on anxious liberals.
Seems like a dude who thinks he's top shit because he reads news sources from "both sides". I have no idea how you can believe we're on the verge of violent anarchy unless you unthinkingly consume conservative outrage. Even during the covid peak, crime was still down relative to the 90s.
Conservative outrage is hyperbolic bs, but crime stats don’t delegitimize the feeling of being unsafe, of the breakdown of social order, under circumstances in many urban areas (and, I’d hazard, rural communities). Maybe most homeless people don’t commit violent crimes, but the ubiquity on the streets of people using drugs and displaying serious mental illness is legit unsettling. I routinely see shopkeepers handling erratic people. No crime happens. It’s not reported, but yeah, it’s fair for patrons and that, say, eighteen year old barista to feel unsafe. It shouldn’t be this way, and it’s wrong and obviously politically hazardous for Dems (continue to) dismiss it.
1) Crime stats do delegitimize fearmongering about imminent societal breakdown.
2) While greater action against antisocial behavior is perhaps warranted, discomfort is a part of life. My coach always told us there's a difference between a hurt and an injury and I feel like that can also apply to public safety as well. You can't go through life being terrified every time you catch a whiff of pot or make eye contact with a shouting hobo. If just walking through the area scares you, how do you think the hobo feels?
Crime stats are important. They just don’t tell the whole story, and to the extent Dems use them to downplay people’s lived experiences, they’ll have a tough time winning back voters.
Regarding your second point, first I’m not “terrified.” Second, I’m not talking about marijuana. I’m talking about meth and fentanyl, both of which ravage bodies and minds. I have close friends who were opiate addicts two of whom died of their disease. I know how powerful the drugs are and I don’t condemn those addicted to them, but they are in serious crisis pretty much all the time. Their behavior is not that of a marijuana smoker.
Third, I’m not sure you live in a city with the same problems as mine. The use of the word “hobo” (as with marijuana) downplays the behaviors I’m talking about. Here’s just one scenario: the psychotic woman who hangs out at the Shell station a block from me, smoking and waving her cigarette at the gas pumps, screaming at the Asian immigrant employee who’s asking her to stop (at a safe distance), “You can’t touch me! Fuck you!” etc. When I ask if he needs help, he tells me he’s called the police on her a dozen times and nothing happens. He lives with that. You think he’s voting for a Democrat who tells him his anxiety is born of ignorance because crime statistics are actually down?
This scenario is repeated all across my city. It’s ubiquitous. Small business owners having to clean feces from their entrances and board up windows - again - aren’t comforted by the stats. And it isn’t fair to tell them they should be. I could go on and on. Yes, the “hobo’s” feelings matter, but they don’t matter *more* than the gas station worker’s or the barista’s or the retail employee’s. That’s the trap Dems have fallen into: appearing to care more for the most marginalized, the most challenging to social norms, over folks who are following the rules and just trying to get by. This has been politically disastrous and, frankly, unfair.
Lastly, as a woman whose been harassed and seen young women harassed on the streets, I have to ask when progressives decided women’s rights must take a backseat to “hobo’s” rights. We used to be all “take back the night.” Now we’re all “how dare you be afraid?”
It's more rhetorical than based on actual action. Dan Lurie has 73% approval in SF simply because he says crime is bad and something should be done about it. That should be completely non-controversial, but I know plenty who would take issue with that statement
You’ve been unemployed? Sorry to hear about (assuming you’re not exactly pleased with it)! And good luck with whatever you’ve been cooking up.
My latest hobby project has been designing an airsoft (IE plastic BBs) derivative replica of the new Army AR. Almost done with the hardest part here, it’s gonna be kinda smooth sailing from here!
No I'm not unemployed lol. I just found this video and thought it was hilarious. I'm actually self-employed, which is a whole different can of worms.... But no I have too much work if anything.
Do you actually shoot the airsofts, or just design them? I've been meaning to get into a shooting sport like that or paintball
Oh yes, although my recent ACL surgery means I’m banned from going out until next winter!
This one’s a personal project, but I also intend to turn it into a side hustle doing 3d printed custom jobs for people. Already got some decent respect for my first couple builds at the field back in May, but this one’s gonna kinda be my “prestige” piece.
