i wore an onion on my belt….

by

by russell

"it was the fashion at the time".

surely, seizing upon opportunities to point and laugh at the youngsters is among the foremost signs of incipient geezerhood.  nonetheless, I am willing to say that I found this hilarious.

now all of you fluffy-bearded, beanie-wearing, flannel-shirted lumberjack wanna-be's get offa my lawn!

open thread y'all.

488 thoughts on “i wore an onion on my belt….”

  1. The article links to a Huff post blog entry saying

    They “conform in their nonconformity,”

    But that “non-conformists” conform to each other was a commonplace when I was young (late ’60s). And probably long before that. It appears that people only pick among styles to conform to.

  2. The article links to a Huff post blog entry saying

    They “conform in their nonconformity,”

    But that “non-conformists” conform to each other was a commonplace when I was young (late ’60s). And probably long before that. It appears that people only pick among styles to conform to.

  3. Wow. Just wow
    It seems that, according to the judge, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross acted in “bad faith,” broke several laws and violated the constitution when he added the citizenship question to the census. (Not to mention lying to Congress about the whole thing.) A trifecta and more.

  4. Wow. Just wow
    It seems that, according to the judge, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross acted in “bad faith,” broke several laws and violated the constitution when he added the citizenship question to the census. (Not to mention lying to Congress about the whole thing.) A trifecta and more.

  5. I recall John Lydon (aka “Johnny Rotten”) of Sex Pistols fame discussing the early days of punk, when the people came to their shows in all manner of whacky, DYI fashion, but that everyone fairly quickly thereafter converged onto a standard punk look. They all conformed, just to something other than what non-punk conformists conformed to.
    Kinda-sorta related:
    In my younger days, I experienced a phenomenon whereby certain places would be under the radar and frequented by “weird” people. Word would start to get out that there was a cool scene in such a place, and other less-weird people would start going there. Once that word spread too far, the scene wouldn’t be cool anymore, and the “weird” people would have moved on to some other relatively unknown place. Wash, rinse, repeat.

  6. I recall John Lydon (aka “Johnny Rotten”) of Sex Pistols fame discussing the early days of punk, when the people came to their shows in all manner of whacky, DYI fashion, but that everyone fairly quickly thereafter converged onto a standard punk look. They all conformed, just to something other than what non-punk conformists conformed to.
    Kinda-sorta related:
    In my younger days, I experienced a phenomenon whereby certain places would be under the radar and frequented by “weird” people. Word would start to get out that there was a cool scene in such a place, and other less-weird people would start going there. Once that word spread too far, the scene wouldn’t be cool anymore, and the “weird” people would have moved on to some other relatively unknown place. Wash, rinse, repeat.

  7. I’ve never understood the wearing of stocking caps unless outdoors in below-freezing temperatures. I’d overheat in about 20 seconds.

  8. I’ve never understood the wearing of stocking caps unless outdoors in below-freezing temperatures. I’d overheat in about 20 seconds.

  11. Once that word spread too far, the scene wouldn’t be cool anymore
    I remember how despondent a piano playing high school buddy of mine was when the jocks all started smoking weed.
    Stocking caps: I wear them a lot in winter, indoors and out, including to bed. It’s in lieu of hair.

  12. Once that word spread too far, the scene wouldn’t be cool anymore
    I remember how despondent a piano playing high school buddy of mine was when the jocks all started smoking weed.
    Stocking caps: I wear them a lot in winter, indoors and out, including to bed. It’s in lieu of hair.

  13. @hsh–
    There’s been a couple of times in my life I happened to have been one of those people frequenting such places early on, owing to some more adventurous friends that discovered them and brought me along. I generally would stop going later just because they would become too crowded once word got out enough.

  14. @hsh–
    There’s been a couple of times in my life I happened to have been one of those people frequenting such places early on, owing to some more adventurous friends that discovered them and brought me along. I generally would stop going later just because they would become too crowded once word got out enough.

  15. @russell–
    A couple of friends of mine, contemplating the factoid that you lose 80% of your body heat through your head, conjectured that therefore you could walk naked around in winter and stay comfortably warm as long as you had boots and a woolen cap on. I am pretty sure that neither of them ever empirically verified it though.

  16. @russell–
    A couple of friends of mine, contemplating the factoid that you lose 80% of your body heat through your head, conjectured that therefore you could walk naked around in winter and stay comfortably warm as long as you had boots and a woolen cap on. I am pretty sure that neither of them ever empirically verified it though.

  19. “conjectured that therefore you could walk naked around in winter and stay comfortably warm as long as you had boots and a woolen cap on. I am pretty sure that neither of them ever empirically verified it though.”
    I have heard, from multiple first-hand sources, that one of the rites of passage at South Pole Station is to run outside, around the ‘pole’ and back inside, wearing only boots.
    Although I bet you can leave your hat on.

  20. “conjectured that therefore you could walk naked around in winter and stay comfortably warm as long as you had boots and a woolen cap on. I am pretty sure that neither of them ever empirically verified it though.”
    I have heard, from multiple first-hand sources, that one of the rites of passage at South Pole Station is to run outside, around the ‘pole’ and back inside, wearing only boots.
    Although I bet you can leave your hat on.

  21. I like to wear a big bowl of blueberries on my head, so I can snack on a whim – and possibly entice small woodland creatures.

  22. I like to wear a big bowl of blueberries on my head, so I can snack on a whim – and possibly entice small woodland creatures.

  25. And downright astonishing that slightly more voters still think the Republicans in Congress are better than the Democrats on national security..

  26. And downright astonishing that slightly more voters still think the Republicans in Congress are better than the Democrats on national security..

  31. From Donald’s link:

    The transition to a carbon-neutral economy is bound to make us worse off before it makes us better off, and the most vulnerable segments of society will be hit especially hard.

    I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.
    The second part is a concern. But the measures required to mitigate the impact are largely those we already should be (should have been?) taking to deal with the impact of the massive technological changes of the last few decades: education/retraining, relocation support, etc. (At least we’ve already started to address the need for health insurance outside employer-based one.)
    It’s true that most people would probably prefer life to go on unchanged. But at this point, even if climate change wasn’t happening that train has long since left the station.

  32. From Donald’s link:

    The transition to a carbon-neutral economy is bound to make us worse off before it makes us better off, and the most vulnerable segments of society will be hit especially hard.

    I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.
    The second part is a concern. But the measures required to mitigate the impact are largely those we already should be (should have been?) taking to deal with the impact of the massive technological changes of the last few decades: education/retraining, relocation support, etc. (At least we’ve already started to address the need for health insurance outside employer-based one.)
    It’s true that most people would probably prefer life to go on unchanged. But at this point, even if climate change wasn’t happening that train has long since left the station.

  33. Is it wrong to say these people are stupid?
    I would put at least the same level of stupidity on the legislators who wrote sure easy opt-out into the law. Just make the vaccinations mandatory. The same way that, for example, auto insurance is for drivers. It is, after all, a matter of protecting others from the possible results of your decisions.

  34. Is it wrong to say these people are stupid?
    I would put at least the same level of stupidity on the legislators who wrote sure easy opt-out into the law. Just make the vaccinations mandatory. The same way that, for example, auto insurance is for drivers. It is, after all, a matter of protecting others from the possible results of your decisions.

  35. Humanity, individually and collectively, has always been at war with pathogens.
    And when we die, they eat us.
    No pity for anti-vaxx species-traitors.

  36. Humanity, individually and collectively, has always been at war with pathogens.
    And when we die, they eat us.
    No pity for anti-vaxx species-traitors.

  37. Every candidate, Democrat or Republican, for President or any other office, should crib this line from Hickenlooper’s kickoff speech:

    “We broadcast America’s values by celebrating those who may not have been born in America — but America was born in them.

    “America was born in them.” How can you not love that phrase?
    Of course, there are those who will disagree with the sentiment. But they should be seen for what they are: unAmerican. And at odds with the reality of what has made America great.

  38. Every candidate, Democrat or Republican, for President or any other office, should crib this line from Hickenlooper’s kickoff speech:

    “We broadcast America’s values by celebrating those who may not have been born in America — but America was born in them.

    “America was born in them.” How can you not love that phrase?
    Of course, there are those who will disagree with the sentiment. But they should be seen for what they are: unAmerican. And at odds with the reality of what has made America great.

  39. Interesting poll all around.
    What I take away from the poll: we hate Congress, consider them about as trustworthy as a fox in a hen house, and would prefer that they not do anything, about anything.
    At least those sentiments appear to be bi-partisan.

  40. Interesting poll all around.
    What I take away from the poll: we hate Congress, consider them about as trustworthy as a fox in a hen house, and would prefer that they not do anything, about anything.
    At least those sentiments appear to be bi-partisan.

  41. “I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.”
    I hope it is not true, because if it is we will probably dither around and let things get much much worse.

  42. “I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.”
    I hope it is not true, because if it is we will probably dither around and let things get much much worse.

  43. I’ll make a prediction about the climate change thing:
    There will be no co-ordinated public effort to address it in any effective way. Not in this country, anyway. There are two reasons for this:
    1. The fossil fuels still in the ground represent too much of the book value of very large companies
    2. Nobody wants to make the basic changes in public infrastructure and lifestyle that would be required to really make a dent in the issue
    So it ain’t gonna happen. Not in my lifetime, probably not in my step-son’s lifetime. And if it doesn’t happen in that kind of time-frame, then some fairly serious consequences are baked in. For centuries.
    We’ll respond to those in one half-assed reactive way or other until enough of the current crop of decision makers die off, and things get bad enough that doing something is actually less painful than not doing something.
    Mostly I think everyone will just adapt to whatever reality looks like in a +2C world. Whatever that turns out to be.

  44. I’ll make a prediction about the climate change thing:
    There will be no co-ordinated public effort to address it in any effective way. Not in this country, anyway. There are two reasons for this:
    1. The fossil fuels still in the ground represent too much of the book value of very large companies
    2. Nobody wants to make the basic changes in public infrastructure and lifestyle that would be required to really make a dent in the issue
    So it ain’t gonna happen. Not in my lifetime, probably not in my step-son’s lifetime. And if it doesn’t happen in that kind of time-frame, then some fairly serious consequences are baked in. For centuries.
    We’ll respond to those in one half-assed reactive way or other until enough of the current crop of decision makers die off, and things get bad enough that doing something is actually less painful than not doing something.
    Mostly I think everyone will just adapt to whatever reality looks like in a +2C world. Whatever that turns out to be.

  45. Mostly I think everyone will just adapt to whatever reality looks like in a +2C world. Whatever that turns out to be.
    I probably don’t need to tell anyone here this, but that reality will hit the most vulnerable the hardest. I’d guess a lot harder than would the transition to a carbon-neutral economy, as mentioned in Donald’s link.

  46. Mostly I think everyone will just adapt to whatever reality looks like in a +2C world. Whatever that turns out to be.
    I probably don’t need to tell anyone here this, but that reality will hit the most vulnerable the hardest. I’d guess a lot harder than would the transition to a carbon-neutral economy, as mentioned in Donald’s link.

  47. @JakeB,
    In my alma mater, there was a tradition of running naked about a two kilometers long route around the university during parties in the student union sauna. People did it usually with shoes and a hat. And at least, if you kept up a good speed, a slightly freezing weather was not an obstacle. Although after a such a run, a man would probably not be an amazing sight to the ladies present. (For ladies, the cold and exercise do not do similar disservice. On the contrary, their skin is freshly red.)
    And I would like to note that this was not a hazing ritual for freshmen. People of all year courses did it, when the fancy struck them.

  48. @JakeB,
    In my alma mater, there was a tradition of running naked about a two kilometers long route around the university during parties in the student union sauna. People did it usually with shoes and a hat. And at least, if you kept up a good speed, a slightly freezing weather was not an obstacle. Although after a such a run, a man would probably not be an amazing sight to the ladies present. (For ladies, the cold and exercise do not do similar disservice. On the contrary, their skin is freshly red.)
    And I would like to note that this was not a hazing ritual for freshmen. People of all year courses did it, when the fancy struck them.

  49. Ah, that’s Scandinavia/Finland for you. No wonder those upright folks of the GOP talk about it as if it’s little better than a gateway to hell…

  50. Ah, that’s Scandinavia/Finland for you. No wonder those upright folks of the GOP talk about it as if it’s little better than a gateway to hell…

  51. I probably don’t need to tell anyone here this, but that reality will hit the most vulnerable the hardest. I’d guess a lot harder than would the transition to a carbon-neutral economy
    Is it excessively cynical of me to predict that the pain of the poor in America will be mitigated by the knowledge that others (e.g. in Bangladesh) are being hit far, far harder? Just like certain cynical politicians here knew that, as long as blacks were worse off, the white poor (in the South, and perhaps elsewhere) would be less upset about their own poverty.

  52. I probably don’t need to tell anyone here this, but that reality will hit the most vulnerable the hardest. I’d guess a lot harder than would the transition to a carbon-neutral economy
    Is it excessively cynical of me to predict that the pain of the poor in America will be mitigated by the knowledge that others (e.g. in Bangladesh) are being hit far, far harder? Just like certain cynical politicians here knew that, as long as blacks were worse off, the white poor (in the South, and perhaps elsewhere) would be less upset about their own poverty.

  53. I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.
    I don’t think that’s right.
    Housing (insulation/heating) is going to be very expensive to fix quickly. Transport could be left to the market… if we had a couple of decades or so too let it play out; similarly with power generation. We don’t.
    2% of GDP is an awful lot of money to allocate to a program that half the electorate doesn’t believe in, but it is needed. And affordable.

  54. I’m not sure that first part is really true, at least overall. The way green technology is developing, even a modicum of government support should keep the net economic disruption relatively small.
    I don’t think that’s right.
    Housing (insulation/heating) is going to be very expensive to fix quickly. Transport could be left to the market… if we had a couple of decades or so too let it play out; similarly with power generation. We don’t.
    2% of GDP is an awful lot of money to allocate to a program that half the electorate doesn’t believe in, but it is needed. And affordable.

  55. Any goal to reduce CO2 emissions by the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, etc. is going to be swamped by what China, India and other developing economies do. India plans to double its coal power production in the next couple of decades.

  56. Any goal to reduce CO2 emissions by the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, etc. is going to be swamped by what China, India and other developing economies do. India plans to double its coal power production in the next couple of decades.

  57. well then, we’re f***ed, aren’t we?
    the mind-boggling thing about it is that we know we are, we see it coming, and are unable to do anything more than wring our hands and talk about it.
    the vulnerable who are hit hardest are unlikely to sit idly by and bemoan their fates. when folks can’t survive where they are, they move.

  58. well then, we’re f***ed, aren’t we?
    the mind-boggling thing about it is that we know we are, we see it coming, and are unable to do anything more than wring our hands and talk about it.
    the vulnerable who are hit hardest are unlikely to sit idly by and bemoan their fates. when folks can’t survive where they are, they move.

  59. Even though I saw the claim recently that India’s coal power production would double in twenty years, it may be based on out of date Indian government projections. Or, perhaps, what I saw was that power from all sources would double.
    “NEW DELHI (Reuters) – India’s demand for electricity is expected to double in the next two decades, and coal has been long forecast to be the fuel of choice for power generation. But this may no longer be the case.
    It’s not that India doesn’t have plentiful reserves of coal. It does, and it is the world’s second-largest producer and importer, following China.”
    Coal going from winner to loser in India’s energy future

  60. Even though I saw the claim recently that India’s coal power production would double in twenty years, it may be based on out of date Indian government projections. Or, perhaps, what I saw was that power from all sources would double.
    “NEW DELHI (Reuters) – India’s demand for electricity is expected to double in the next two decades, and coal has been long forecast to be the fuel of choice for power generation. But this may no longer be the case.
    It’s not that India doesn’t have plentiful reserves of coal. It does, and it is the world’s second-largest producer and importer, following China.”
    Coal going from winner to loser in India’s energy future

  61. One has to wonder if the corollary of “as long as the X has it worse than me” isn’t “well if Mr. High-and-Mighty doesn’t care if I’m screwed, why should I make any effort to make it more pleasant for him, since I’m screwed no matter what?”

  62. One has to wonder if the corollary of “as long as the X has it worse than me” isn’t “well if Mr. High-and-Mighty doesn’t care if I’m screwed, why should I make any effort to make it more pleasant for him, since I’m screwed no matter what?”

  63. Nous, but far too many believe that they will become part of the high and mighty and don’t want to spoil the experience by voting in inconvenient things for them. I read a poll only recently where ‘I am going to be a millionaire, so I don’t want millionaires taxed’ was an extremly common sentiment.

  64. Nous, but far too many believe that they will become part of the high and mighty and don’t want to spoil the experience by voting in inconvenient things for them. I read a poll only recently where ‘I am going to be a millionaire, so I don’t want millionaires taxed’ was an extremly common sentiment.

  65. Adapting to a planet that is a little hotter means famine; mass movement of peoples, likely triggering authoritarian take-over in the receiving countries; war; the death of what is left of the natural world; severe economic dislocations within countries resulting in internal migrations; and the wealthy benefitting from all this at the expense of everyone else.
    I am not planning on living long enough to see this play out.

  66. Adapting to a planet that is a little hotter means famine; mass movement of peoples, likely triggering authoritarian take-over in the receiving countries; war; the death of what is left of the natural world; severe economic dislocations within countries resulting in internal migrations; and the wealthy benefitting from all this at the expense of everyone else.
    I am not planning on living long enough to see this play out.