I've been trying to practice drawing when I have time at work, rather than just scrolling my phone. I'm not particularly good, but I do feel better about the time spent.
I really like this roundup. When I go on vacation I fully abstain from news, when I get back it can be hard to figure out what happened.
(The million dollar idea I'm giving out for free is a headline aggregating news site that has a slider you can drag around to past days/timeframe to examine what the big stories were, bonus points if the headlines are sized based on how big the story was, going from small to big and then small as the news cycle does its infinite turn.)
I think maybe we're going to just have to use the Friday thread, which is a bummer, because then you have to sort by "new," and I think you miss things that way.
I know you’re not disagreeing, I think we’re on the same (missing) page, but we don’t need anything—no link, no story, no work, just a Saturday thread please so we can avoid this problem you described!
Reminder that for many voters it really is Party Over Everything and your weak attempts to use logic or argument are futile: https://x.com/YAppelbaum/status/1956460168041959725 (this is another good example of why Deliveryism doesn't work)
Bernie/Warren/AOC: we need Starlink public option!
Everything Baglers: We must spend 10 billion dollars on creating a tent form of broadband that meet the follow 281 conditions and are done under the concept of shared governance and community control...
Abundencer/Neolibs/Matt: Let 1000 wireless networks bloom! Oh and just give people phone cards or something
I'll admit to mixed feelings about Trump's Washington, DC law enforcement theatrics...
My son just started a job in DC, and I was there last week helping him move into his new place, a rented house shared with several other new grads in Columbia Heights, a neighborhood that struck me as borderline sketchy, but gentrifying. Troops on the streets has a scary, authoritarian vibe, but if they clear out some of the creepy people (including the homeless guy sleeping in front of my son's house) from the area, I won't be too unhappy.
I can't remember who said it, but a few months ago I saw someone comment that David Frum's dictum about fascism and immigration applied to homelessness and other urban "social disorder" phenomena too.
If we could just send everyone in city government (or determining city related policies) to Europe to meet with their peers for a week the US would be in much better shape soon.
Just gotta make sure they don't talk to them about anything related to business or regulation.
I owned a place in CH 2002-2004, when it was really starting to gentrify. Interesting times. Illegal gambling nextdoor, along with the (reportedly transexual) whoreshouse. Had to remove people from my neighbor's porch 2X because they went to the wrong door (looking for aforementioned brothel). People doing drugs in the basement stoop. Dice game next to the ghetto Chinese place. Sadly it never quite seemed to achieve full take off -- imagine too much public/low income housing remains, along with the concomitant crews. But sold and never really went back. Almost bought a beautiful Wardman but a neighbor mentioned how one of the young gentlemen in the neighborhhod had put a gun to her head the previous week, so new wife and I decided we just did not want to deal. Instead moved to SE....only one killing near our house, and it was the cross street!
Not sure what Trump is doing, but in principle -- DC needs lots more law enforcement, focused on the very obvious areas where the majority of the criminals are, and the laws need to be changed to stop allowing a revolving door for young criminals (all criminals). And yes the culture of the black community needs to change etc. etc., but in the absence of some kind of great awakening, crush crime. Actually worked before, and it can work again, just need to accept reality of what that will mean.
Kudos to Halina on really goosing the engagement numbers this week. [ed: Her first full week!]
No offense to Ben, blessed be his memory, but Matt *can’t* be paying you enough. Ask for a raise, we’ll have your back!
This is a different job to Ben’s - it’s a writing job. So while Halina is doing great, it’s not fair to compare with Ben.
Contrariwise, I hate the new "newsletter" style of this post. If I had to compare it to, say, astralcodexten.com or thingofthings.substack.com's linkposts, the problem is that these bullets claim to summarize articles, rather than pitch those articles as something interesting to read in their own right.
(Necroposting a bit, I know, but I just returned from vacation.)
I am beyond horrified by this:
The White House created a “scorecard” that rates hundreds of companies and trade associations on how well they supported Trump’s recent tax and spending legislation.
I know MattY encourages calm affect, etc. but then Trump does CCP-level autocracy shit
Right-wing Maoism. A decade ago it was progressives who wanted to be "China for a day," in the words of Tom Friedman. Now, the Right wants to be China.