  67. If “we” are “f***ed”, it’s our own damn fault.
    It’s our fault for mollycoddling the sort of god-botherers who believe that either Jesus will rapture them or Jesus’s dad will make CO2 go away, so what’s the problem?
    It’s our fault for tolerating the kind of libertarians who are so into individualism that they could say “Ha, ha, your end of the lifeboat is sinking” with a straight face.
    It’s our fault for letting people like that get away with a snowflake victim act based on the proposition that stupid ideas deserve respect.
    The American right wing has been allowed, by “us”, to believe that they have a god-given right to determine the fate of the world — because we must not call them stupid and shun them in real life, don’t you know.
    And “we” have allowed all this because Very Serious People assure us that there is a meaningful cohort of “independents” out there who will vote Republican unless we mollycoddle them by pretending that the RWNJs must be compromised with.
    Which may be true, but it’s another reason why “we’re f***ed”.
    –TP

  68. If “we” are “f***ed”, it’s our own damn fault.
    It’s our fault for mollycoddling the sort of god-botherers who believe that either Jesus will rapture them or Jesus’s dad will make CO2 go away, so what’s the problem?
    It’s our fault for tolerating the kind of libertarians who are so into individualism that they could say “Ha, ha, your end of the lifeboat is sinking” with a straight face.
    It’s our fault for letting people like that get away with a snowflake victim act based on the proposition that stupid ideas deserve respect.
    The American right wing has been allowed, by “us”, to believe that they have a god-given right to determine the fate of the world — because we must not call them stupid and shun them in real life, don’t you know.
    And “we” have allowed all this because Very Serious People assure us that there is a meaningful cohort of “independents” out there who will vote Republican unless we mollycoddle them by pretending that the RWNJs must be compromised with.
    Which may be true, but it’s another reason why “we’re f***ed”.
    –TP

  69. It’s confusing which thread is which. My last comment answered Charles WT elsewhere.
    Anyway, since this is an open thread, remember when everyone here gave a flying f*** about the atrocity of drone warfare? Oh, but that was when Obama, the “flawed” Democrat, was President.
    This is now.
    Honestly, this pisses me off all over again, even though I love y’all. Family fight that won’t ever go away. Sorry, folks.

  70. It’s confusing which thread is which. My last comment answered Charles WT elsewhere.
    Anyway, since this is an open thread, remember when everyone here gave a flying f*** about the atrocity of drone warfare? Oh, but that was when Obama, the “flawed” Democrat, was President.
    This is now.
    Honestly, this pisses me off all over again, even though I love y’all. Family fight that won’t ever go away. Sorry, folks.

  71. Sapient, in the old days I’d be more than happy to accommodate you if you wanted a fight on our war crimes. Suffice it to say my views haven’t changed. For Yemen alone Trump and Obama should rot in jail for the rest of their lives.
    On your link, it’s not a big shock. Under Trump’s watch thousands of civilians died at Mosul and Raqqa under US bombs. Trump relaxed some of the restrictions on bombing. I would be thrilled if people denounced him as a blood soaked butcher rather than for this trivial Russiagate s@@t.
    All I will say.

  72. Sapient, in the old days I’d be more than happy to accommodate you if you wanted a fight on our war crimes. Suffice it to say my views haven’t changed. For Yemen alone Trump and Obama should rot in jail for the rest of their lives.
    On your link, it’s not a big shock. Under Trump’s watch thousands of civilians died at Mosul and Raqqa under US bombs. Trump relaxed some of the restrictions on bombing. I would be thrilled if people denounced him as a blood soaked butcher rather than for this trivial Russiagate s@@t.
    All I will say.

  73. I’m not going to answer Donald (who was super quick to answer me – what’s up with that), other than to say that the subject doesn’t seem to be something that he randomly brings up anymore. He’s also not appearing with semiweekly Yemen news. Wonder why it’s no longer his main focus.
    Actually, I don’t wonder.
    But he’s not the only one who was obsessed with Obama’s drone war, and for the last two years – not a stated concern.

  74. I’m not going to answer Donald (who was super quick to answer me – what’s up with that), other than to say that the subject doesn’t seem to be something that he randomly brings up anymore. He’s also not appearing with semiweekly Yemen news. Wonder why it’s no longer his main focus.
    Actually, I don’t wonder.
    But he’s not the only one who was obsessed with Obama’s drone war, and for the last two years – not a stated concern.

  77. Donald,
    “… this trivial Russiagate s@@t” is a pooh-poohing of Putin’s purchase of the White House that I cannot allow to go un-pooped-upon.
    You are a decent, kindly humanitarian AFAICT, but if you really harbor some delusion that Yemenis would be better off if Americans shrugged their shoulders at the Putin-Trump alliance then I don’t know what to say to you.
    –TP

  78. Donald,
    “… this trivial Russiagate s@@t” is a pooh-poohing of Putin’s purchase of the White House that I cannot allow to go un-pooped-upon.
    You are a decent, kindly humanitarian AFAICT, but if you really harbor some delusion that Yemenis would be better off if Americans shrugged their shoulders at the Putin-Trump alliance then I don’t know what to say to you.
    –TP

  79. TP—
    Not going to argue about it, but I have always thought people’s priorities on American politics are screwed up regarding what should count as a scandal.
    But if I keep posting I will be arguing, so that is the end of that.
    Sapient, I stopped posting on Yemen here because people here got sick of it and I got angry. I posted elsewhere, got a letter in the NYT, ranted and raved in various places. I still do, but elsewhere, but at least now it is widely acknowledged as an American disgrace so I feel less driven. The Khashoggi murder was the turning point with Yemen, when the humanitarian catastrophe was recognized as front page news for a few months but of course Trump and most of the Republicans with a few exceptions still want to keep the war going. It should still be front page news, but isn’t. I sense the two of us are falling back into an old pattern. I lurk here a lot, usually don’t post even when I see you saying things that I find irritating, but it was a mistake to respond.

  80. TP—
    Not going to argue about it, but I have always thought people’s priorities on American politics are screwed up regarding what should count as a scandal.
    But if I keep posting I will be arguing, so that is the end of that.
    Sapient, I stopped posting on Yemen here because people here got sick of it and I got angry. I posted elsewhere, got a letter in the NYT, ranted and raved in various places. I still do, but elsewhere, but at least now it is widely acknowledged as an American disgrace so I feel less driven. The Khashoggi murder was the turning point with Yemen, when the humanitarian catastrophe was recognized as front page news for a few months but of course Trump and most of the Republicans with a few exceptions still want to keep the war going. It should still be front page news, but isn’t. I sense the two of us are falling back into an old pattern. I lurk here a lot, usually don’t post even when I see you saying things that I find irritating, but it was a mistake to respond.

  81. I found the article that was referenced by the article I remembered as saying India’s coal power use would double in the next twenty years.
    The article makes an unsourced assertion that it will almost double. And an unlinked source that it will increase by 120% which is more than double. Though that may include uses for coal besides power generation.
    “Yet, even as the Modi government strives to ensure universal electricity access by the early 2020s, India’s power system will need to almost quadruple its size by 2040, and investments up to US$2 trillion will be required to keep pace with increasing demand.
    Large-scale power generation will be at the heart of India’s strategy to electrification, with coal-fired power output forecast to almost double by 2040. This means that while solar will support energy access in rural communities, coal will power up the growing cities, industries and businesses that are key to India’s economic growth.
    …
    Looking ahead, with coal demand in the country predicted to rise by 120% through to 2040 (IEA), it is clear that it will remain a crucial part of India’s future energy system, as well as acting as a critical enabler for electrification.”
    The role of coal in India’s energy ambitions: India is the world’s second most populous country and figures among the world’s most rapidly growing economies, reports the World Coal Association.

  82. I found the article that was referenced by the article I remembered as saying India’s coal power use would double in the next twenty years.
    The article makes an unsourced assertion that it will almost double. And an unlinked source that it will increase by 120% which is more than double. Though that may include uses for coal besides power generation.
    “Yet, even as the Modi government strives to ensure universal electricity access by the early 2020s, India’s power system will need to almost quadruple its size by 2040, and investments up to US$2 trillion will be required to keep pace with increasing demand.
    Large-scale power generation will be at the heart of India’s strategy to electrification, with coal-fired power output forecast to almost double by 2040. This means that while solar will support energy access in rural communities, coal will power up the growing cities, industries and businesses that are key to India’s economic growth.
    …
    Looking ahead, with coal demand in the country predicted to rise by 120% through to 2040 (IEA), it is clear that it will remain a crucial part of India’s future energy system, as well as acting as a critical enabler for electrification.”
    The role of coal in India’s energy ambitions: India is the world’s second most populous country and figures among the world’s most rapidly growing economies, reports the World Coal Association.

  83. I stopped posting on Yemen here because people here got sick of it
    I among them, and I was kind of a dick about it. I’ve offered apologies privately, please allow me to do so publicly.
    You were right, I was wrong.

  84. I stopped posting on Yemen here because people here got sick of it
    I among them, and I was kind of a dick about it. I’ve offered apologies privately, please allow me to do so publicly.
    You were right, I was wrong.

  87. While I’ve always thought Donald’s stance on Yemen was perfectly sound, and am always extremely happy to see him here, on the Russian stuff I’m with Tony P @ 10.34.

  88. While I’ve always thought Donald’s stance on Yemen was perfectly sound, and am always extremely happy to see him here, on the Russian stuff I’m with Tony P @ 10.34.

  93. Russell there was no need to apologize again. You are generally the wisest person around here and the most mature. Not saying I always agree with your political views, though generally we overlap, but just that you are sort of the gold standard for blog comment writers.
    Gftnc—
    I am in the distinct minority here. Not everywhere. Take a different example— Nixon and Watergate. I am not being original in saying that it would be better for our country and the world if he had been impeached and driven out of office for Chile and the bombing of Cambodia. There was also the apparent conspiracy to keep the war going in 68 by undermining negotiations, but I don’t know the details. That wasn’t known at the time. But anyway, the most serious scandals should be the ones that would be called war crimes or aggression, where people are killed in large numbers and which are treated as monstrous crimes when one of our enemies ( or a former friend) commits them.
    On Trump, I can’t keep up with the things he does, though the attitude towards climate change is what, long term, I am guessing will make him most despised by future generations. But on that one he represents a great many people unfortunately.

  94. Russell there was no need to apologize again. You are generally the wisest person around here and the most mature. Not saying I always agree with your political views, though generally we overlap, but just that you are sort of the gold standard for blog comment writers.
    Gftnc—
    I am in the distinct minority here. Not everywhere. Take a different example— Nixon and Watergate. I am not being original in saying that it would be better for our country and the world if he had been impeached and driven out of office for Chile and the bombing of Cambodia. There was also the apparent conspiracy to keep the war going in 68 by undermining negotiations, but I don’t know the details. That wasn’t known at the time. But anyway, the most serious scandals should be the ones that would be called war crimes or aggression, where people are killed in large numbers and which are treated as monstrous crimes when one of our enemies ( or a former friend) commits them.
    On Trump, I can’t keep up with the things he does, though the attitude towards climate change is what, long term, I am guessing will make him most despised by future generations. But on that one he represents a great many people unfortunately.

  95. Donald: … it would be better for our country and the world if he had been impeached and driven out of office for Chile and the bombing of Cambodia. There was also the apparent conspiracy to keep the war going in 68 by undermining negotiations …
    The following are meditations on Donald’s text, not arguments against it.
    Would it have been better for the US and the world if Nixon had lost to Humphrey in 1968? Who knows? Humphrey might have bombed Cambodia and overthrown Allende like Nixon did, although I’m fairly sure Humphrey would not have foisted the execrable Henry Kissinger on the world.
    Would Humphrey have won if LBJ had gone public with his knowledge of Nixon’s collusion with the Saigon regime through Anna Chennault to scupper the Paris peace talks? Again: who knows? Many Americans might have shrugged their shoulders at the collusion, or even grudgingly admired it as a stratagem to defeat the heir of LBJ’s warmongering and civil rights and Medicare and such.
    Would American politics have been degraded and polluted by LBJ revealing “intelligence” about Nixon’s collusion for “partisan” purposes? Maybe. So, let us be thankful that our politics has remained on a higher, principled plane; let us be grateful that public servants like CIA officers, generals, prosecutors, and such keep important secrets safe from the public because “rules”. Or not.
    In 1968, Nixon had not (yet) ordered the killing of masses of people, but LBJ had. That’s what Americans should have been outraged about, instead of the collusion thing. Of course, Americans were simple-minded enough to re-elect Nixon by a landslide in 1972, and chances are they’d have done it even if Nixon’s collusion had already been widely publicized. It was old news by then, after all.
    Musing on what might have been, had Americans been outraged about different things at various points in the past, is of course mere intellectual wankery. History can’t be changed. The future is a bit more malleable, but only a bit.
    –TP

  96. Donald: … it would be better for our country and the world if he had been impeached and driven out of office for Chile and the bombing of Cambodia. There was also the apparent conspiracy to keep the war going in 68 by undermining negotiations …
    The following are meditations on Donald’s text, not arguments against it.
    Would it have been better for the US and the world if Nixon had lost to Humphrey in 1968? Who knows? Humphrey might have bombed Cambodia and overthrown Allende like Nixon did, although I’m fairly sure Humphrey would not have foisted the execrable Henry Kissinger on the world.
    Would Humphrey have won if LBJ had gone public with his knowledge of Nixon’s collusion with the Saigon regime through Anna Chennault to scupper the Paris peace talks? Again: who knows? Many Americans might have shrugged their shoulders at the collusion, or even grudgingly admired it as a stratagem to defeat the heir of LBJ’s warmongering and civil rights and Medicare and such.
    Would American politics have been degraded and polluted by LBJ revealing “intelligence” about Nixon’s collusion for “partisan” purposes? Maybe. So, let us be thankful that our politics has remained on a higher, principled plane; let us be grateful that public servants like CIA officers, generals, prosecutors, and such keep important secrets safe from the public because “rules”. Or not.
    In 1968, Nixon had not (yet) ordered the killing of masses of people, but LBJ had. That’s what Americans should have been outraged about, instead of the collusion thing. Of course, Americans were simple-minded enough to re-elect Nixon by a landslide in 1972, and chances are they’d have done it even if Nixon’s collusion had already been widely publicized. It was old news by then, after all.
    Musing on what might have been, had Americans been outraged about different things at various points in the past, is of course mere intellectual wankery. History can’t be changed. The future is a bit more malleable, but only a bit.
    –TP

  97. you are sort of the gold standard for blog comment writers
    I imagine this is an opinion shared by everybody who ever reads this blog, with the probable exception of russell.
    Donald, I believe your opinions are always worth giving serious attention to, even if one starts (or ends) by disagreeing with them. But prioritising concern over e.g. war crimes (also always worth highly prioritising) over concern about a foreign takeover of the administration is, I believe, a category confusion. Once there is a legitimately elected administration, one is justified in holding it accountable for its acts, illegal or immoral. But if an administration is not legitimately elected (because of e.g. traitors selling the country out to a foreign power, or e.g. significant voter suppression or gerrymandering), then dealing with that illegitimacy seems to me to be the necessary first step before you can deal with its consequences.

  98. you are sort of the gold standard for blog comment writers
    I imagine this is an opinion shared by everybody who ever reads this blog, with the probable exception of russell.
    Donald, I believe your opinions are always worth giving serious attention to, even if one starts (or ends) by disagreeing with them. But prioritising concern over e.g. war crimes (also always worth highly prioritising) over concern about a foreign takeover of the administration is, I believe, a category confusion. Once there is a legitimately elected administration, one is justified in holding it accountable for its acts, illegal or immoral. But if an administration is not legitimately elected (because of e.g. traitors selling the country out to a foreign power, or e.g. significant voter suppression or gerrymandering), then dealing with that illegitimacy seems to me to be the necessary first step before you can deal with its consequences.

  101. Gftnc—
    I get the impression most people here are good at math—I think that included you, but am not sure.
    Anyway, math analogy— if you plot the moral seriousness of a scandal on the X axis and the attention it receives on the y axis and start plotting points, I think you would get an upside down U shaped curve— that is, small evils get small attention, big evils get big attention and gigantic evils get small attention. It’s generally that way. A sufficiently large crime is a policy. Question the really giant crimes and it is actually a bit scary— do people want to see Presidents true as war criminals? Does it destabilize our system, call its legitimacy in question? I am guessing for most people in DC the whole idea is unthinkable.
    I also don’t think Trump is in Putin’s pocket. The attempt at overthrowing Maduro is the latest example. Not what Putin wants. There are others. In 2016 emails were stolen and released to embarrass Clinton, with or without Trump’s collusion. Too soon to tell, afaik.

  102. Gftnc—
    I get the impression most people here are good at math—I think that included you, but am not sure.
    Anyway, math analogy— if you plot the moral seriousness of a scandal on the X axis and the attention it receives on the y axis and start plotting points, I think you would get an upside down U shaped curve— that is, small evils get small attention, big evils get big attention and gigantic evils get small attention. It’s generally that way. A sufficiently large crime is a policy. Question the really giant crimes and it is actually a bit scary— do people want to see Presidents true as war criminals? Does it destabilize our system, call its legitimacy in question? I am guessing for most people in DC the whole idea is unthinkable.
    I also don’t think Trump is in Putin’s pocket. The attempt at overthrowing Maduro is the latest example. Not what Putin wants. There are others. In 2016 emails were stolen and released to embarrass Clinton, with or without Trump’s collusion. Too soon to tell, afaik.

  103. “Treason doth neuer prosper? What’s the Reason? For if it prosper none dare call it treason.” —Sir John Harington

  104. “Treason doth neuer prosper? What’s the Reason? For if it prosper none dare call it treason.” —Sir John Harington

  105. wj: Brexit is a major success for Putin. Destroying or weakening the EU has been a primary motivation for him.
    Donald: In fact, I’m not a maths person, but I still get your graph image. You may be right, and about the attitudes of most people, but speaking for myself (and I’m guessing many people here) I’m perfectly prepared to consider our leaders perpetrators of war crimes if I believe they are (Tony Blair and George W spring to mind immediately). I disagree with you about Putin and Trump in any case, but I think my point still holds about the order in which one has to deal with issues of legitimacy and subsequent crimes.

  106. wj: Brexit is a major success for Putin. Destroying or weakening the EU has been a primary motivation for him.
    Donald: In fact, I’m not a maths person, but I still get your graph image. You may be right, and about the attitudes of most people, but speaking for myself (and I’m guessing many people here) I’m perfectly prepared to consider our leaders perpetrators of war crimes if I believe they are (Tony Blair and George W spring to mind immediately). I disagree with you about Putin and Trump in any case, but I think my point still holds about the order in which one has to deal with issues of legitimacy and subsequent crimes.

  107. The attempt at overthrowing Maduro is the latest example. Not what Putin wants.
    The reality is more nuanced, and the public positions of Putin and Trump don’t necessarily reflect their private agreements.
    There’s no question that there was coordination between Assange as the conduit between Russian intelligence and Trump’s campaign. The previous “collusion” thread is where russell stated the case (at least some of it) quite clearly.
    On Trump, I can’t keep up with the things he does versus I also don’t think Trump is in Putin’s pocket.
    I’m wondering whether if you kept up with more of what Trump does, you would agree that Trump is doing work for Putin. And not just Trump, but the Republican Party, including McConnell and the NRA. It’s hard for me to keep up with climate science, but I don’t deny climate change.
    Treason doth neuer prosper? Well, it seems to be bringing prosperity to the Trump family, so they certainly won’t dare call it treason. The rest of us are not so constrained.

  108. The attempt at overthrowing Maduro is the latest example. Not what Putin wants.
    The reality is more nuanced, and the public positions of Putin and Trump don’t necessarily reflect their private agreements.
    There’s no question that there was coordination between Assange as the conduit between Russian intelligence and Trump’s campaign. The previous “collusion” thread is where russell stated the case (at least some of it) quite clearly.
    On Trump, I can’t keep up with the things he does versus I also don’t think Trump is in Putin’s pocket.
    I’m wondering whether if you kept up with more of what Trump does, you would agree that Trump is doing work for Putin. And not just Trump, but the Republican Party, including McConnell and the NRA. It’s hard for me to keep up with climate science, but I don’t deny climate change.
    Treason doth neuer prosper? Well, it seems to be bringing prosperity to the Trump family, so they certainly won’t dare call it treason. The rest of us are not so constrained.

  109. Also, I agree with GftNC in her assessment that we will have no success in promoting humane policies if we don’t make some inroads in supporting the legitimacy and functionality of our democratic system.

  110. Also, I agree with GftNC in her assessment that we will have no success in promoting humane policies if we don’t make some inroads in supporting the legitimacy and functionality of our democratic system.

  111. The NYT piece is not supportive of private agreement between Trump and Putin. It shows Russia hedging its bets if Trump succeeds, but it is crazy to imagine they would spend so much time supporting Chávez and then Maduro and then decide to risk it all with a bunch of unknowns. But hedging their bets is what any government operating on the basis of realpokitk (sp?) would do. Btw, I get a kick out of the mainstream press in the US on foreign affairs— if we had a government run operation there often wouldn’t be much difference.
    Trump’s foreign policy is to a large extent in the hands of people who want to pressure Iran ( ending the nuclear deal was not Putin and the war in Yemen is part of the anti- Iranian policy) and in the Western Hemisphere they are back in Cold War Cuba Lobby mode. If Marco Rubio were President we’d be doing the same thing, as in fact Rubio and Abrams seem to be the brains ( loosely speaking) behind the operation. Trump strikes me and probably most people as someone who can be easily manipulated by people who know how to flatter him.

  112. The NYT piece is not supportive of private agreement between Trump and Putin. It shows Russia hedging its bets if Trump succeeds, but it is crazy to imagine they would spend so much time supporting Chávez and then Maduro and then decide to risk it all with a bunch of unknowns. But hedging their bets is what any government operating on the basis of realpokitk (sp?) would do. Btw, I get a kick out of the mainstream press in the US on foreign affairs— if we had a government run operation there often wouldn’t be much difference.
    Trump’s foreign policy is to a large extent in the hands of people who want to pressure Iran ( ending the nuclear deal was not Putin and the war in Yemen is part of the anti- Iranian policy) and in the Western Hemisphere they are back in Cold War Cuba Lobby mode. If Marco Rubio were President we’d be doing the same thing, as in fact Rubio and Abrams seem to be the brains ( loosely speaking) behind the operation. Trump strikes me and probably most people as someone who can be easily manipulated by people who know how to flatter him.

  113. Hmm. We are arguing again, sapient. This never ends well. You get the last word if you want, even if I strongly disagree.

  114. Hmm. We are arguing again, sapient. This never ends well. You get the last word if you want, even if I strongly disagree.

  115. The NYT piece is not supportive of private agreement.
    The evidence of a private agreement is that they keep meeting in private.

  116. The NYT piece is not supportive of private agreement.
    The evidence of a private agreement is that they keep meeting in private.

  117. I don’t believe there’s any explicit agreement between Trump and Putin – Putin isn’t foolish enough to trust Trump to keep to an agreement, or to keep an agreement confidential.
    Obviously, Putin wanted Trump to be president – it’s in Russia’s interest to have a greedy fool as president of the USA. And obviously, it’s unwise of the US to let Russia choose its president.
    Meanwhile, the US electorate is largely indifferent to its government murdering and torturing overseas. It used to care about gross criminality at home. Apparently republican voters no longer do.

  118. I don’t believe there’s any explicit agreement between Trump and Putin – Putin isn’t foolish enough to trust Trump to keep to an agreement, or to keep an agreement confidential.
    Obviously, Putin wanted Trump to be president – it’s in Russia’s interest to have a greedy fool as president of the USA. And obviously, it’s unwise of the US to let Russia choose its president.
    Meanwhile, the US electorate is largely indifferent to its government murdering and torturing overseas. It used to care about gross criminality at home. Apparently republican voters no longer do.

  119. Russell there was no need to apologize again
    Thank you, that is very generous of you.
    Thank you, and GFTNC, for your additional kind words. To be honest, I hardly know what to say about anything anymore. Every day us is like a fresh new adventure in the land of WTF.
    Better days.

  120. Russell there was no need to apologize again
    Thank you, that is very generous of you.
    Thank you, and GFTNC, for your additional kind words. To be honest, I hardly know what to say about anything anymore. Every day us is like a fresh new adventure in the land of WTF.
    Better days.

  121. There has been a pause in the Force thread.
    As an unhinged left winger in the thrall of the fantasy economics of MMT (Make Money Tendentious) the fact that Strumpf and Phewtin have talked privately in not evidence of, well, much of anything beyond a bit of (I would wholeheartedly agree) worrisome speculation. We’ll see what comes of this.
    2. Putting the screws to Iran is contrary to Russian interests in the ME. Full stop. This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that. To me, it just shows Strumpf to be an idiot.
    3. Russian policy viz Venezuela is more of a jab a stick in the eye of the US than an important part of any Russian assessment of their vital national interests. Bottom line: It is not anything to be taken with any great level of seriousness or concern. The US policy to intervene in that nation’s affairs is.
    4. Strump’s NATO peregrinations more closely align with Phewtin major policy goals. I should think this is where Russian national interests are highest. Worrisome level: High.
    5. I, for one, continue to be outraged by US support (Jaredskyism) for the Saudis and their genocide in Yemen. Also contrary to Russian interests. Interest level? Salaciously tantalizing. Phewtin lackeyism? I don’t get that.
    6. It is remarkable that sapient defended the Obama drone policy but now chastises the left for not condemning the remarkably similar Strumft drone civilian remote civilian execution policy. The technical term for this is bullshit. PS: I FOR ONE UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS POLICY. Just sayin’.
    On the whole? Strumpf haz to go. He is a fascist thug. On this, sapient and I agree wholeheartedly.

  122. There has been a pause in the Force thread.
    As an unhinged left winger in the thrall of the fantasy economics of MMT (Make Money Tendentious) the fact that Strumpf and Phewtin have talked privately in not evidence of, well, much of anything beyond a bit of (I would wholeheartedly agree) worrisome speculation. We’ll see what comes of this.
    2. Putting the screws to Iran is contrary to Russian interests in the ME. Full stop. This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that. To me, it just shows Strumpf to be an idiot.
    3. Russian policy viz Venezuela is more of a jab a stick in the eye of the US than an important part of any Russian assessment of their vital national interests. Bottom line: It is not anything to be taken with any great level of seriousness or concern. The US policy to intervene in that nation’s affairs is.
    4. Strump’s NATO peregrinations more closely align with Phewtin major policy goals. I should think this is where Russian national interests are highest. Worrisome level: High.
    5. I, for one, continue to be outraged by US support (Jaredskyism) for the Saudis and their genocide in Yemen. Also contrary to Russian interests. Interest level? Salaciously tantalizing. Phewtin lackeyism? I don’t get that.
    6. It is remarkable that sapient defended the Obama drone policy but now chastises the left for not condemning the remarkably similar Strumft drone civilian remote civilian execution policy. The technical term for this is bullshit. PS: I FOR ONE UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS POLICY. Just sayin’.
    On the whole? Strumpf haz to go. He is a fascist thug. On this, sapient and I agree wholeheartedly.

  123. It used to care about gross criminality at home.
    Well, sometimes. Like most other places, we are willing to put up with a good deal of such behavior as long as “our side” gets the goodies.
    Nobody is wholly innocent.

  124. It used to care about gross criminality at home.
    Well, sometimes. Like most other places, we are willing to put up with a good deal of such behavior as long as “our side” gets the goodies.
    Nobody is wholly innocent.

  125. it is crazy to imagine they would spend so much time supporting Chávez and then Maduro and then decide to risk it all with a bunch of unknowns
    It’s not that crazy, once you consider the loss (Chavez, Maduro, etc.) compared to the gain (Trump and the havoc he is creating). Losing Venezuela is a small, tiny even, price to pay to maybe give Trump a “win” that might get him reelected.

  126. it is crazy to imagine they would spend so much time supporting Chávez and then Maduro and then decide to risk it all with a bunch of unknowns
    It’s not that crazy, once you consider the loss (Chavez, Maduro, etc.) compared to the gain (Trump and the havoc he is creating). Losing Venezuela is a small, tiny even, price to pay to maybe give Trump a “win” that might get him reelected.

  127. I don’t believe there’s any explicit agreement between Trump and Putin – Putin isn’t foolish enough to trust Trump to keep to an agreement, or to keep an agreement confidential.
    Depends on the kind of “agreement.” If it’s a “Do X and in return I won’t reveal Y and destroy you” type agreement, Trump would keep it and keep it confidential. Because that’s the kind of mob-based deal he knows he can’t stiff the other party over.

  128. I don’t believe there’s any explicit agreement between Trump and Putin – Putin isn’t foolish enough to trust Trump to keep to an agreement, or to keep an agreement confidential.
    Depends on the kind of “agreement.” If it’s a “Do X and in return I won’t reveal Y and destroy you” type agreement, Trump would keep it and keep it confidential. Because that’s the kind of mob-based deal he knows he can’t stiff the other party over.

  129. 2. Putting the screws to Iran is contrary to Russian interests in the ME. Full stop. This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that. To me, it just shows Strumpf to be an idiot.
    Say rather that Trump isn’t solely in Putin’s pocket. Putin can get him to do some things, but not everything; so he saves his leverage for big stuff (e.g. sanctions relief, avoiding US support for Ukraine, etc.). But the biggest win for Putin is damaging the US, especially its alliances. And going nuts over Iran does more good in that line than the loss that might be suffered in the ME. It’s about priorities.
    No question Trump is an idiot. And a massively uninformed one. But for Putin, he’s a useful idiot.

  130. 2. Putting the screws to Iran is contrary to Russian interests in the ME. Full stop. This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that. To me, it just shows Strumpf to be an idiot.
    Say rather that Trump isn’t solely in Putin’s pocket. Putin can get him to do some things, but not everything; so he saves his leverage for big stuff (e.g. sanctions relief, avoiding US support for Ukraine, etc.). But the biggest win for Putin is damaging the US, especially its alliances. And going nuts over Iran does more good in that line than the loss that might be suffered in the ME. It’s about priorities.
    No question Trump is an idiot. And a massively uninformed one. But for Putin, he’s a useful idiot.

  131. 6. It is remarkable that sapient defended the Obama drone policy but now chastises the left for not condemning the remarkably similar Strumft drone civilian remote civilian execution policy. The technical term for this is bullshit. PS: I FOR ONE UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS POLICY. Just sayin’.
    That’s nice, bobbyp. Did you look at the article I linked to earlier? This one? It’s heartening to learn that you have some kind of consistency in your objection to drones, but why isn’t anyone talking about it anymore when it was a daily obsession during the Obama administration, and when , now, Trump has decided to hide the civilian casualty rate?
    Same same, I guess, with no consideration at all to what the rationale was offered. Yes, I did support Obama, and his drone war. I supported his attempt to regulate procedures and practices. We were trying to (in the aftermath of the Bush tragedy) avoid leaving vulnerable places in complete turmoil.
    Obama inherited three wars. He dealt with that admirably.
    Strumpf haz to go. He is a fascist thug. On this, sapient and I agree wholeheartedly.
    Yes, and my argument here with anyone who is with us on that is an exercise.

  132. 6. It is remarkable that sapient defended the Obama drone policy but now chastises the left for not condemning the remarkably similar Strumft drone civilian remote civilian execution policy. The technical term for this is bullshit. PS: I FOR ONE UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS POLICY. Just sayin’.
    That’s nice, bobbyp. Did you look at the article I linked to earlier? This one? It’s heartening to learn that you have some kind of consistency in your objection to drones, but why isn’t anyone talking about it anymore when it was a daily obsession during the Obama administration, and when , now, Trump has decided to hide the civilian casualty rate?
    Same same, I guess, with no consideration at all to what the rationale was offered. Yes, I did support Obama, and his drone war. I supported his attempt to regulate procedures and practices. We were trying to (in the aftermath of the Bush tragedy) avoid leaving vulnerable places in complete turmoil.
    Obama inherited three wars. He dealt with that admirably.
    Strumpf haz to go. He is a fascist thug. On this, sapient and I agree wholeheartedly.
    Yes, and my argument here with anyone who is with us on that is an exercise.

  133. The pipeline from Russia to Germany is an example of where Trump is on the side of the Ukraine and against Russia.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/25/nord-stream-2-russian-gas-pipeline-likely-to-go-ahead-after-eu-deal
    As for Putin losing Venezuela to give Trump a win, I think that is unlikely. If Venezuela collapses into civil war or we intervene, it’s not a win for Trump. It is only a win if he gets his regime change without a civil war or mass starvation.
    On the Ukraine, Trump supplied them with anti tank missiles.
    It’s pretty clear who Trump does collude with— the Saudis. Flynn also met with the Russian ambassador while Obama was in office, but on behalf of Israel. They wanted Russia to side with Israel in opposition to Obama’s abstention on a vote condemning settlements. Russia didn’t play along.
    I do think Trump’s chaotic policies do weaken the US and so long as things don’t get too far out of control Putin might see this as a positive, but I doubt he appreciates Trump’s policies on the pipeline or his giving weapons to the Ukrainians or the push to topple Maduro or the pressure on Iran. Personally I don’t care whether Putin sees our stupid wars and interventions as positive or negative. It’s probably hard for Putin to know in some cases whether Trump’s actions help or hurt him.
    I also think much of the foreign policy establishment opposition to Trump comes from people who want a better more competent warmonger in charge.

  134. The pipeline from Russia to Germany is an example of where Trump is on the side of the Ukraine and against Russia.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/25/nord-stream-2-russian-gas-pipeline-likely-to-go-ahead-after-eu-deal
    As for Putin losing Venezuela to give Trump a win, I think that is unlikely. If Venezuela collapses into civil war or we intervene, it’s not a win for Trump. It is only a win if he gets his regime change without a civil war or mass starvation.
    On the Ukraine, Trump supplied them with anti tank missiles.
    It’s pretty clear who Trump does collude with— the Saudis. Flynn also met with the Russian ambassador while Obama was in office, but on behalf of Israel. They wanted Russia to side with Israel in opposition to Obama’s abstention on a vote condemning settlements. Russia didn’t play along.
    I do think Trump’s chaotic policies do weaken the US and so long as things don’t get too far out of control Putin might see this as a positive, but I doubt he appreciates Trump’s policies on the pipeline or his giving weapons to the Ukrainians or the push to topple Maduro or the pressure on Iran. Personally I don’t care whether Putin sees our stupid wars and interventions as positive or negative. It’s probably hard for Putin to know in some cases whether Trump’s actions help or hurt him.
    I also think much of the foreign policy establishment opposition to Trump comes from people who want a better more competent warmonger in charge.

  135. If Venezuela collapses into civil war or we intervene, it’s not a win for Trump. It is only a win if he gets his regime change without a civil war or mass starvation.
    No, that’s what you would see as a win. But a lot of Trump supporters would see any regime change as a win. No matter how ugly; no matter how much avoidable collateral damage.

  136. If Venezuela collapses into civil war or we intervene, it’s not a win for Trump. It is only a win if he gets his regime change without a civil war or mass starvation.
    No, that’s what you would see as a win. But a lot of Trump supporters would see any regime change as a win. No matter how ugly; no matter how much avoidable collateral damage.