Wild thought, but maybe the right wanted to do this a decade ago and you and Tom were just misled into believing some nonsense about progressives? Hard to see a lot of evidence of “China for a day” in Biden’s administration and he was also VP a decade ago.
(Sort of reminds me of the “surely the Epstein files will implicate the left” nonsense we’ve been hearing for a decade. At a certain point I think you need to hear stuff like this and think “ah, someone is trying to soften the target environment, maybe I need to stop believing things I read on the Internet.”)
China does some good things and some bad things, it’s not bad to want to copy some of the good things. The abundance agenda (build things, fewer procedural constraints) is a move in a Chinese direction. Other good things are how they managed to redistribute wealth away from the top 1% without hurting innovation and how they don’t bomb third-world countries. We should copy these good things without copying the mass surveillance or Internet censorship. Although under Trump it seems like we’re more likely to get the surveillance and censorship without the good things…
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09friedman.html
That’s an article about how the GOP isn’t participating in Democracy (back in 2009) by obstructing legislation proposed by a Democratic Congress elected in a landslide. I don’t know what it has to do with progressives wanting to act like Mao.
Did you just miss these sentences: "One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century."
Also, from a Meet the Press episode: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna37279599
"...it's why I have fantasized--don't get me wrong--but that what if we could just be China for a day? I mean, just, just, just one day. You know, I mean, where we could actually, you know, authorize the right solutions, and I do think there is a sense of that, on, on everything from the economy to environment. "
With conservatives it is always always always about projection.
Wouldn't be surprised if Trump came for their guns and Bibles after he takes care of the libs (unless they are Trump Bibles).
Calm affect is always useful. There's even a song to that effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo
Dems will not do a reciprocal thing when they have power, then GOP will come back and do it again.
Crazy horrible authoritarian stuff, but like Newsom is doing in CA, you can't just let moral virtue drive you towards surrender
Even Kathy Hochul is talking about this like it’s a war. And when even squishy Kathy Hochul is talking like this, you can bet this is the new normal. (But, unfortunately, you’re probably going to be right in the end.)
Our corporate masters: "Ladies and gentlemen, our course is clear. The time has come to knuckle under. To get down on all fours and really lick boot. Give MAGA whatever they want a--"
I subscribe to the “orange man is in fact bad” theory of everything, so don’t misconstrue this, but isn’t the +\- what every political group/ admin does?
Some version of who supports us / who does not?
Not nearly to the same extent. No law firm was ever afraid of challenging Biden or Obama in court due to retaliation against their other clients. Law firms that weren’t afraid to represent terrorists under Bush pro bono are now afraid to take immigration cases or challenge the federal government at all: https://www.reuters.com/investigations/trumps-war-big-law-leads-firms-retreat-pro-bono-work-underdogs-2025-07-31/
I totally agree that that the steps the administration has taken are authoritarian (see: universities, law firms, nat guard, law suits, on and on)
I guess I’m just quibbling that the problem is not the taking stock of political allies/foes but rather the steps afterward.
Additional issue is the cowardice of some of these targeted institutions. I find the capitulation in the business community especially irksome given how stridently they’ve fought other (to my mind smaller) things
My proposal for the Alaska Summit: Russia enacts an immediate ceasefire and return to 2022 boarders. US cedes to Russia the Colorado 4th and Georgia 14th Congressional Districts. Allow for Ukraine and California admittance into the European Union.
I'm just assuming Putin somehow is walking out with Alaska back.
The Na-Dene language family has roots in Siberia. We should actually use postmodernist and critical theory mumbo-jumbo to claim that Siberia is rightfully America's.
Could we also add something about the American Expeditionary Force in Siberia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force,_Siberia
With the benefit of hindsight, one of America's greatest mistakes was settling for peace in fall 1918, instead of sacking Berlin in the spring and then marching on to Moscow.
You may find "Churchill's Secret War With Lenin: British and Commonwealth Military Intervention in the Russian Civil War, 1918-20" by Damien Wright relevant to your interests if you haven't already read it. (I've got lots more recommendations too, if you'd like.)