  137. Putin doesn’t give much of a damn about Venezuela.
    His overriding objective is his own personal survival, and dealing with any threats to it. In that context, preventing Ukraine from joining the EU at some point in the future is of far more importance.
    Russia, with the GDP of a middling European nation, has nowhere near the economic resources to compete with either the US, China or the EU in anything constructive. Disruption is much cheaper.
    And I don’t think he expected Trump to win any more than Trump did. The original intent behind any interference was to weaken a President Clinton.

  138. Putin doesn’t give much of a damn about Venezuela.
    His overriding objective is his own personal survival, and dealing with any threats to it. In that context, preventing Ukraine from joining the EU at some point in the future is of far more importance.
    Russia, with the GDP of a middling European nation, has nowhere near the economic resources to compete with either the US, China or the EU in anything constructive. Disruption is much cheaper.
    And I don’t think he expected Trump to win any more than Trump did. The original intent behind any interference was to weaken a President Clinton.

  141. Yes, but look at the population, area and per capita GDP of Luxembourg.
    It is not a realistic model for very many other countries.

  142. Yes, but look at the population, area and per capita GDP of Luxembourg.
    It is not a realistic model for very many other countries.

  143. Yes, but look at the population, area and per capita GDP of Luxembourg.
    Yes, instead we have 50,000 miles of highway. Generally free to all (for ‘generally’, I’m looking at you, Mass Pike).
    What we don’t have anymore is a critical mass of belief in shared public effort for the common good.
    This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that.
    People who are looking for video of Trump and Putin discussing quid pro quo in a back room somewhere watch too much TV. For one thing, Trump might be naive enough to entangle himself in something that obvious, Putin is not.
    The points of contact between principals of Trump’s campaign and people in Putin’s circles of intelligence and kleptocracy is remarkable for its number and variety. The points of contact between Trump’s private business affairs and Russian criminals and criminal money, even more so. The range of opportunities for Russian influence on Trump, both governmental and criminal, is quite broad.
    All of that is just the Russian side of things.
    Trump is corrupt. He’s not corrupt because of being POTUS, he was corrupt long before then. Corruption and self-dealing is just an approach, and a life-long habit, that he brings to the office.
    There isn’t going to be a transcript of Putin offering Trump a hotel in Moscow in exchange for the Ukraine, or relief from Magnitzky, or even a good deal on some nice Manhattan condos. Putin is not going to incur that kind of personal exposure.
    He runs Russia like a criminal enterprise, with endless opportunities for graft, theft, and corruption. That’s like catnip to Trump. And not just to Trump, but to the bizarre parade of crooks that he surrounds himself with. Putin, personally, doesn’t have to do a freaking thing but stand back and watch.
    I have no idea what Putin wants as regards Iran. I know he hates NATO. And all he’s had to do to encourage the US to weaken its support for NATO is tell Trump how the NATO countries are playing us for chumps.
    I have no idea if Trump is stupid or not. I don’t know what he has by way of cognitive equipment. What is plainly obvious is that he is sufficiently vain and fragile that he can be played like a fucking violin.
    Putin doesn’t have to give him anything. He just has to tell him what a misunderstood genius he is, and Trump will do the rest on his own. He’ll even think it was his own idea.

  144. Yes, but look at the population, area and per capita GDP of Luxembourg.
    Yes, instead we have 50,000 miles of highway. Generally free to all (for ‘generally’, I’m looking at you, Mass Pike).
    What we don’t have anymore is a critical mass of belief in shared public effort for the common good.
    This obviously makes Strumpf a lackey to Phewtin? I don’t get that.
    People who are looking for video of Trump and Putin discussing quid pro quo in a back room somewhere watch too much TV. For one thing, Trump might be naive enough to entangle himself in something that obvious, Putin is not.
    The points of contact between principals of Trump’s campaign and people in Putin’s circles of intelligence and kleptocracy is remarkable for its number and variety. The points of contact between Trump’s private business affairs and Russian criminals and criminal money, even more so. The range of opportunities for Russian influence on Trump, both governmental and criminal, is quite broad.
    All of that is just the Russian side of things.
    Trump is corrupt. He’s not corrupt because of being POTUS, he was corrupt long before then. Corruption and self-dealing is just an approach, and a life-long habit, that he brings to the office.
    There isn’t going to be a transcript of Putin offering Trump a hotel in Moscow in exchange for the Ukraine, or relief from Magnitzky, or even a good deal on some nice Manhattan condos. Putin is not going to incur that kind of personal exposure.
    He runs Russia like a criminal enterprise, with endless opportunities for graft, theft, and corruption. That’s like catnip to Trump. And not just to Trump, but to the bizarre parade of crooks that he surrounds himself with. Putin, personally, doesn’t have to do a freaking thing but stand back and watch.
    I have no idea what Putin wants as regards Iran. I know he hates NATO. And all he’s had to do to encourage the US to weaken its support for NATO is tell Trump how the NATO countries are playing us for chumps.
    I have no idea if Trump is stupid or not. I don’t know what he has by way of cognitive equipment. What is plainly obvious is that he is sufficiently vain and fragile that he can be played like a fucking violin.
    Putin doesn’t have to give him anything. He just has to tell him what a misunderstood genius he is, and Trump will do the rest on his own. He’ll even think it was his own idea.

  145. The pipeline from Russia to Germany is an example of where Trump is on the side of the Ukraine and against Russia.
    I don’t believe that Trump’s opinion on that is authentic. It is a way that he could say to Angela Merkel, “You’re the puppet!”
    Putin doesn’t give much of a damn about Venezuela.
    That’s my impression as well. More on that.
    It’s pretty clear who Trump does collude with— the Saudis.
    Sure. Trump loves abominable dictators. He doesn’t just work with them because of historical alliances – he loves them.

  146. The pipeline from Russia to Germany is an example of where Trump is on the side of the Ukraine and against Russia.
    I don’t believe that Trump’s opinion on that is authentic. It is a way that he could say to Angela Merkel, “You’re the puppet!”
    Putin doesn’t give much of a damn about Venezuela.
    That’s my impression as well. More on that.
    It’s pretty clear who Trump does collude with— the Saudis.
    Sure. Trump loves abominable dictators. He doesn’t just work with them because of historical alliances – he loves them.

  147. “I have no idea what Putin wants as regards Iran. I know he hates NATO. And all he’s had to do to encourage the US to weaken its support for NATO is tell Trump how the NATO countries are playing us for chumps.”
    Now that I agree with. That is how Trump thinks and everyone knows it,
    More later maybe.

  148. “I have no idea what Putin wants as regards Iran. I know he hates NATO. And all he’s had to do to encourage the US to weaken its support for NATO is tell Trump how the NATO countries are playing us for chumps.”
    Now that I agree with. That is how Trump thinks and everyone knows it,
    More later maybe.

  153. Elaborating slightly—
    Practically everything Trump does can be explained by his focus on money and the desire to be seen as a winner who shafts the losers. Anyone who understands this can probably manipulate him. Trump doesn’t understand the concept of being a good ally to others, only that others should help him.
    In the campaign Trump said he was a critic of our Mideast wars, but he also said we should take their oil. One of his team, I think Bolton, explicitly mentioned oil as a motive for intervening in Venezuela— the idea that Trump or his team gives a crap about humanitarian situations is a joke. He supports the war in Yemen in part because he thinks we are making tons of money selling the Saudis weapons. He wants NATO countries to pay more so we pay less and probably just sees NATO as a financial burden. And he hates being thought of as a sucker.
    I think Putin along with the rest of the planet knows this about him and yes, obviously if Putin has him alone he would probably try to take advantage of this.
    My theory anyway. I don’t think Putin is controlling Trump like a puppet. There is no strong reason to think that. You can assume it anyway, take cases where he does what Putin likes as proof and dismiss the opposing cases as Trump just pretending,but I doubt Trump is that subtle.

  154. Elaborating slightly—
    Practically everything Trump does can be explained by his focus on money and the desire to be seen as a winner who shafts the losers. Anyone who understands this can probably manipulate him. Trump doesn’t understand the concept of being a good ally to others, only that others should help him.
    In the campaign Trump said he was a critic of our Mideast wars, but he also said we should take their oil. One of his team, I think Bolton, explicitly mentioned oil as a motive for intervening in Venezuela— the idea that Trump or his team gives a crap about humanitarian situations is a joke. He supports the war in Yemen in part because he thinks we are making tons of money selling the Saudis weapons. He wants NATO countries to pay more so we pay less and probably just sees NATO as a financial burden. And he hates being thought of as a sucker.
    I think Putin along with the rest of the planet knows this about him and yes, obviously if Putin has him alone he would probably try to take advantage of this.
    My theory anyway. I don’t think Putin is controlling Trump like a puppet. There is no strong reason to think that. You can assume it anyway, take cases where he does what Putin likes as proof and dismiss the opposing cases as Trump just pretending,but I doubt Trump is that subtle.

  157. “But a lot of Trump supporters would see any regime change as a win. No matter how ugly; no matter how much avoidable collateral damage.”
    Forgot to reply, but I don’t think this is necessarily correct. For one thing if Venezuela becomes Syria then we have ten million refugees, some of them heading this way. There is a good chance we intervene. Even Republicans started to see Iraq as a mess after a few years and Trump ran ( dishonestly) as someone who criticized the other Republicans for getting into stupid wars.
    And I just don’t see Putin encouraging the overthrow of an ally merely for some hypothetical Trump victory that might or might not help in in 2020,
    People are way too inclined to concoct complicated conspiracies about Putin and Trump. If Putin thought he could nudge Trump into weakening NATO, I think it is likely he would have done so in those private talks. Venezuela and Iran are Putin’s allies, so no, I don’t think Putin wants to push Trump against them. There are other people around Trump who want to push him in those directions.

  158. “But a lot of Trump supporters would see any regime change as a win. No matter how ugly; no matter how much avoidable collateral damage.”
    Forgot to reply, but I don’t think this is necessarily correct. For one thing if Venezuela becomes Syria then we have ten million refugees, some of them heading this way. There is a good chance we intervene. Even Republicans started to see Iraq as a mess after a few years and Trump ran ( dishonestly) as someone who criticized the other Republicans for getting into stupid wars.
    And I just don’t see Putin encouraging the overthrow of an ally merely for some hypothetical Trump victory that might or might not help in in 2020,
    People are way too inclined to concoct complicated conspiracies about Putin and Trump. If Putin thought he could nudge Trump into weakening NATO, I think it is likely he would have done so in those private talks. Venezuela and Iran are Putin’s allies, so no, I don’t think Putin wants to push Trump against them. There are other people around Trump who want to push him in those directions.

  159. Venezuela is not, and will not be Syria, civil war or not.
    And there are already over three million refugees.

  160. Venezuela is not, and will not be Syria, civil war or not.
    And there are already over three million refugees.

  161. Yes there are, in part because of Maduro and in part because of sanctions.
    I am not sure where your confidence that Venezuela could not become Syria comes from, unless you mean plate tectonics doesn’t work fast enough to move places several thousand miles in a human lifetime. Could there be a bloody civil war in Latin America? Um, yeah. Could the US pour massive amounts of weapons into Venezuela the way we did in Syria? You betcha, though I think the Democrats will not let it go that far.
    By the way, one drawback in the time people spend criticizing Trump as a nitwit is that it takes away time that could be spent criticizing Marco Rubio as a nitwit and psychopath.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/1104862268305690628
    That’s the nitwit part. The psychopath part is when he put up photos on his Twitter account of a captured bloodied Gaddafi as a warning to Maduro

  162. Yes there are, in part because of Maduro and in part because of sanctions.
    I am not sure where your confidence that Venezuela could not become Syria comes from, unless you mean plate tectonics doesn’t work fast enough to move places several thousand miles in a human lifetime. Could there be a bloody civil war in Latin America? Um, yeah. Could the US pour massive amounts of weapons into Venezuela the way we did in Syria? You betcha, though I think the Democrats will not let it go that far.
    By the way, one drawback in the time people spend criticizing Trump as a nitwit is that it takes away time that could be spent criticizing Marco Rubio as a nitwit and psychopath.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/1104862268305690628
    That’s the nitwit part. The psychopath part is when he put up photos on his Twitter account of a captured bloodied Gaddafi as a warning to Maduro

  163. Trump loves abominable dictators. He doesn’t just work with them because of historical alliances – he loves them.
    Well like attracts like. They run their countries the way he always ran his businesses — like a criminal enterprise. And he’s seriously frustrated these days because people keep stopping him when he tries to run the US government the same way. (After all, it always worked out good for him before — for him, and nothing else matters.) It also makes him a sucker for sympathy from them about people getting in his way.

  164. Trump loves abominable dictators. He doesn’t just work with them because of historical alliances – he loves them.
    Well like attracts like. They run their countries the way he always ran his businesses — like a criminal enterprise. And he’s seriously frustrated these days because people keep stopping him when he tries to run the US government the same way. (After all, it always worked out good for him before — for him, and nothing else matters.) It also makes him a sucker for sympathy from them about people getting in his way.

  165. Though no, I don’t think Venezuela will fall into full scale civil war of the sort Elliot Abrams was involved in during the 80’s.

  166. Though no, I don’t think Venezuela will fall into full scale civil war of the sort Elliot Abrams was involved in during the 80’s.

  169. I’m feeling like an idiot for not realizing that, to someone as obsessed by oil as Trump (“We should just take their oil” regarding the Middle East), what would matter in Venezuela would be the oil. For that, getting rid of the current regime would be a win, no matter what else happened.

  170. I’m feeling like an idiot for not realizing that, to someone as obsessed by oil as Trump (“We should just take their oil” regarding the Middle East), what would matter in Venezuela would be the oil. For that, getting rid of the current regime would be a win, no matter what else happened.

  173. The BJ Betty Cracker piece that sapient links to quotes George Galloway, liberal MP, as follows:
    “I want Britain post-Brexit to be what it was in the Swinging 60s, when we were the cultural capital of the world. When we had a steel industry, when we had a coal industry – when we were something!”
    This kind of nostalgia is something I think about from time to time. I live in New England. Once we were more or less agriculturally self-sufficient. Then we werent, because the north-west territory opened up and all the farmers left, because the land was better and the growing season was longer.
    Once we were the home of the American industrial revolution. Then, manufacturing left, to be close to resources or cheap labor. When I moved to Salem MA in 1983, I lived down the street from what had been mill buildings, and which were at that point kind of semi-derelict.
    To be honest, the area I live in was kind of run down. The tech industry hadn’t really taken off at the scale it is now, and things weren’t that great.
    All the factory jobs, in particular, had gone “offshore” to the South. THanks for nothing, you guys.
    It’s much better now. Not perfect, just better. It took thought, and investment, and time, and work. Lots of each of those things.
    You know what didn’t work? Wishing that the mills, or the shoe makers,or manufacturing, or whatever, would magically return and whisk us back to when we were whatever the heck we were in 1800, or 1850, or 1900, or 1950.
    Things change. You have to adapt or die. It’s the iron law of life on earth, just ask Darwin.
    People who dream of life returning to what it was when they were kids, or their parents or grandparents were kids, are not going to get their wish. People who put their faith in people who promise stuff like that are headed for disappointment.

  174. The BJ Betty Cracker piece that sapient links to quotes George Galloway, liberal MP, as follows:
    “I want Britain post-Brexit to be what it was in the Swinging 60s, when we were the cultural capital of the world. When we had a steel industry, when we had a coal industry – when we were something!”
    This kind of nostalgia is something I think about from time to time. I live in New England. Once we were more or less agriculturally self-sufficient. Then we werent, because the north-west territory opened up and all the farmers left, because the land was better and the growing season was longer.
    Once we were the home of the American industrial revolution. Then, manufacturing left, to be close to resources or cheap labor. When I moved to Salem MA in 1983, I lived down the street from what had been mill buildings, and which were at that point kind of semi-derelict.
    To be honest, the area I live in was kind of run down. The tech industry hadn’t really taken off at the scale it is now, and things weren’t that great.
    All the factory jobs, in particular, had gone “offshore” to the South. THanks for nothing, you guys.
    It’s much better now. Not perfect, just better. It took thought, and investment, and time, and work. Lots of each of those things.
    You know what didn’t work? Wishing that the mills, or the shoe makers,or manufacturing, or whatever, would magically return and whisk us back to when we were whatever the heck we were in 1800, or 1850, or 1900, or 1950.
    Things change. You have to adapt or die. It’s the iron law of life on earth, just ask Darwin.
    People who dream of life returning to what it was when they were kids, or their parents or grandparents were kids, are not going to get their wish. People who put their faith in people who promise stuff like that are headed for disappointment.

  175. We are presently living in the best period in human history regardless of the short term ups and downs.

  176. We are presently living in the best period in human history regardless of the short term ups and downs.

  177. We are presently living in the best period in human history regardless of the short term ups and downs.
    I would be willing to go along with that (as a general statement), but I value the environment and other species, and they aren’t doing so well. And if we look beyond our own material comfort, we won’t be doing well either if we can’t find sustenance, solace and beauty in the natural world. I’m not as pessimistic as some who think that we can’t turn things around, but we don’t have much time.

  178. We are presently living in the best period in human history regardless of the short term ups and downs.
    I would be willing to go along with that (as a general statement), but I value the environment and other species, and they aren’t doing so well. And if we look beyond our own material comfort, we won’t be doing well either if we can’t find sustenance, solace and beauty in the natural world. I’m not as pessimistic as some who think that we can’t turn things around, but we don’t have much time.

  179. You know what didn’t work? Wishing that the mills, or the shoe makers,or manufacturing, or whatever, would magically return and whisk us back to when we were whatever the heck we were in 1800, or 1850, or 1900, or 1950.
    What is seriously stupid is nostalgia for buggy whip manufacturing. While having no willingness to abandon the automobiles which drove them out of business. But that’s the level of reality that we keep seeing.

  180. You know what didn’t work? Wishing that the mills, or the shoe makers,or manufacturing, or whatever, would magically return and whisk us back to when we were whatever the heck we were in 1800, or 1850, or 1900, or 1950.
    What is seriously stupid is nostalgia for buggy whip manufacturing. While having no willingness to abandon the automobiles which drove them out of business. But that’s the level of reality that we keep seeing.

  187. Sorry about the sarcasm, Nigel. I am giving myself a time out
    No need to apologise, Donald. Sarcasm is entirely fair game if not overdone.
    Venezuela, civil war or not, will not become Syria as they don’t have any equivalent of IS; they are not going to see intensive bombing campaigns by their, the US , or the Russian airforce; and one of the two sides will win the conflict, rather than the several sides in Syria, which have all lost.
    And the refugees are also there because of Chavez. Of whom Maduro is merely a far less charismatic shadow.

  188. Sorry about the sarcasm, Nigel. I am giving myself a time out
    No need to apologise, Donald. Sarcasm is entirely fair game if not overdone.
    Venezuela, civil war or not, will not become Syria as they don’t have any equivalent of IS; they are not going to see intensive bombing campaigns by their, the US , or the Russian airforce; and one of the two sides will win the conflict, rather than the several sides in Syria, which have all lost.
    And the refugees are also there because of Chavez. Of whom Maduro is merely a far less charismatic shadow.

  189. Galloway is not a liberal.
    I’m happy to defer to you that point. My point is that the kind of nostalgic looking back to “when we were something” has never and will never result in once again “being something”.
    “Being something”, in the terms that Galloway invokes – confidence, a sense of being successful and of being a deservedly consequential presence in the world – requires actual achievement.
    That thing your parents and grand-parents did 50 or 60 years ago (or 70, or 100) is not your achievement.
    The conditions for the kind of “being something” Galloway remembers – we call it “being great” over here – don’t exist anymore. Nobody is going to be “great again” in the sense of re-creating successes of an earlier generation. We need to address the conditions we live in now.
    And, probably worry less about “being something” or “being great again”, and more about being effective, and realistic, and good.
    We are presently living in the best period in human history
    Tell it to somebody who’s living on less than $2.50 a day. That’s about 3 billion people.
    Not everyone is living in first world nirvana.

  190. Galloway is not a liberal.
    I’m happy to defer to you that point. My point is that the kind of nostalgic looking back to “when we were something” has never and will never result in once again “being something”.
    “Being something”, in the terms that Galloway invokes – confidence, a sense of being successful and of being a deservedly consequential presence in the world – requires actual achievement.
    That thing your parents and grand-parents did 50 or 60 years ago (or 70, or 100) is not your achievement.
    The conditions for the kind of “being something” Galloway remembers – we call it “being great” over here – don’t exist anymore. Nobody is going to be “great again” in the sense of re-creating successes of an earlier generation. We need to address the conditions we live in now.
    And, probably worry less about “being something” or “being great again”, and more about being effective, and realistic, and good.
    We are presently living in the best period in human history
    Tell it to somebody who’s living on less than $2.50 a day. That’s about 3 billion people.
    Not everyone is living in first world nirvana.

  191. Tell it to somebody who’s living on less than $2.50 a day. That’s about 3 billion people.
    Human poverty certainly isn’t solved. But it has been reduced significantly compared to the rest of human history, as have casualties of war. I would never suggest that we should abandon efforts towards alleviating poverty or pursuing peaceful means to resolve disputes, but we know how to do those things as shown by our significant progress.
    Whereas we are losing ground on the environment, and need to reverse that trend.

  192. Tell it to somebody who’s living on less than $2.50 a day. That’s about 3 billion people.
    Human poverty certainly isn’t solved. But it has been reduced significantly compared to the rest of human history, as have casualties of war. I would never suggest that we should abandon efforts towards alleviating poverty or pursuing peaceful means to resolve disputes, but we know how to do those things as shown by our significant progress.
    Whereas we are losing ground on the environment, and need to reverse that trend.

  193. What sapient said.
    It’s all too easy to see what lots of people don’t have today. And forget just how much worse it was in the past. Even for the relatively prosperous.
    It’s like the reason that people in 3rd world countries willingly work in sweat shops. And it is willingly. Sure, the conditions are miserable, and the pay looks tiny. To us. But to someone just off the (subsistence) farm, the conditions aren’t especially bad and the pay is darned good — compared to what they are coming from.
    That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to get it improved. Just that it doesn’t mean that they are being exploited compared to what they have to compare it with.

  194. What sapient said.
    It’s all too easy to see what lots of people don’t have today. And forget just how much worse it was in the past. Even for the relatively prosperous.
    It’s like the reason that people in 3rd world countries willingly work in sweat shops. And it is willingly. Sure, the conditions are miserable, and the pay looks tiny. To us. But to someone just off the (subsistence) farm, the conditions aren’t especially bad and the pay is darned good — compared to what they are coming from.
    That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to get it improved. Just that it doesn’t mean that they are being exploited compared to what they have to compare it with.

  195. But it has been reduced significantly compared to the rest of human history, as have casualties of war.
    Neither of these statements seem obviously true, to me.
    “The rest of human history” covers a lot of ground, and a lot of places. Blanket statements like “things are better now then they ever have been” depend, quite a lot, on the particular circumstances you’re talking about.
    We probably have the best antibiotics that humans have ever had, I’ll grant you that. If you live in a first world country, or if you have a lot of money no matter where you live, you’re living a pretty good life, historically or otherwise.
    I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.

  196. But it has been reduced significantly compared to the rest of human history, as have casualties of war.
    Neither of these statements seem obviously true, to me.
    “The rest of human history” covers a lot of ground, and a lot of places. Blanket statements like “things are better now then they ever have been” depend, quite a lot, on the particular circumstances you’re talking about.
    We probably have the best antibiotics that humans have ever had, I’ll grant you that. If you live in a first world country, or if you have a lot of money no matter where you live, you’re living a pretty good life, historically or otherwise.
    I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.

  197. If you live in a first world country, or if you have a lot of money no matter where you live, you’re living a pretty good life, historically or otherwise.
    I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.
    There may be a few places where civilization has collapsed for the moment. Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia. But in general, people today are doing better than people in the same places were doing a century ago. Even the quite poor ones are doing no worse. They may be doing worse than we are. Worse, even, than we were a century or two ago. But still, better than they were then.
    If anyone has counterexamples (excepting places temporarily, as in less than a couple of decades worth, impacted by wars), I’d be interested to know what they are and how they ate worse.

  198. If you live in a first world country, or if you have a lot of money no matter where you live, you’re living a pretty good life, historically or otherwise.
    I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.
    There may be a few places where civilization has collapsed for the moment. Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia. But in general, people today are doing better than people in the same places were doing a century ago. Even the quite poor ones are doing no worse. They may be doing worse than we are. Worse, even, than we were a century or two ago. But still, better than they were then.
    If anyone has counterexamples (excepting places temporarily, as in less than a couple of decades worth, impacted by wars), I’d be interested to know what they are and how they ate worse.

  199. I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.
    My thinking is this: Assuming the human race is generally better off than it has ever been, what then? How do I apply that information?
    Don’t worry? Be happy? Big TVs are super-cheap!

  200. I’m not persuaded by the rest of it.
    My thinking is this: Assuming the human race is generally better off than it has ever been, what then? How do I apply that information?
    Don’t worry? Be happy? Big TVs are super-cheap!

  201. Hey, if you really want that 1800’s lifestyle, just join the Amish or Mennonites, ditch the internet and electricity in your home, put the phone on a pole out in the yard, and learn to take care of the horse that pulls your buggy.
    It’s not for wimps.

  202. Hey, if you really want that 1800’s lifestyle, just join the Amish or Mennonites, ditch the internet and electricity in your home, put the phone on a pole out in the yard, and learn to take care of the horse that pulls your buggy.
    It’s not for wimps.

  203. “The rest of human history” covers a lot of ground, and a lot of places. Blanket statements like “things are better now then they ever have been” depend, quite a lot, on the particular circumstances you’re talking about.
    The human condition has always been a mixed bag, and wealthy people (especially in well functioning societies) have always been materially better off than the poor. Well people are physically better off than sick ones. Etc. Some people are happier than others because of their mental health, or psychological makeup. No general statement about the well-being of humanity is true of every person.
    And my optimism about the trajectory of human history from, say 1920 to now, is based on data. I’m not going to look it up for anyone, because it’s easy to prove. That said, our success is fragile if we don’t foster the conditions that created it.
    How do I apply that information?
    Number One: Tell any anti-vaccers you know to go stuff it. Number Two: Study how international institutions have helped to prevent world wars and do it more and better. Number Three: Understand that scientists who are predicting climate catastrophe are onto something, and support eliminating the dependence on fossil fuels. (Green new deal?) Number Four: Support human rights, civil rights, religious tolerance, equal access to justice.. Number Five: Support democratic institutions. Number Five: Work against monarchy, autocracy, other power monopolies and corruption.
    I’m sure there’s more, and that people’s can order their own priorities. Oh, and about TV and other technology – make it available as a tool of education instead of misinformation.
    The world always changes, and so do its challenges. Nobody said it was easy, but if anyone is in a position not to give up hope, it’s middle class (or wealthier) comfortable Westerners. And sure, even we have our individual peculiar life challenges and setbacks, some of them fatal.

  204. “The rest of human history” covers a lot of ground, and a lot of places. Blanket statements like “things are better now then they ever have been” depend, quite a lot, on the particular circumstances you’re talking about.
    The human condition has always been a mixed bag, and wealthy people (especially in well functioning societies) have always been materially better off than the poor. Well people are physically better off than sick ones. Etc. Some people are happier than others because of their mental health, or psychological makeup. No general statement about the well-being of humanity is true of every person.
    And my optimism about the trajectory of human history from, say 1920 to now, is based on data. I’m not going to look it up for anyone, because it’s easy to prove. That said, our success is fragile if we don’t foster the conditions that created it.
    How do I apply that information?
    Number One: Tell any anti-vaccers you know to go stuff it. Number Two: Study how international institutions have helped to prevent world wars and do it more and better. Number Three: Understand that scientists who are predicting climate catastrophe are onto something, and support eliminating the dependence on fossil fuels. (Green new deal?) Number Four: Support human rights, civil rights, religious tolerance, equal access to justice.. Number Five: Support democratic institutions. Number Five: Work against monarchy, autocracy, other power monopolies and corruption.
    I’m sure there’s more, and that people’s can order their own priorities. Oh, and about TV and other technology – make it available as a tool of education instead of misinformation.
    The world always changes, and so do its challenges. Nobody said it was easy, but if anyone is in a position not to give up hope, it’s middle class (or wealthier) comfortable Westerners. And sure, even we have our individual peculiar life challenges and setbacks, some of them fatal.

  205. Number Five: Support democratic institutions. Number Five: Work against monarchy, autocracy, other power monopolies and corruption.
    Number n: Learn to count.

  206. Number Five: Support democratic institutions. Number Five: Work against monarchy, autocracy, other power monopolies and corruption.
    Number n: Learn to count.

  207. Number One: Tell any anti-vaccers you know to go stuff it.
    As somebody (can’t remember who) recently commented quite wittily on twitter, anti-vaxxers suffering from measles etc are victims of Big Karma. (Too bad the children of anti-vaxxers get caught up in it too).

  208. Number One: Tell any anti-vaccers you know to go stuff it.
    As somebody (can’t remember who) recently commented quite wittily on twitter, anti-vaxxers suffering from measles etc are victims of Big Karma. (Too bad the children of anti-vaxxers get caught up in it too).

  209. Other than the “do it more and better” part, I don’t see what believing that humanity is now better off than ever has to do with all of the stuff you mentioned, sapient. I agree with all of it, mind you. I just don’t see how it follows.
    If anything, I tend to think that people who point out how much better things are now are trying to blunt criticism and thwart any evil government interventions on behalf of the less well-off.

  210. Other than the “do it more and better” part, I don’t see what believing that humanity is now better off than ever has to do with all of the stuff you mentioned, sapient. I agree with all of it, mind you. I just don’t see how it follows.
    If anything, I tend to think that people who point out how much better things are now are trying to blunt criticism and thwart any evil government interventions on behalf of the less well-off.

  213. If anything, I tend to think that people who point out how much better things are now are trying to blunt criticism and thwart any evil government interventions on behalf of the less well-off.
    I guess that people will make what they will of facts. My point is that we have the capacity to make things better, as shown by recent history. We need to apply our knowledge rather than rest on our laurels, because laurel wreaths are fragile.

  214. If anything, I tend to think that people who point out how much better things are now are trying to blunt criticism and thwart any evil government interventions on behalf of the less well-off.
    I guess that people will make what they will of facts. My point is that we have the capacity to make things better, as shown by recent history. We need to apply our knowledge rather than rest on our laurels, because laurel wreaths are fragile.

  215. No general statement about the well-being of humanity is true of every person.
    And my optimism about the trajectory of human history from, say 1920 to now, is based on data.
    I have no argument with either of these statements.
    Humans have been living in settled communities for 10,000 years. A hell of a lot of people – not just individuals, but communities of people, societies, cultures – have lived lives that would be seen as an improvement over the circumstances of folks who currently live on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day.
    Which is billions of people.
    As sapient says, I’m not going to go look it up for anybody, you all can do your own reading. It’s no biggie to me either way.
    I’m just not buying the “things have never been better…” line. It’s likely true if you live, for instance, in the US, or the EU, and have some money.
    A lot of people are not living that life.

  216. No general statement about the well-being of humanity is true of every person.
    And my optimism about the trajectory of human history from, say 1920 to now, is based on data.
    I have no argument with either of these statements.
    Humans have been living in settled communities for 10,000 years. A hell of a lot of people – not just individuals, but communities of people, societies, cultures – have lived lives that would be seen as an improvement over the circumstances of folks who currently live on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day.
    Which is billions of people.
    As sapient says, I’m not going to go look it up for anybody, you all can do your own reading. It’s no biggie to me either way.
    I’m just not buying the “things have never been better…” line. It’s likely true if you live, for instance, in the US, or the EU, and have some money.
    A lot of people are not living that life.

  217. I’ve noticed in real life that the people who tend to use the statistics showing how much better for most people in the world things are today (using such metrics as violence, disease, poverty, starvation etc) are usually rightwingers or libertarians, defending the status quo and arguing with lefties/liberals who want to improve things. This clearly (to me) does not apply to sapient, who is self-evidently about trying to make things better.
    It seems to me you can hold both opinions simultaneously: raw statistics show things have gotten better for most people in most places (I am not a statistician, but the stats are out there), and things are still shit for far too many people and need to be made better. In my view, people who concentrate on the former lack empathy and imagination. But, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, as a liberal I would think that wouldn’t I.

  218. I’ve noticed in real life that the people who tend to use the statistics showing how much better for most people in the world things are today (using such metrics as violence, disease, poverty, starvation etc) are usually rightwingers or libertarians, defending the status quo and arguing with lefties/liberals who want to improve things. This clearly (to me) does not apply to sapient, who is self-evidently about trying to make things better.
    It seems to me you can hold both opinions simultaneously: raw statistics show things have gotten better for most people in most places (I am not a statistician, but the stats are out there), and things are still shit for far too many people and need to be made better. In my view, people who concentrate on the former lack empathy and imagination. But, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, as a liberal I would think that wouldn’t I.

  219. Humans have been living in settled communities for 10,000 years. A hell of a lot of people – not just individuals, but communities of people, societies, cultures – have lived lives that would be seen as an improvement over the circumstances of folks who currently live on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day.
    It would be hard to poll the level of happiness of people who lived in ancient, or even recent settled communities. As a woman who values personal autonomy, I am living in the best place at the best time in history. Perhaps if my values were shaped by religious fundamentalism, my happiness level would be different. So, sure, we can’t really generalize at all, even for people who live elsewhere in the present, because we’re shaped by our own cultural standards.

  220. Humans have been living in settled communities for 10,000 years. A hell of a lot of people – not just individuals, but communities of people, societies, cultures – have lived lives that would be seen as an improvement over the circumstances of folks who currently live on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day.
    It would be hard to poll the level of happiness of people who lived in ancient, or even recent settled communities. As a woman who values personal autonomy, I am living in the best place at the best time in history. Perhaps if my values were shaped by religious fundamentalism, my happiness level would be different. So, sure, we can’t really generalize at all, even for people who live elsewhere in the present, because we’re shaped by our own cultural standards.

  221. Life expectancy is increasing all over the world. Including those people living on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day. So life has improved for them in ways that aren’t being measured in increased income.

  222. Life expectancy is increasing all over the world. Including those people living on the equivalent of single-digit dollars a day. So life has improved for them in ways that aren’t being measured in increased income.

  223. If anyone has Netflix, I would highly recommend watching the documentary “Period!” It’s only an hour long and its subject is a simple technology that’s (possibly) improving the lives of a lot of women. Not discussed is the environmental impact of that technology.
    We have a lot of work to do in figuring out how to make our technologies more sustainable. But I question the value of denying the positive impact of those technologies on people’s lives and choices.

  224. If anyone has Netflix, I would highly recommend watching the documentary “Period!” It’s only an hour long and its subject is a simple technology that’s (possibly) improving the lives of a lot of women. Not discussed is the environmental impact of that technology.
    We have a lot of work to do in figuring out how to make our technologies more sustainable. But I question the value of denying the positive impact of those technologies on people’s lives and choices.