I have not read that book
It's true there's strong evidence linking the Na-Dene language family with the Yeniseian language family of Siberia. But surely that *strengthens* Russia's claims on Alaska!
That would also suggest independence for Siberia from Russia, since Russian is Indo-European in origin.
Trump's Folly!
Trump's going to show it to him and he's just going to put it in his pocket and walk off like with Bob Kraft.
That'll teach Murkowski to step out of line!
It appears nothing happened.
It was a very powerful, very strong nothing. Joe Biden just did little nothings, very sad and small. This was a huge, large nothing, many people say they had never seen such a big nothing.
So we won, basically...
My hope is that Trump trades Alaska for Ukraine sovereignty and doesn't realize he just blew the GOP Senate majority until after the handshake
This did not go where I thought it was going to go after the first sentence!
Mannn I really don't want the EU telling me I can't take out my garbage on Sunday...can we settle for California independence?
But I don't want to be Russian...
What an utter shame today was in our nation’s history. Just like our British friends, we have now literally rolled out the red carpet for a murderous dictator.
I'm holding in criticism until at least the meetings are over. If nothing comes of it, or worse Trump entertains Putin's demands, then you're absolutely right, Anchorage 2025 belongs on the list with Munich 1938.
But if literal red carpets can prevent dead civilians in Ukraine, the distaste can be swallowed. Optimism isn't warranted, but if Putin would rather back out of his war through conversation with the Americans, we should take what we can get.
I don’t mean this as a dunk, but I do sincerely hope that the obvious Chamberlainian comparison — and by extension a really easy way to mock your open mindedness here — is proven wrong.
It would be a better timeline.
I just don’t think it’ll happen.
To be clear I don't think it'll happen either. I'm just keeping my powder dry.
Fair!
I have this delusion that if I keep an open mind and let the facts of events present themselves before being hasty with criticism, my Trump supporting relatives will feel some pang of reciprocity and will themselves offer the same generosity to Democrats. More insane, my brain thinks that acting in good faith should be a reason for them to open their ears and consider my criticisms, based on the full accounting, of Trumps behavior and actions being bad, actually.
As I said, there is a hopefully not too deep circle of hell reserved for fools like me.
Aww honey… bless your heart.
As opposed to all the other times the US has done it? I doubt anyone even remembers Reagan throwing a state dinner at the White House for mass murdering dictator Suharto who may killed as many as 3 million during his genocides (an order of magnitude more than Putin so far at least).
Yea but didn’t we scare him with that B2 flyover?
I'll tell you it scared the shit out of me, ~500' above my office two miles from the base!
Wasn’t until I watched Warfare that I really understood how loud a fighter jet is just off the deck…
What chance of peace is worth the slight humiliation of a red carpet reception?
Something that irks me is the chatter among Salon / Slate / etc types about how blue states pay the most taxes to the federal government and get the least for it — particularly the suggestion it gives blue states leverage. It does not, because California doesn’t pay taxes to the federal government; Californians pay taxes to the IRS, and that’s a huge distinction. There is way too much “how to fight back” talk assuming facts not in existence.
A lot those one sentence zingers about blue/red state differences aren't very well thought through.
You also have to look at how the folks making such claims are doing the math. One trick is saying a good deal of the federal spending is on military bases that, for a variety of reasons, are in so called red states. That spending is counted a a benefit to only those red states. It's a nonsense argument because the benefit of that spending, namely national defense, is shared by all states.
I can assure you military bases are a major source of employment for civilians and military spending can be a major economic engine locally (as usual Classic Simpsons explains it all https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSimpsons/comments/13hn4q0/the_economic_slump_began_last_spring_when_the/)
Was Springfield a Confederate general?
No, he was a pirate, who later founded the town in the late 1790s/early 18 Aughts after he and group of brave pioneers left Maryland after misinterpreting a passage in the Bible.
Thanks. I had forgotten that.
"Their destination: New Soddom."
Thank you.
Here's what most people get wrong about Jebediah Springfield, it's true that Hans Sprungfeld was a highly dubious and morally dislikeable person, but the legend, the ideal, the belief in "Jebediah Springfield" the myth can mean so much, if only to make such a broken and dysfunctional society like Springfield somewhat better. As political scientist Seth Masket wrote about the massively overrated JFK:
"Pretty much any time I interview a Democratic political activist or officeholder over the age of 60 and ask them why they got into politics, they mention Kennedy and his call to service. The Peace Corps, the space program, his speeches, and more are frequently mentioned as inspiring a generation of young people to get involved in politics and see government as a noble calling.
This sort of inspirational quality is rare among presidents—or anyone, really—and is difficult to quantify. But it shouldn’t be dismissed. Kennedy’s rhetoric and approach inspired people and continues to do so today. We could dismiss all this as just an exercise in branding, but it’s very good branding. And if it’s used to encourage people to try to improve the world in some way, that’s hardly wasted effort.
So as we look back on a century of Kennedy, it’s worth parsing the man from the myth, but also to recognize the value that the myth serves." https://psmag.com/news/revisiting-john-f-kennedys-legacy-100-years-after-his-birth/
Hmm congressional reps fight for this spending because… why?
Presumably because DoD wants it and it looks good in the local news.
I think you might be ignoring something.
Oh? What's that?
Gemini Deep Research so YMMV:
"Red States (31): The total population of the 31 Red states is approximately 180.8 million. Within this group, there are approximately 37.8 million Medicare beneficiaries. This results in a population-weighted average per capita Medicare enrollment of 20.9%.
Blue States (19 + D.C.): The total population of the 19 Blue states and the District of Columbia is approximately 159.3 million. This group contains about 30.6 million Medicare beneficiaries, yielding a population-weighted average per capita Medicare enrollment of 19.2%.
The analysis reveals a "Medicare gap" of 1.7 percentage points between the two blocs. This means that, on a per capita basis, the Red state bloc has a Medicare population that is nearly 9% larger than that of the Blue state bloc. While a 1.7-point difference may seem modest in isolation, when applied to populations of this magnitude, it represents millions of individuals and translates into tens of billions of dollars in annual federal healthcare expenditures. "
Ain’t gonna lie, that kinda made me want to get with Gemini.
You also have to figure out the age differences in the states - social security and Medicare will be a large government transfer to some states.
why would we consider this separate from other welfare programs
Because if the idea is that “Red States are super unproductive compared to Blue States, look at all the government money they take” and it turns out most of the difference is that Red States are older, that ends up not being the most compelling argument.
Especially given a lot of people move from blue states to red states to retire because blue states are too expensive
Also because weather.
I was going to bring this up. Florida and Arizona in particular are major retirement destinations.
are retirees known for their productivity
Blue states pay a lot of taxes because blue state policy results in people having more income.
Other way around. More educated people make more money AND are more likely to be liberal.
Policy is how you get more educated people.
No dude, more educated states have drifted left and less educated states have drifted right. It not like Colorado and Virginia have the most amazing schools in the country, or that the quality of their schools has changed drastically since 2004, they're just more educated states, and in a time of education polarization, that pushes them to the left.
Their policies (relative to red states) attract more educated people to move and stay there; policy isn’t just about schools.
I live in Colorado and policy really doesn't seem to be the draw for anyone. Colorado has excellent outdoor recreation and a decently-sized metro area, which means a lot of well-paid jobs.
EDIT: To be clear, I largely prefer 2025 Dem policies to 2025 R policies, and Colorado is fairly well-run. But I don't think these policies are the major pull factors for Colorado.
Once you get down to the individual level, Democrats and Republicans pay similar amounts in taxes, too
That seems unlikely given recent political realignment.
What does this even mean? Do you think Republicans pay more or less than Democrats in federal taxes? Are you talking about the realignment of some of Silicon Valley towards Republicans, or the realignment of some of Wall Street towards MAGA, or the realignment of Hispanics or young people? Or something else?
The last time Pew surveyed partisanship by income level, Democrats were slightly overrepresented among upper and lower income families but barely underrepresented among upper-middle, but the divide is almost 50-50 across the board. The parties just aren't that divided by class; I'm not sure why you would expect a large gap in tax burden.
Most likely Democrats pay more in taxes right now because they're overrepresented among the upper middle class.
I'm not sure this is true though. I know that Democrats are overrepresented among the upper middle class, but the top 1% pay over 40% of Federal income taxes and I'm not sure Republicans are underrepresented there.