  225. We have a lot of work to do in figuring out how to make our technologies more sustainable. But I question the value of denying the positive impact of those technologies on people’s lives and choices.
    I fully agree with your first sentence. While I don’t deny the positive impact of various technologies on people lives, I don’t want to ignore the potential long-term negative impacts (which is why I agree with your first sentence).
    Analogy time! Lyle Alzado was an all-pro NFL defensive end in the 70s and 80s. He did lots of steroids. He died in 1992 at the age of 43.
    In all likelihood, his high level of performance as a professional football player was due in no small part to his steroid use. The same can be said of his early death.
    I doubt I have to explain to this crowd how this analogy applies.

  226. We have a lot of work to do in figuring out how to make our technologies more sustainable. But I question the value of denying the positive impact of those technologies on people’s lives and choices.
    I fully agree with your first sentence. While I don’t deny the positive impact of various technologies on people lives, I don’t want to ignore the potential long-term negative impacts (which is why I agree with your first sentence).
    Analogy time! Lyle Alzado was an all-pro NFL defensive end in the 70s and 80s. He did lots of steroids. He died in 1992 at the age of 43.
    In all likelihood, his high level of performance as a professional football player was due in no small part to his steroid use. The same can be said of his early death.
    I doubt I have to explain to this crowd how this analogy applies.

  229. It would be hard to poll the level of happiness of people who lived in ancient, or even recent settled communities.
    Or, that matter, in many if not most places today.
    My point overall is that statements like “we are presently living in the best period in human history” are facile to the point of being almost meaningless.
    Best by what measure?
    Best for whom?
    If you live in the first world and have a reasonable amount of money, you’re probably living a pretty good life.
    If you live in other parts of the world and have a relatively large amount of money, ditto.
    That excludes something like half the people on the planet.
    Obviously things look better if we exclude events like civilizations collapsing and wars, but I’d say that rather begs the question. Exclude civilizations collapsing and wars and the Mongol invasions of Europe start to look kind of rosy.
    Human history is quite deep, and includes a fairly wide range of experiences. IMO it’s useful to not assume we, or our time, or our civilization and culture, are the best thing that’s ever happened.
    Over and out.

  230. It would be hard to poll the level of happiness of people who lived in ancient, or even recent settled communities.
    Or, that matter, in many if not most places today.
    My point overall is that statements like “we are presently living in the best period in human history” are facile to the point of being almost meaningless.
    Best by what measure?
    Best for whom?
    If you live in the first world and have a reasonable amount of money, you’re probably living a pretty good life.
    If you live in other parts of the world and have a relatively large amount of money, ditto.
    That excludes something like half the people on the planet.
    Obviously things look better if we exclude events like civilizations collapsing and wars, but I’d say that rather begs the question. Exclude civilizations collapsing and wars and the Mongol invasions of Europe start to look kind of rosy.
    Human history is quite deep, and includes a fairly wide range of experiences. IMO it’s useful to not assume we, or our time, or our civilization and culture, are the best thing that’s ever happened.
    Over and out.

  231. We’re making observations about the physical world and russell is going all metaphysical on us. 🙂

  232. We’re making observations about the physical world and russell is going all metaphysical on us. 🙂

  233. We’re making observations about the physical world and russell is going all metaphysical on us.
    I’ve conceded to russell that people’s subjective reality can’t be measured. But, russell, although I know you’re done with this conversation, when you say “If you live in the first world and have a reasonable amount of money, you’re probably living a pretty good life. If you live in other parts of the world and have a relatively large amount of money, ditto,” you are referring to your own standard of what “a pretty good life” is.
    Data is useless and “facile” for determining any one human being’s experience of meaning and happiness. But, as a measure of whether we’re making progress fighting global poverty, or decreasing the chances of being killed in a war, the positive numbers provide hope, and maybe some guidance.

  234. We’re making observations about the physical world and russell is going all metaphysical on us.
    I’ve conceded to russell that people’s subjective reality can’t be measured. But, russell, although I know you’re done with this conversation, when you say “If you live in the first world and have a reasonable amount of money, you’re probably living a pretty good life. If you live in other parts of the world and have a relatively large amount of money, ditto,” you are referring to your own standard of what “a pretty good life” is.
    Data is useless and “facile” for determining any one human being’s experience of meaning and happiness. But, as a measure of whether we’re making progress fighting global poverty, or decreasing the chances of being killed in a war, the positive numbers provide hope, and maybe some guidance.

  241. One age’s waste is another age’s archaeological treasure.
    32nd c archaeologist: “TMI!” or maybe “Squeak squeak! Chomp chomp!”

  242. One age’s waste is another age’s archaeological treasure.
    32nd c archaeologist: “TMI!” or maybe “Squeak squeak! Chomp chomp!”

  247. It seems to me you can hold both opinions simultaneously: raw statistics show things have gotten better for most people in most places (I am not a statistician, but the stats are out there), and things are still shit for far too many people and need to be made better. In my view, people who concentrate on the former lack empathy and imagination. But, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, as a liberal I would think that wouldn’t I.
    Just for the record, this conservative thinks so, too.
    I would just point out that failing to acknowledge the progress that has been made (which I have encountered numerous times from those to my left) is actually counterproductive — if they are so lost to reality, why pay attention to them on what’s needed next?

  248. It seems to me you can hold both opinions simultaneously: raw statistics show things have gotten better for most people in most places (I am not a statistician, but the stats are out there), and things are still shit for far too many people and need to be made better. In my view, people who concentrate on the former lack empathy and imagination. But, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, as a liberal I would think that wouldn’t I.
    Just for the record, this conservative thinks so, too.
    I would just point out that failing to acknowledge the progress that has been made (which I have encountered numerous times from those to my left) is actually counterproductive — if they are so lost to reality, why pay attention to them on what’s needed next?

  249. Thanks, Nigel, for your link as well.
    I would just point out that failing to acknowledge the progress that has been made (which I have encountered numerous times from those to my left) is actually counterproductive
    A millennial friend of mine, who is a grad student, has spent years (and isn’t done) in India, accumulating data to support assessments of which development programs have been helpful or not.
    Data is important if we want to figure out how to make people’s lives better. Or maybe it’s not. Maybe this woman’s work in India is bullshit. I think it’s valuable. Progress is hard work; it’s policy, not sloganeering. And we deserve to understand whether we can make a difference, and how.

  250. Thanks, Nigel, for your link as well.
    I would just point out that failing to acknowledge the progress that has been made (which I have encountered numerous times from those to my left) is actually counterproductive
    A millennial friend of mine, who is a grad student, has spent years (and isn’t done) in India, accumulating data to support assessments of which development programs have been helpful or not.
    Data is important if we want to figure out how to make people’s lives better. Or maybe it’s not. Maybe this woman’s work in India is bullshit. I think it’s valuable. Progress is hard work; it’s policy, not sloganeering. And we deserve to understand whether we can make a difference, and how.

  251. In keeping with the theme.
    Pollution in Pre-Industrial Europe: Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli once described the River Thames as a “a Stygian pool, reeking with ineffable and intolerable horrors.”
    The Darker Side Of 19Th Century London: The Great Stink
    Rural Life in the past Was a Battle for Survival: People in pre-industrial Europe generally lived a miserable, hand-to-mouth existence which would be foolish to romanticize.
    Ten recent low-tech inventions that have changed the world: Technologies don’t have to be cutting edge to make a profound difference in people’s lives.

  252. In keeping with the theme.
    Pollution in Pre-Industrial Europe: Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli once described the River Thames as a “a Stygian pool, reeking with ineffable and intolerable horrors.”
    The Darker Side Of 19Th Century London: The Great Stink
    Rural Life in the past Was a Battle for Survival: People in pre-industrial Europe generally lived a miserable, hand-to-mouth existence which would be foolish to romanticize.
    Ten recent low-tech inventions that have changed the world: Technologies don’t have to be cutting edge to make a profound difference in people’s lives.

  253. russell is going all metaphysical on us
    LOL. Dude, if you only knew. It only gets worse from here….
    you are referring to your own standard of what “a pretty good life” is.
    yes, I’m sure that’s so. also, I’m trying to frame a somewhat vague idea in terms that are… congruent to the overall thread.
    Basically, my reaction to Charles’ “we are presently living in the best period in human history” was akin to my reaction to things like “an increase in CO2 is actually a good thing!”. It strikes me as panglossian and naive. In some cases, although I doubt in Charles’, self-serving.
    Human technological progress from the advent of the Industrial Revolution until now has been remarkable. Almost certainly a transformation of human culture comparable in scale and consequence to the neolithic agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago, only happening in a much more compressed timeframe.
    Very little of that has been free of cost. Not just economic, but social, environmental. In terms of the meaning and purpose of work, and of life. In terms of the degree to which people distant from us are affected by our choices about how we live. In terms of how all of the other creatures we share the planet with are affected.
    The changes in human life and culture that have resulted from all of this have not been uniformly beneficial. Not everyone is better off than they were, or might have been. A lot of people actually are not.
    And none of that even gets into the question of how we address the fact that everyone *can’t* have all of the lovely benefits of industrial and post-industrial culture, because we’d need about 7 planets to make that happen, and we only have one.
    Technology will solve some of that, but not all of it. And it will create other problems in the process of fixing whatever it does fix.
    The reason I am persistently pessimistic about stuff like this is because it *does not have a technical solution*. It requires a human solution. It requires people deciding to forego some of what they think they’re entitled to, so that others can have enough.
    And humans don’t have a good track record with that.
    Now excuse me while I go eat some shrooms and watch “Koyaanisqatsi”….

  254. russell is going all metaphysical on us
    LOL. Dude, if you only knew. It only gets worse from here….
    you are referring to your own standard of what “a pretty good life” is.
    yes, I’m sure that’s so. also, I’m trying to frame a somewhat vague idea in terms that are… congruent to the overall thread.
    Basically, my reaction to Charles’ “we are presently living in the best period in human history” was akin to my reaction to things like “an increase in CO2 is actually a good thing!”. It strikes me as panglossian and naive. In some cases, although I doubt in Charles’, self-serving.
    Human technological progress from the advent of the Industrial Revolution until now has been remarkable. Almost certainly a transformation of human culture comparable in scale and consequence to the neolithic agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago, only happening in a much more compressed timeframe.
    Very little of that has been free of cost. Not just economic, but social, environmental. In terms of the meaning and purpose of work, and of life. In terms of the degree to which people distant from us are affected by our choices about how we live. In terms of how all of the other creatures we share the planet with are affected.
    The changes in human life and culture that have resulted from all of this have not been uniformly beneficial. Not everyone is better off than they were, or might have been. A lot of people actually are not.
    And none of that even gets into the question of how we address the fact that everyone *can’t* have all of the lovely benefits of industrial and post-industrial culture, because we’d need about 7 planets to make that happen, and we only have one.
    Technology will solve some of that, but not all of it. And it will create other problems in the process of fixing whatever it does fix.
    The reason I am persistently pessimistic about stuff like this is because it *does not have a technical solution*. It requires a human solution. It requires people deciding to forego some of what they think they’re entitled to, so that others can have enough.
    And humans don’t have a good track record with that.
    Now excuse me while I go eat some shrooms and watch “Koyaanisqatsi”….

  255. I appreciate your links, CharlesWT. I wish you were more proactive in advocating for the environment.
    This thread has been interesting, and I hope my comments haven’t been too heated. If anyone wants to discuss the menstruation issue, I would love that. It’s a taboo topic in India. Also here.
    I am 62, and the technology for dealing with menstruation improved dramatically during the years that I menstruated. Even so, when I watched the film “Period. End of Sentence” I thought about how many times, in school, in business meetings, in court, I had to worry about bleeding. How one time when sitting in my office, absorbed in my work, I looked down and realized that my chair was soaked in blood. I spent hours cleaning the upholstery and hoping that no one would see.
    Women in the film dropped out of school because of this. russell, use the google, and show me the cultures that appreciate[d] women during menstruation. I’m sure there are some! And, sincerely, no snark, I’m sure that women found meaning and happiness in their lives even though their culture (a beautiful culture, no doubt – a culture that they loved) enslaved them. I understand that we all have to think about this, and that there are no simple answers.

  256. I appreciate your links, CharlesWT. I wish you were more proactive in advocating for the environment.
    This thread has been interesting, and I hope my comments haven’t been too heated. If anyone wants to discuss the menstruation issue, I would love that. It’s a taboo topic in India. Also here.
    I am 62, and the technology for dealing with menstruation improved dramatically during the years that I menstruated. Even so, when I watched the film “Period. End of Sentence” I thought about how many times, in school, in business meetings, in court, I had to worry about bleeding. How one time when sitting in my office, absorbed in my work, I looked down and realized that my chair was soaked in blood. I spent hours cleaning the upholstery and hoping that no one would see.
    Women in the film dropped out of school because of this. russell, use the google, and show me the cultures that appreciate[d] women during menstruation. I’m sure there are some! And, sincerely, no snark, I’m sure that women found meaning and happiness in their lives even though their culture (a beautiful culture, no doubt – a culture that they loved) enslaved them. I understand that we all have to think about this, and that there are no simple answers.

  257. One aspect making matters complicated is the growth of world population. Even with a general improving trend concerning quality of life the absolute number of people suffering is growing (even while sinking percentage-wise).
    The Spanish flu killed far more people than the Black Death not due to higher lethality but because there were far more people on Earth at the end of WW1 than in the Middle Ages.

  258. One aspect making matters complicated is the growth of world population. Even with a general improving trend concerning quality of life the absolute number of people suffering is growing (even while sinking percentage-wise).
    The Spanish flu killed far more people than the Black Death not due to higher lethality but because there were far more people on Earth at the end of WW1 than in the Middle Ages.

  259. even though their culture (a beautiful culture, no doubt – a culture that they loved) enslaved them.
    I do not and will not argue that women have not been oppressed, often, and right up until now, by the cultures they have been born into. Full stop.
    What I think about the issue of being enslaved by culture, broadly, is that we are all creatures of, and products of, the cultures we are born into. Even when we object to them, or chafe against or resist them, the terms available to us to do that are, to some degree, limited and determined by that culture.
    People hundreds of years from now, looking back at us, will likely not see us as being as happy and free as we think we are.
    And no, the shrooms have not just kicked in.
    I’m really not looking to pick fights about this, I’m making what I think is a simple point. All of the progress we proudly point to has a flip side. It’s not all beneficial, and it’s certainly not all beneficial to everyone.
    What I’m certainly not calling for is a nostalgic return to some Arcadian yesteryear, when all was sweetness and light. Life isn’t sweetness and light. Not now, not then.
    Some things we’ve come up with over the last couple hundred years have been great. Some have been horrific. All or nearly all have been a mix of good and ill. I’m quite sure that, were it possible to arrange a swap between folks now and some random point in the past, some of our forbears would leap at the chance, and some would run away as fast as they could.

  260. even though their culture (a beautiful culture, no doubt – a culture that they loved) enslaved them.
    I do not and will not argue that women have not been oppressed, often, and right up until now, by the cultures they have been born into. Full stop.
    What I think about the issue of being enslaved by culture, broadly, is that we are all creatures of, and products of, the cultures we are born into. Even when we object to them, or chafe against or resist them, the terms available to us to do that are, to some degree, limited and determined by that culture.
    People hundreds of years from now, looking back at us, will likely not see us as being as happy and free as we think we are.
    And no, the shrooms have not just kicked in.
    I’m really not looking to pick fights about this, I’m making what I think is a simple point. All of the progress we proudly point to has a flip side. It’s not all beneficial, and it’s certainly not all beneficial to everyone.
    What I’m certainly not calling for is a nostalgic return to some Arcadian yesteryear, when all was sweetness and light. Life isn’t sweetness and light. Not now, not then.
    Some things we’ve come up with over the last couple hundred years have been great. Some have been horrific. All or nearly all have been a mix of good and ill. I’m quite sure that, were it possible to arrange a swap between folks now and some random point in the past, some of our forbears would leap at the chance, and some would run away as fast as they could.

  263. I’m really not looking to pick fights about this, I’m making what I think is a simple point. All of the progress we proudly point to has a flip side. It’s not all beneficial, and it’s certainly not all beneficial to everyone.
    Shorter russell: Nothing matters.

  264. I’m really not looking to pick fights about this, I’m making what I think is a simple point. All of the progress we proudly point to has a flip side. It’s not all beneficial, and it’s certainly not all beneficial to everyone.
    Shorter russell: Nothing matters.

  265. It means we need to give up
    No.
    Really, I think you’re taking my comment in a direction that was not and is not intended.
    Charles says: we are living in the best period of human history.
    russell says: I don’t know if that’s true, or if it’s something we can even say or judge. it certainly isn’t the best period of human history for everyone.
    And that’s about it. Maybe some half-baked St Francis and Marcuse and perhaps even some warmed over hippie shit in there, too, but basically the above is my entire point.
    To your point, no doubt, there’s lots to do, and we should be about it.

  266. It means we need to give up
    No.
    Really, I think you’re taking my comment in a direction that was not and is not intended.
    Charles says: we are living in the best period of human history.
    russell says: I don’t know if that’s true, or if it’s something we can even say or judge. it certainly isn’t the best period of human history for everyone.
    And that’s about it. Maybe some half-baked St Francis and Marcuse and perhaps even some warmed over hippie shit in there, too, but basically the above is my entire point.
    To your point, no doubt, there’s lots to do, and we should be about it.

  271. Shorter russell: Nothing matters.
    Nope, not what I said. Please see my immediately previous.
    I’m moving offa this, because the point of diminishing returns has been achieved.
    Cheers.