That’s a little misleading because it’s not accounting for payroll tax which tops out at about $180,000 of individual income and accounts for about 2/3s of the revenue of income tax; the 1% pay hardly any payroll tax relative to their incomes because it tops out so low so their share of overall tax would be much lower.
Kind of interesting the White House and other senior admin officials are more concerned about an ICE official hit by a sandwich than the CDC after someone shot 500 rounds at it. Wonder what the difference could be. Check out your tax dollars at work:
https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1956114803295953325
Nothing can be done about the shooter. But the sandwich grenadier! That’s not protected by the second amendment. Background checks for sandwiches, now!
I didn’t get on the thread in time to comment on it and not get buried this morning, but Matt’s “if tariffs cut growth, interest rates will just come down and revive it” analysis is off. This is because if they’re not accompanied by significant damage to aggregate demand, tariffs are likely to be *inflationary*. If you structurally raise the cost of goods, both businesses and individuals will do whatever they can to pass on rather than eat those costs, and so on, and the entities they pass those costs on to will try to pass on their own cost increases, and so on and so forth— a Galbraithian wage-price spiral. We avoid this in scenarios where demand takes a big enough initial hit to blunt various types of pass-through. But if we try to stimulate our way out of the problem with rate cuts, its inflationary effects will intensify, and if the Fed does stimulative monetary policy into rising inflation (especially accompanied by increasing budget deficits), we’re likely to get both very high inflation *and* a blow-out expansion of the term premium that raises long-dated interest rates and chokes growth. (This is what happened during the 1970s; we started getting into something similar when we stimulated ourselves out of the COVID supply shock, but in that case we at least got both an easing of the shock itself AND a hard monetary policy pivot to constrain inflation, and it’s worth remembering that even with relatively clean execution that averted the worst outcomes and the president not publicly pressuring the Fed chief, the public still hated the whole thing.)
TLDR. I tariff is a tax and taxes always create deadweight losses.
What an uplifting week in review. Blessed to live in such tranquil, peaceful, prosperous times.
‘May you live in interesting times’ - old chinese curse
Some rhetorical gems and a suggestion from Nick Catoggio: https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/boilingfrogs/democrats-dc-crime-dilemma-trump/.
"The Democratic Party, in short, is caught between two groups of postliberal idiots: one that doesn’t care enough about tyranny and another that doesn’t care enough about disorder. Whatever its leaders end up doing will probably backfire."
"'Anarchy wins unless Trump can deploy the Marines to Beverly Hills' is a pitch-perfect summary of the sophistication with which the great and good American people now approach serious problems."
"This is why I say Trump deserves only partial credit for engineering these lose-lose situations Democrats find themselves in. They don’t just make it easy for him; they do most of the engineering themselves."
"how Schumer’s party squandered trust on safety issues ranging from immigration to shoplifting rings to homelessness and public drug use to violent crime. Really, we can boil it down to three steps: Ignore the problem until Republicans take it up, then minimize it, then encourage Americans to get used to it as a nothing-to-be-done inevitability of modern life."
And the suggestion: "The obvious move for Schumer is to meet Trump halfway on crime while trying to turn the public’s skepticism of the president’s tactics to his advantage. If I were him, I’d invite Republicans to name a dollar amount that they think is needed to improve law enforcement’s ability to fight crime nationally, beginning in D.C., and then I’d offer to double it. But in return, I’d demand their cooperation on reforms to limit the president’s powers to deploy the military on U.S. soil. The solution to crime is not monarchy."
Some rhetorical shit, more like. Brokering this deal (if it's even on the table) would ease public concerns about Trump's executive overreach and almost certainly hurt Dem performance in the midterms. So it really only makes sense to do something like this as a last-ditch effort to prevent imminent authoritarian takeover. But if Catoggio thinks such existentialism is warranted, why isn't he and all these secretly anti-Trump Republican legislators willing to offer something substantial as an olive branch? Like at least throw in a national ban on gerrymandering or something.
I'll tell you what it looks like, it looks like a conservative trying to pull a fast one on anxious liberals.
Having read Eeyore for the past several months he basically thinks we're all fucked no matter what happens.
Seems like a dude who thinks he's top shit because he reads news sources from "both sides". I have no idea how you can believe we're on the verge of violent anarchy unless you unthinkingly consume conservative outrage. Even during the covid peak, crime was still down relative to the 90s.
Conservative outrage is hyperbolic bs, but crime stats don’t delegitimize the feeling of being unsafe, of the breakdown of social order, under circumstances in many urban areas (and, I’d hazard, rural communities). Maybe most homeless people don’t commit violent crimes, but the ubiquity on the streets of people using drugs and displaying serious mental illness is legit unsettling. I routinely see shopkeepers handling erratic people. No crime happens. It’s not reported, but yeah, it’s fair for patrons and that, say, eighteen year old barista to feel unsafe. It shouldn’t be this way, and it’s wrong and obviously politically hazardous for Dems (continue to) dismiss it.
1) Crime stats do delegitimize fearmongering about imminent societal breakdown.
2) While greater action against antisocial behavior is perhaps warranted, discomfort is a part of life. My coach always told us there's a difference between a hurt and an injury and I feel like that can also apply to public safety as well. You can't go through life being terrified every time you catch a whiff of pot or make eye contact with a shouting hobo. If just walking through the area scares you, how do you think the hobo feels?
Crime stats are important. They just don’t tell the whole story, and to the extent Dems use them to downplay people’s lived experiences, they’ll have a tough time winning back voters.
Regarding your second point, first I’m not “terrified.” Second, I’m not talking about marijuana. I’m talking about meth and fentanyl, both of which ravage bodies and minds. I have close friends who were opiate addicts two of whom died of their disease. I know how powerful the drugs are and I don’t condemn those addicted to them, but they are in serious crisis pretty much all the time. Their behavior is not that of a marijuana smoker.
Third, I’m not sure you live in a city with the same problems as mine. The use of the word “hobo” (as with marijuana) downplays the behaviors I’m talking about. Here’s just one scenario: the psychotic woman who hangs out at the Shell station a block from me, smoking and waving her cigarette at the gas pumps, screaming at the Asian immigrant employee who’s asking her to stop (at a safe distance), “You can’t touch me! Fuck you!” etc. When I ask if he needs help, he tells me he’s called the police on her a dozen times and nothing happens. He lives with that. You think he’s voting for a Democrat who tells him his anxiety is born of ignorance because crime statistics are actually down?
This scenario is repeated all across my city. It’s ubiquitous. Small business owners having to clean feces from their entrances and board up windows - again - aren’t comforted by the stats. And it isn’t fair to tell them they should be. I could go on and on. Yes, the “hobo’s” feelings matter, but they don’t matter *more* than the gas station worker’s or the barista’s or the retail employee’s. That’s the trap Dems have fallen into: appearing to care more for the most marginalized, the most challenging to social norms, over folks who are following the rules and just trying to get by. This has been politically disastrous and, frankly, unfair.
Lastly, as a woman whose been harassed and seen young women harassed on the streets, I have to ask when progressives decided women’s rights must take a backseat to “hobo’s” rights. We used to be all “take back the night.” Now we’re all “how dare you be afraid?”
It's more rhetorical than based on actual action. Dan Lurie has 73% approval in SF simply because he says crime is bad and something should be done about it. That should be completely non-controversial, but I know plenty who would take issue with that statement
Vibes emanate into reality.
Them: Lost Future, hear you've been uh working on something big?
Me: https://x.com/MadsPosting/status/1954902983440814323
You’ve been unemployed? Sorry to hear about (assuming you’re not exactly pleased with it)! And good luck with whatever you’ve been cooking up.
My latest hobby project has been designing an airsoft (IE plastic BBs) derivative replica of the new Army AR. Almost done with the hardest part here, it’s gonna be kinda smooth sailing from here!
No I'm not unemployed lol. I just found this video and thought it was hilarious. I'm actually self-employed, which is a whole different can of worms.... But no I have too much work if anything.
Do you actually shoot the airsofts, or just design them? I've been meaning to get into a shooting sport like that or paintball
Oh yes, although my recent ACL surgery means I’m banned from going out until next winter!