  272. Shorter russell: Nothing matters.
    Nope, not what I said. Please see my immediately previous.
    I’m moving offa this, because the point of diminishing returns has been achieved.
    Cheers.

  279. Open thread, so I will cut and paste this activist email I received here. It’s a bit late, but if you have the time—————-
    The Senate may vote as soon as TOMORROW on whether to reject U.S. support for the brutal Saudi- and UAE-led coalition’s war in Yemen that has left 15 million Yemenis at risk of famine.
    And this is going to be a close vote.
    But with just a day left to call our senators, we have to make sure they hear us loud and clear: a vote for S.J.Res.7 is a vote to finally reject the United States’ role in creating a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.

  280. Open thread, so I will cut and paste this activist email I received here. It’s a bit late, but if you have the time—————-
    The Senate may vote as soon as TOMORROW on whether to reject U.S. support for the brutal Saudi- and UAE-led coalition’s war in Yemen that has left 15 million Yemenis at risk of famine.
    And this is going to be a close vote.
    But with just a day left to call our senators, we have to make sure they hear us loud and clear: a vote for S.J.Res.7 is a vote to finally reject the United States’ role in creating a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.

  289. One thing: the stagnation of incomes for ordinary workers in the US and UK, and the consequent popularity of reactionary politics, is directly related to rising incomes in China and India.
    Overall, the world is better for spreading opportunities more widely. But the process is far from painless.

  290. One thing: the stagnation of incomes for ordinary workers in the US and UK, and the consequent popularity of reactionary politics, is directly related to rising incomes in China and India.
    Overall, the world is better for spreading opportunities more widely. But the process is far from painless.

  291. Further Brexit news. Carole Cadwalladr tweets:

    Last week @arron_banks & @andywigmore went to Veneto, the heartland of Italy’s Lega Nord. Today, the plan is revealed. The fascists have agreed to help Britain exit without a deal. Salvini will block an extension of article 50. We’re fucked.

    Which is retweeted by Peter Grant MP with the following:

    Apologies for the sweary word in the first tweet but this is too important. The people who bankrolled Brexit to “take back sovereignty” are asking the successors of Mussolini to help them impose a completely different kind of Brexit from the one they promised.

    Hard to argue with that.

  292. Further Brexit news. Carole Cadwalladr tweets:

    Last week @arron_banks & @andywigmore went to Veneto, the heartland of Italy’s Lega Nord. Today, the plan is revealed. The fascists have agreed to help Britain exit without a deal. Salvini will block an extension of article 50. We’re fucked.

    Which is retweeted by Peter Grant MP with the following:

    Apologies for the sweary word in the first tweet but this is too important. The people who bankrolled Brexit to “take back sovereignty” are asking the successors of Mussolini to help them impose a completely different kind of Brexit from the one they promised.

    Hard to argue with that.

  295. Hard to argue with that.
    Except that I’d take the likelihood of their actually blocking an extension, which the rest of the EU approves, with a pinch of salt. It’s not impossible, but it is far from certain.
    Cadwalladr is an enterprising journalist, whom I like, but is not always 100% accurate in her conclusions.

  296. Hard to argue with that.
    Except that I’d take the likelihood of their actually blocking an extension, which the rest of the EU approves, with a pinch of salt. It’s not impossible, but it is far from certain.
    Cadwalladr is an enterprising journalist, whom I like, but is not always 100% accurate in her conclusions.

  297. It’s unclear to me that Salvini can cause Italy to seek to block an extension – his party is a partner in the governing coalition, and he is deputy prime minister.
    If the Italian government does decide on a policy of blocking an extension, I think it very unlikely to insist if Germany wants to grant it. Italy’s government deficit and debt are problematic, and it will continue to need favours from the EU.
    I think the EU as a whole will grant an extension if it thinks the alternative is a hard Brexit. There would be some muttering about where is the UK’s plan to resolve the issue during the extension, but in practice kicking the can down the road is what the EU does best.
    The EU elections at the end of May are a problem. As things stand, the UK is not going to take part.

  298. It’s unclear to me that Salvini can cause Italy to seek to block an extension – his party is a partner in the governing coalition, and he is deputy prime minister.
    If the Italian government does decide on a policy of blocking an extension, I think it very unlikely to insist if Germany wants to grant it. Italy’s government deficit and debt are problematic, and it will continue to need favours from the EU.
    I think the EU as a whole will grant an extension if it thinks the alternative is a hard Brexit. There would be some muttering about where is the UK’s plan to resolve the issue during the extension, but in practice kicking the can down the road is what the EU does best.
    The EU elections at the end of May are a problem. As things stand, the UK is not going to take part.

  299. Pro Bono and Nigel: from your lips to God’s ear (although you’re certainly right about the EU elections being a problem).
    As for Cadwalladr, I think she deserves to be made a Dame, in the absence of anything better, for services to the nation. She is a credit to her profession – her staunchness and persistence have been astonishing, in the face of both official neglect and negligence, and personal attacks of considerable vitriol.

  300. Pro Bono and Nigel: from your lips to God’s ear (although you’re certainly right about the EU elections being a problem).
    As for Cadwalladr, I think she deserves to be made a Dame, in the absence of anything better, for services to the nation. She is a credit to her profession – her staunchness and persistence have been astonishing, in the face of both official neglect and negligence, and personal attacks of considerable vitriol.

  301. I have a question for the UK folks. (Actually for any of the Europeans.)
    Assume, for the sake of discussion, a hard Brexit. How long, if at all, before the pain gets bad enough for Britain to ask to rejoin?
    Inevitably it would be without all the special carve-outs the UK has currently. That being the price of stupidity.

  302. I have a question for the UK folks. (Actually for any of the Europeans.)
    Assume, for the sake of discussion, a hard Brexit. How long, if at all, before the pain gets bad enough for Britain to ask to rejoin?
    Inevitably it would be without all the special carve-outs the UK has currently. That being the price of stupidity.

  303. How long, if at all, before the pain gets bad enough for Britain to ask to rejoin?
    And would that be an option? I.e., would the EU entertain that request?

  304. How long, if at all, before the pain gets bad enough for Britain to ask to rejoin?
    And would that be an option? I.e., would the EU entertain that request?

  305. I believe a vast majority of EU states would like to have Britain rejoin* but there may be just enough to block it. Not because they have a grudge against the UK but as part of their own desires to weaken the EU from within while increasing their own relative influence. Hungary and Poland come to mind. Italy may or may not join the effort.
    *though without the special privileges.

  306. I believe a vast majority of EU states would like to have Britain rejoin* but there may be just enough to block it. Not because they have a grudge against the UK but as part of their own desires to weaken the EU from within while increasing their own relative influence. Hungary and Poland come to mind. Italy may or may not join the effort.
    *though without the special privileges.

  307. Two rather conservative people I know of (one public pundit and ex-MP who has always been a Leaver) and one friend (who was on the fence, but voted rather uncertainly for Remain) have said recently they think there’s a reasonable chance that if it comes down to the wire (i.e. if the EU refuses an extension), out of the three options actually available to parliament (the May deal, No deal or Revoke Article 50) parliament will opt to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. I myself hardly dare hope for this, since all Leavers and even Remainers say continually as a mantra that they must “fulfil the will of the British people”, and it would require the talents of impressive contortionists to find a justification that would fly.
    But to answer wj’s and russell’s questions (in the wrong order): I imagine the EU would let us rejoin eventually, but (as Hartmut says) without the special privileges. But as for how long it would take the British to decide they’d made a mistake and re-apply, I have no idea what it would take to convince the public, if what has happened so far does not convince them (which the polls still suggest, if not definitively). No matter how bad the pain, I have lost all faith that my countrymen would correctly diagnose the cause.

  308. Two rather conservative people I know of (one public pundit and ex-MP who has always been a Leaver) and one friend (who was on the fence, but voted rather uncertainly for Remain) have said recently they think there’s a reasonable chance that if it comes down to the wire (i.e. if the EU refuses an extension), out of the three options actually available to parliament (the May deal, No deal or Revoke Article 50) parliament will opt to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. I myself hardly dare hope for this, since all Leavers and even Remainers say continually as a mantra that they must “fulfil the will of the British people”, and it would require the talents of impressive contortionists to find a justification that would fly.
    But to answer wj’s and russell’s questions (in the wrong order): I imagine the EU would let us rejoin eventually, but (as Hartmut says) without the special privileges. But as for how long it would take the British to decide they’d made a mistake and re-apply, I have no idea what it would take to convince the public, if what has happened so far does not convince them (which the polls still suggest, if not definitively). No matter how bad the pain, I have lost all faith that my countrymen would correctly diagnose the cause.

  309. Should I use this as the open thread or the other one?
    I’ll use this one.
    What’s up with Morris Dees, and the SPLC?

  310. Should I use this as the open thread or the other one?
    I’ll use this one.
    What’s up with Morris Dees, and the SPLC?

  311. This does seem to be the only officially open thread!
    sapient: from all the guarded comments about Dees and SPLC, it looks like it might be sexual (or more unlikely I think) financial misconduct. The reason I think this is his age, and when asked whether he had done anything improper, he said he didn’t know what was considered improper these days. I was always used to consider the SPLC pretty respectable, and when McKinney poured scorn on them and their definition of “hate groups” a while ago I was inclined to think it was just his rightwing bias talking, but the fact that they impugned Maajid Naawaz and the Quilliam Foundation, and then had to retract, made me think maybe they have got ideologically carried away too far of late.

  312. This does seem to be the only officially open thread!
    sapient: from all the guarded comments about Dees and SPLC, it looks like it might be sexual (or more unlikely I think) financial misconduct. The reason I think this is his age, and when asked whether he had done anything improper, he said he didn’t know what was considered improper these days. I was always used to consider the SPLC pretty respectable, and when McKinney poured scorn on them and their definition of “hate groups” a while ago I was inclined to think it was just his rightwing bias talking, but the fact that they impugned Maajid Naawaz and the Quilliam Foundation, and then had to retract, made me think maybe they have got ideologically carried away too far of late.

  313. Sounds right, GftNC. Despite its error, the SPLC has long been one of the most effective organizations against hate groups. I hope that it is able to recover.

  314. Sounds right, GftNC. Despite its error, the SPLC has long been one of the most effective organizations against hate groups. I hope that it is able to recover.

  315. Despite its error, the SPLC has long been one of the most effective organizations against hate groups. I hope that it is able to recover.
    I agree. And as to the first part, that is why it is so important for them not to get carried away and go haring off down ideological rabbit holes, because it gives the McKinneys of this world legitimate ammunition against them.

  316. Despite its error, the SPLC has long been one of the most effective organizations against hate groups. I hope that it is able to recover.
    I agree. And as to the first part, that is why it is so important for them not to get carried away and go haring off down ideological rabbit holes, because it gives the McKinneys of this world legitimate ammunition against them.

  317. How did we miss mentioning this?
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/nyregion/sandy-hook-supreme-court.html
    Money quote:

    Their [the families who are suing] hope was to bring the case to trial, which could force gun companies to turn over internal communications that they have fiercely fought to keep private and provide a revealing and possibly damaging glimpse into how the industry operates.

    It has always seemed a bit odd that, if you make any other product (e.g. a pesticide) that harms people, you are liable. But if you are a gun manufacturer, you’re not. Any light shed on the way those manufacturers operate, especially how they market their products and why they market them that way, seems all to the good.

  318. How did we miss mentioning this?
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/nyregion/sandy-hook-supreme-court.html
    Money quote:

    Their [the families who are suing] hope was to bring the case to trial, which could force gun companies to turn over internal communications that they have fiercely fought to keep private and provide a revealing and possibly damaging glimpse into how the industry operates.

    It has always seemed a bit odd that, if you make any other product (e.g. a pesticide) that harms people, you are liable. But if you are a gun manufacturer, you’re not. Any light shed on the way those manufacturers operate, especially how they market their products and why they market them that way, seems all to the good.

  321. “The best way for politicians to keep Brexit—or any cross-border opportunities—from turning into smugglers’ bonanzas is to leave people unmolested. That’s because illicit trade isn’t a measure of bad behavior so much of bad policies. In the absence of high taxes and restrictions on the availability of desirable goods, smuggling isn’t a lucrative activity at all.
    Brexit will be a smuggling opportunity only if government officials make it so. But, with history as a guide, they probably will.”
    Brexit Is a Bonanza for Smugglers (and That’s a Good Thing): Borders offer a wonderful opportunity to evade high taxes and restrictive rules.

  322. “The best way for politicians to keep Brexit—or any cross-border opportunities—from turning into smugglers’ bonanzas is to leave people unmolested. That’s because illicit trade isn’t a measure of bad behavior so much of bad policies. In the absence of high taxes and restrictions on the availability of desirable goods, smuggling isn’t a lucrative activity at all.
    Brexit will be a smuggling opportunity only if government officials make it so. But, with history as a guide, they probably will.”
    Brexit Is a Bonanza for Smugglers (and That’s a Good Thing): Borders offer a wonderful opportunity to evade high taxes and restrictive rules.

  323. Charles,
    Any tax is something that can be evaded. Especially if it is not uniform worldwide.
    So how do you propose to fund government without creating such opportunities (at least for those rich enough to allow evasion)? Or do you just want no government at all, i.e. straight-out anarchy?

  324. Charles,
    Any tax is something that can be evaded. Especially if it is not uniform worldwide.
    So how do you propose to fund government without creating such opportunities (at least for those rich enough to allow evasion)? Or do you just want no government at all, i.e. straight-out anarchy?

  327. So how do you propose to fund government without creating such opportunities (at least for those rich enough to allow evasion)?
    Some governments may have to make some hard decisions on what they will and won’t spend money on. And be more efficient in their spending.

  328. So how do you propose to fund government without creating such opportunities (at least for those rich enough to allow evasion)?
    Some governments may have to make some hard decisions on what they will and won’t spend money on. And be more efficient in their spending.

  329. Charles,
    You missed my point. It wasn’t how much to tax (and spend). It was, how to fund government at all.
    When the country was new, tariffs were how the Federal government funded itself. Currently, most funding is from income taxes (Federal and most states), sales taxes (states) and property taxes (local). What do YOU think should be the source of government revenue?

  330. Charles,
    You missed my point. It wasn’t how much to tax (and spend). It was, how to fund government at all.
    When the country was new, tariffs were how the Federal government funded itself. Currently, most funding is from income taxes (Federal and most states), sales taxes (states) and property taxes (local). What do YOU think should be the source of government revenue?

  331. For those of you who still get your panties in a bunch over “reparations” I suggest taking a look at this and follow up by reading the original article.
    Have a nice darned day (sunny and 70 today in Seattle).

  332. For those of you who still get your panties in a bunch over “reparations” I suggest taking a look at this and follow up by reading the original article.
    Have a nice darned day (sunny and 70 today in Seattle).

  333. What do YOU think should be the source of government revenue?
    Not a question I can answer or google an answer for. Governments have very limited revenue sources that don’t involve pointing guns at people.

  334. What do YOU think should be the source of government revenue?
    Not a question I can answer or google an answer for. Governments have very limited revenue sources that don’t involve pointing guns at people.

  335. So, Charles,
    Name ONE government revenue source that does not involve “pointing guns at people”.
    Bake sales, maybe?
    –TP

  336. So, Charles,
    Name ONE government revenue source that does not involve “pointing guns at people”.
    Bake sales, maybe?
    –TP

  337. This is just way cool.
    I was recently reading about Pytheas of Massalia (now Marseille) who circumnavigated England and Ireland, visiting much of both on foot as well, and may have made it to Iceland.
    In the 4th C BC.
    When the country was new, tariffs were how the Federal government funded itself.
    Tariffs, and taxes on luxury goods.
    Governments have very limited revenue sources that don’t involve pointing guns at people.
    I have received a sternly worded letter or two over the years, but never had a gun pointed at me.
    Just pay your freaking taxes, for crying out loud, and move on.
    sheesh.

  338. This is just way cool.
    I was recently reading about Pytheas of Massalia (now Marseille) who circumnavigated England and Ireland, visiting much of both on foot as well, and may have made it to Iceland.
    In the 4th C BC.
    When the country was new, tariffs were how the Federal government funded itself.
    Tariffs, and taxes on luxury goods.
    Governments have very limited revenue sources that don’t involve pointing guns at people.
    I have received a sternly worded letter or two over the years, but never had a gun pointed at me.
    Just pay your freaking taxes, for crying out loud, and move on.
    sheesh.

  339. Not a question I can answer or google an answer for.
    Not entirely clear why you would need to google for an answer. Or why you can’t answer.

    • What governments do isn’t free, right?
    • The money the government spends has to come from somewhere, right? (I don’t think you’re crazy enough to think we can just print fiat money, and that will work indefinitely.)
    • So, where do you think it should come from? Presumably, from your previous comments, somewhere that doesn’t provide major opportunities for smuggling and other evasions (or have I misunderstood you?). But where?

    Not looking for a perfect or comprehensive answer. Just some insight into how you think we should approach the question.

  340. Not a question I can answer or google an answer for.
    Not entirely clear why you would need to google for an answer. Or why you can’t answer.

    • What governments do isn’t free, right?
    • The money the government spends has to come from somewhere, right? (I don’t think you’re crazy enough to think we can just print fiat money, and that will work indefinitely.)
    • So, where do you think it should come from? Presumably, from your previous comments, somewhere that doesn’t provide major opportunities for smuggling and other evasions (or have I misunderstood you?). But where?

    Not looking for a perfect or comprehensive answer. Just some insight into how you think we should approach the question.