This one’s a personal project, but I also intend to turn it into a side hustle doing 3d printed custom jobs for people. Already got some decent respect for my first couple builds at the field back in May, but this one’s gonna kinda be my “prestige” piece.
I would like a Kalashnikov, please.
I've been trying to practice drawing when I have time at work, rather than just scrolling my phone. I'm not particularly good, but I do feel better about the time spent.
I really like this roundup. When I go on vacation I fully abstain from news, when I get back it can be hard to figure out what happened.
(The million dollar idea I'm giving out for free is a headline aggregating news site that has a slider you can drag around to past days/timeframe to examine what the big stories were, bonus points if the headlines are sized based on how big the story was, going from small to big and then small as the news cycle does its infinite turn.)
Can someone at SB *please* bring back the Saturday thread? Thanks!
At the very least, I’d be interested to know the decision behind not having the Saturday thread.
I think maybe we're going to just have to use the Friday thread, which is a bummer, because then you have to sort by "new," and I think you miss things that way.
😕
I know you’re not disagreeing, I think we’re on the same (missing) page, but we don’t need anything—no link, no story, no work, just a Saturday thread please so we can avoid this problem you described!
Exactly! Just an open post saying "Have at it, kids."
Reminder that for many voters it really is Party Over Everything and your weak attempts to use logic or argument are futile: https://x.com/YAppelbaum/status/1956460168041959725 (this is another good example of why Deliveryism doesn't work)
Pretty sure he'll flip on the third tent seizure.
We need a policy of highspeed broadband to tents!
That's called Starlink
The Dem factions:
Bernie/Warren/AOC: we need Starlink public option!
Everything Baglers: We must spend 10 billion dollars on creating a tent form of broadband that meet the follow 281 conditions and are done under the concept of shared governance and community control...
Abundencer/Neolibs/Matt: Let 1000 wireless networks bloom! Oh and just give people phone cards or something
DSA/Talib/(maybe Mamdani?): Nationalize all ISPs!
Trump has agreed to swap the Donbas for the Dumbass Steven Seagal since both are similar in size.
I'll admit to mixed feelings about Trump's Washington, DC law enforcement theatrics...
My son just started a job in DC, and I was there last week helping him move into his new place, a rented house shared with several other new grads in Columbia Heights, a neighborhood that struck me as borderline sketchy, but gentrifying. Troops on the streets has a scary, authoritarian vibe, but if they clear out some of the creepy people (including the homeless guy sleeping in front of my son's house) from the area, I won't be too unhappy.
I can't remember who said it, but a few months ago I saw someone comment that David Frum's dictum about fascism and immigration applied to homelessness and other urban "social disorder" phenomena too.
Yep.
If we could just send everyone in city government (or determining city related policies) to Europe to meet with their peers for a week the US would be in much better shape soon.
Just gotta make sure they don't talk to them about anything related to business or regulation.
The troops won't be in Columbia Heights though: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/16/us/politics/trump-washington-crime.html
I owned a place in CH 2002-2004, when it was really starting to gentrify. Interesting times. Illegal gambling nextdoor, along with the (reportedly transexual) whoreshouse. Had to remove people from my neighbor's porch 2X because they went to the wrong door (looking for aforementioned brothel). People doing drugs in the basement stoop. Dice game next to the ghetto Chinese place. Sadly it never quite seemed to achieve full take off -- imagine too much public/low income housing remains, along with the concomitant crews. But sold and never really went back. Almost bought a beautiful Wardman but a neighbor mentioned how one of the young gentlemen in the neighborhhod had put a gun to her head the previous week, so new wife and I decided we just did not want to deal. Instead moved to SE....only one killing near our house, and it was the cross street!
Not sure what Trump is doing, but in principle -- DC needs lots more law enforcement, focused on the very obvious areas where the majority of the criminals are, and the laws need to be changed to stop allowing a revolving door for young criminals (all criminals). And yes the culture of the black community needs to change etc. etc., but in the absence of some kind of great awakening, crush crime. Actually worked before, and it can work again, just need to accept reality of what that will mean.
It's really funny* that Trump just kind of sucks at closing deals.
*or perhaps as Ralph would say "Funny, but not haha funny"