  341. Name ONE government revenue source that does not involve “pointing guns at people”.
    Some examples:
    • Loans
    • State-owned enterprises
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    • Sales of state assets
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    • Donations and voluntary contributions

  342. Name ONE government revenue source that does not involve “pointing guns at people”.
    Some examples:
    • Loans
    • State-owned enterprises
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    • Sales of state assets
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    • Donations and voluntary contributions

  345. Some examples:
    • Loans
    • State-owned enterprises
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    • Sales of state assets
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Would it be rude to point out that, with the obvious exception of the last one, all of those involve some element of coercion. As in, for example, suppose someone doesn’t bother to get (pay for) a license, but just does whatever. Enforcement involves some level of coercion.
    Ditto rents (see the Bundy standoff a few years back).

  346. Some examples:
    • Loans
    • State-owned enterprises
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    • Sales of state assets
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Would it be rude to point out that, with the obvious exception of the last one, all of those involve some element of coercion. As in, for example, suppose someone doesn’t bother to get (pay for) a license, but just does whatever. Enforcement involves some level of coercion.
    Ditto rents (see the Bundy standoff a few years back).

  347. Would it be rude to point out that, with the obvious exception of the last one, all of those involve some element of coercion.
    But, unlike taxation, none of them involve upfront coercion. The coercion occurs when someone breaks a contract or engages in activities that require permits or licenses.

  348. Would it be rude to point out that, with the obvious exception of the last one, all of those involve some element of coercion.
    But, unlike taxation, none of them involve upfront coercion. The coercion occurs when someone breaks a contract or engages in activities that require permits or licenses.

  349. • Loans
    To whom? In competition with private sector banks? How do you enforce repayment without, ultimately, “pointing guns at people”?
    • State-owned enterprises
    Like health insurance companies? Last-mile broadband service under the (constitutionally mandated) Post Office? I could go for those. But again: how do you ultimately enforce the contracts?
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    Picking winners and losers? Uhm-kay.
    • Sales of state assets
    That’s how Russian mobocracy got started, but I suppose that’s not a bug as far as Libertarian principles are concerned.
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    Enough to fund the FBI, maybe. But the Navy?
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    For what? Guns? Stamps? Tea? Actually, Paul Krugman once proposed (tongue-half-in-cheek) that revenue from CO2 emission licenses could raise enough revenue to replace the income tax. But once more: how do you enforce any of this without “pointing guns at people”?
    • User fees
    I think you’re just padding the list here.
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Ah, the REAL tax cut for billionaires and megacorporations!
    –TP

  350. • Loans
    To whom? In competition with private sector banks? How do you enforce repayment without, ultimately, “pointing guns at people”?
    • State-owned enterprises
    Like health insurance companies? Last-mile broadband service under the (constitutionally mandated) Post Office? I could go for those. But again: how do you ultimately enforce the contracts?
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    Picking winners and losers? Uhm-kay.
    • Sales of state assets
    That’s how Russian mobocracy got started, but I suppose that’s not a bug as far as Libertarian principles are concerned.
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    Enough to fund the FBI, maybe. But the Navy?
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    For what? Guns? Stamps? Tea? Actually, Paul Krugman once proposed (tongue-half-in-cheek) that revenue from CO2 emission licenses could raise enough revenue to replace the income tax. But once more: how do you enforce any of this without “pointing guns at people”?
    • User fees
    I think you’re just padding the list here.
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Ah, the REAL tax cut for billionaires and megacorporations!
    –TP

  351. Thanks, TonyP. I had drafted a response to that list, but I’ll take yours instead.
    The coercion occurs when someone breaks a contract or engages in activities that require permits or licenses.
    We have, in our nation, something known as a social contract. We elect people who enact policy, and we pay for it with taxes (the terms of which are also controlled by our votes). I’m fine with that.

  352. Thanks, TonyP. I had drafted a response to that list, but I’ll take yours instead.
    The coercion occurs when someone breaks a contract or engages in activities that require permits or licenses.
    We have, in our nation, something known as a social contract. We elect people who enact policy, and we pay for it with taxes (the terms of which are also controlled by our votes). I’m fine with that.

  353. We have, in our nation, something known as a social contract. We elect people who enact policy, and we pay for it with taxes (the terms of which are also controlled by our votes). I’m fine with that.
    Hey, hey, hey….the right of voluntary free association only goes so far ya’ know.
    /snicker.

  354. We have, in our nation, something known as a social contract. We elect people who enact policy, and we pay for it with taxes (the terms of which are also controlled by our votes). I’m fine with that.
    Hey, hey, hey….the right of voluntary free association only goes so far ya’ know.
    /snicker.

  357. • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    For what? Guns? Stamps? Tea?
    Everybody likes to go fishing.

  358. • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    For what? Guns? Stamps? Tea?
    Everybody likes to go fishing.

  359. We could auction naming rights for the Capitol, the White House, and the Washington Monument.
    Maybe even get the national parks in the game. What am I bid for naming rights, for one year, for the Grand Canyon?
    It works for sports arenas and concert venues. We’re missing an opportunity here.

  360. We could auction naming rights for the Capitol, the White House, and the Washington Monument.
    Maybe even get the national parks in the game. What am I bid for naming rights, for one year, for the Grand Canyon?
    It works for sports arenas and concert venues. We’re missing an opportunity here.

  361. FWIW, this was my list:
    • Loans
    Bonds? We do that. And then Republicans complain about the deficit (unless they’re in power, when they think deficits don’t matter).
    • State-owned enterprises
    That’s interesting to me. But isn’t that kind of like socialism?
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    I’m good with that, but what are we investing in, Trump Hotels? We need to do that in a way that is fair, transparent, and not enriching politicians.
    • Sales of state assets
    No, thank you. National parks, monuments, buildings, museums, etc. We need to keep these.
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    That pays for some things, but we shouldn’t turn those things into a regressive tax.
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    We do some of this already but, again, they can be turned into a regressive tax.
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Not a way to run a national government. Fine for a homeowners association.

  362. FWIW, this was my list:
    • Loans
    Bonds? We do that. And then Republicans complain about the deficit (unless they’re in power, when they think deficits don’t matter).
    • State-owned enterprises
    That’s interesting to me. But isn’t that kind of like socialism?
    • Interest or profit from investment funds
    I’m good with that, but what are we investing in, Trump Hotels? We need to do that in a way that is fair, transparent, and not enriching politicians.
    • Sales of state assets
    No, thank you. National parks, monuments, buildings, museums, etc. We need to keep these.
    • Rents, concessions, and royalties
    That pays for some things, but we shouldn’t turn those things into a regressive tax.
    • Fees for the granting or issuance of permits or licenses
    • User fees
    We do some of this already but, again, they can be turned into a regressive tax.
    • Donations and voluntary contributions
    Not a way to run a national government. Fine for a homeowners association.

  363. It actually is true that there was no federal income tax for a significant part of our national history. We did actually pay for everything with tariffs, and luxury taxes, and licenses and user fees.
    There was even a SCOTUS decision ruling that a federal income tax was unconstitutional. It took an amendment to get past that one.
    This isn’t the same country that it was in 1832, or 1904, or whenever. So, we do things differently. Good, bad, whatever. The clock will not be turning back.
    Your proposals here are interesting. Were any of them to be proposed, the same folks who complain about taxes, with the possible exception of you, would complain about them as well.

  364. It actually is true that there was no federal income tax for a significant part of our national history. We did actually pay for everything with tariffs, and luxury taxes, and licenses and user fees.
    There was even a SCOTUS decision ruling that a federal income tax was unconstitutional. It took an amendment to get past that one.
    This isn’t the same country that it was in 1832, or 1904, or whenever. So, we do things differently. Good, bad, whatever. The clock will not be turning back.
    Your proposals here are interesting. Were any of them to be proposed, the same folks who complain about taxes, with the possible exception of you, would complain about them as well.

  365. Your proposals here are interesting.
    I wasn’t making proposals. Tony asked for examples of government revenue sources that didn’t involve coercion. So I gave a list of revenue sources that various levels of government in the US and other countries are currently using or have used at some time.

  366. Your proposals here are interesting.
    I wasn’t making proposals. Tony asked for examples of government revenue sources that didn’t involve coercion. So I gave a list of revenue sources that various levels of government in the US and other countries are currently using or have used at some time.

  367. Cool. All good, Charles.
    Your historical point is apt, we (and others) have relied on a variety of funding mechanisms over the years.

  368. Cool. All good, Charles.
    Your historical point is apt, we (and others) have relied on a variety of funding mechanisms over the years.

  369. The income tax is progressive. Also, if you’re going to benefit from living in a country with a political system that advertises “equal protection”, it’s important to support it in a just manner. We have an all-volunteer army. It isn’t feasible to have an all-volunteer tax system.
    It’s not interesting, except as a relic. It’s regressive. It has been tried. It failed.

  370. The income tax is progressive. Also, if you’re going to benefit from living in a country with a political system that advertises “equal protection”, it’s important to support it in a just manner. We have an all-volunteer army. It isn’t feasible to have an all-volunteer tax system.
    It’s not interesting, except as a relic. It’s regressive. It has been tried. It failed.

  371. I’ve been forced at gunpoint to live and earn a living within the context of an ordered society, which in turn forces me to make a far greater income than I otherwise would. And I can buy cans of peas without worry, while having no idea who grew them or put them in the cans!

  372. I’ve been forced at gunpoint to live and earn a living within the context of an ordered society, which in turn forces me to make a far greater income than I otherwise would. And I can buy cans of peas without worry, while having no idea who grew them or put them in the cans!

  383. Google “mysterious disappearance of millionaires”.
    Scary Deep State stuff.
    Und Schmul Meier bleibt verschwunden.
    Und so mancher reiche Mann
    Und sein Geld hat Mackie Messer
    Dem man nichts beweisen kann

  384. Google “mysterious disappearance of millionaires”.
    Scary Deep State stuff.
    Und Schmul Meier bleibt verschwunden.
    Und so mancher reiche Mann
    Und sein Geld hat Mackie Messer
    Dem man nichts beweisen kann

  387. Galt’s Gulch?
    Yeah, that’s where deregulated gravity caught up with two Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft.
    The second plane was filled with foreign aid workers, many dozens of them Americans. Reports are that the killers in the White House erupted in cheering and derisive laughter when they heard the news of who died.
    They chortled with malign glee like a bunch of fake news Muslims in New Jersey on 9/11.

  388. Galt’s Gulch?
    Yeah, that’s where deregulated gravity caught up with two Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft.
    The second plane was filled with foreign aid workers, many dozens of them Americans. Reports are that the killers in the White House erupted in cheering and derisive laughter when they heard the news of who died.
    They chortled with malign glee like a bunch of fake news Muslims in New Jersey on 9/11.

  389. CharlesWT: I wasn’t making proposals.
    Well, I wish you’d make some, then.
    “You’re doing it wrong” seems to be your position on how we presently fund the government. Fine, but how about a hint as to how you would propose to do it right.
    Incidentally, just to be clear: your first non-proposal was “Loans”. I assumed that you meant lending by the government, not borrowing by the government. Was I wrong?
    –TP

  390. CharlesWT: I wasn’t making proposals.
    Well, I wish you’d make some, then.
    “You’re doing it wrong” seems to be your position on how we presently fund the government. Fine, but how about a hint as to how you would propose to do it right.
    Incidentally, just to be clear: your first non-proposal was “Loans”. I assumed that you meant lending by the government, not borrowing by the government. Was I wrong?
    –TP

  391. The NSA could probably make some money from the “data recovery” business.
    You laugh, but will wish they did after your next hard-drive crash.

  392. The NSA could probably make some money from the “data recovery” business.
    You laugh, but will wish they did after your next hard-drive crash.

  393. I assumed that you meant lending by the government, not borrowing by the government.
    I should have made that clearer.
    “Loans, or other borrowing, from monetary funds and/or other governments”
    Non-tax revenue

  394. I assumed that you meant lending by the government, not borrowing by the government.
    I should have made that clearer.
    “Loans, or other borrowing, from monetary funds and/or other governments”
    Non-tax revenue

  397. CharlesWT,
    Thanks for clarifying. So you really did mean borrowing by the government, aka running deficits, aka increasing the national debt. Good thing it wasn’t a “proposal” on your part.
    But you answered my incidental question without addressing my real one: what do you propose?
    –TP

  398. CharlesWT,
    Thanks for clarifying. So you really did mean borrowing by the government, aka running deficits, aka increasing the national debt. Good thing it wasn’t a “proposal” on your part.
    But you answered my incidental question without addressing my real one: what do you propose?
    –TP

  399. My non-starter proposal is that the size and scope of government be greatly reduced so that any required taxation would be low by current standards.

  400. My non-starter proposal is that the size and scope of government be greatly reduced so that any required taxation would be low by current standards.

  401. Tony, he hasn’t answered you, after not answering me on the same point. Combined with his suggestion of “loans” (with no indication of how they might, even theoretically, be paid back), I’m beginning to suspect that the actual answer is: magic!

  402. Tony, he hasn’t answered you, after not answering me on the same point. Combined with his suggestion of “loans” (with no indication of how they might, even theoretically, be paid back), I’m beginning to suspect that the actual answer is: magic!

  403. wj,
    I just noticed that tariffs did not appear on CharlesWT’s list of (non)proposals. Maybe because Charles (unlike He, Trump) recognizes that tariffs are taxes; maybe Charles meant to subsume them under one of the other items on the list. But that’s by the bye.
    Charles does write: My non-starter proposal is that the size and scope of government be greatly reduced so that any required taxation would be low by current standards.
    That begs the question, of course: what parts of The Government would Charles propose to reduce?
    I get the impression that the reductions would have to be really, really big if the goal is to cut the federal budget down to where it could be funded by “voluntary contributions” and such.
    –TP

  404. wj,
    I just noticed that tariffs did not appear on CharlesWT’s list of (non)proposals. Maybe because Charles (unlike He, Trump) recognizes that tariffs are taxes; maybe Charles meant to subsume them under one of the other items on the list. But that’s by the bye.
    Charles does write: My non-starter proposal is that the size and scope of government be greatly reduced so that any required taxation would be low by current standards.
    That begs the question, of course: what parts of The Government would Charles propose to reduce?
    I get the impression that the reductions would have to be really, really big if the goal is to cut the federal budget down to where it could be funded by “voluntary contributions” and such.
    –TP

  407. This is really interesting.
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/universal-basic-income/
    My thinking is that the demand for human labor to produce what people want and need has been declining and will continue to do so (at least until we decide to bomb ourselves back into the stone age).
    So what the hell kind of jobs are there going to be for the majority of people? How does market-based capitalism not eventually collapse in on itself? What happens if people can pursue their own interests without having to worry about obtaining food and shelter?

  408. This is really interesting.
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/universal-basic-income/
    My thinking is that the demand for human labor to produce what people want and need has been declining and will continue to do so (at least until we decide to bomb ourselves back into the stone age).
    So what the hell kind of jobs are there going to be for the majority of people? How does market-based capitalism not eventually collapse in on itself? What happens if people can pursue their own interests without having to worry about obtaining food and shelter?

  409. I mean, just imagine if, instead of sitting in an office commenting on Obsidian Wings, I could sit in my living room commenting on Obsidian Wings!

  410. I mean, just imagine if, instead of sitting in an office commenting on Obsidian Wings, I could sit in my living room commenting on Obsidian Wings!

  417. Am I alone in seeing the guaranteed basic income, instead of various welfare programs, as enormously similar to the block grants that Congressional Republicans seem so enamoured with? Yeah, they go the individuals, rather than to states. But that would seem to be a feature, but a bug: it would mean less government at the state level as well!
    I do see one unintended consequence which should be addressed. For a lot of people, their job is what gives structure to their life. Witness those who, when they retire, end up just sitting around waiting to die.** Yes, most of us have plenty of ideas for things we will want to do, once we have more time. But that’s not universal. And it seems like something which should be addressed by anyone seriously proposing a guaranteed income.
    ** It occurs to me that this might be a factor in why women live longer than men. The work around the home that women traditionally do doesn’t go away; essentially, they don’t retire. Hmmm….

  418. Am I alone in seeing the guaranteed basic income, instead of various welfare programs, as enormously similar to the block grants that Congressional Republicans seem so enamoured with? Yeah, they go the individuals, rather than to states. But that would seem to be a feature, but a bug: it would mean less government at the state level as well!
    I do see one unintended consequence which should be addressed. For a lot of people, their job is what gives structure to their life. Witness those who, when they retire, end up just sitting around waiting to die.** Yes, most of us have plenty of ideas for things we will want to do, once we have more time. But that’s not universal. And it seems like something which should be addressed by anyone seriously proposing a guaranteed income.
    ** It occurs to me that this might be a factor in why women live longer than men. The work around the home that women traditionally do doesn’t go away; essentially, they don’t retire. Hmmm….

  419. Came across this this morning (hey, it’s still morning where I am!):
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/20/trump-could-be-left-off-some-states-ballots-if-these-bills-become-law/
    It occurs to me that bills to require Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates to publish their tax returns would be far easier to uphold if states doing so applied the same requirement to candidates for state office. I can’t tell from the article if any of them propose to do so. Does anyone know if that is already a requirement somewhere?

  420. Came across this this morning (hey, it’s still morning where I am!):
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/20/trump-could-be-left-off-some-states-ballots-if-these-bills-become-law/
    It occurs to me that bills to require Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates to publish their tax returns would be far easier to uphold if states doing so applied the same requirement to candidates for state office. I can’t tell from the article if any of them propose to do so. Does anyone know if that is already a requirement somewhere?

  421. wj: there’s no way that that ‘release your tax returns’ requirement would survive a court challenge.
    Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.

  422. wj: there’s no way that that ‘release your tax returns’ requirement would survive a court challenge.
    Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.

  423. For a lot of people, their job is what gives structure to their life. Witness those who, when they retire, end up just sitting around waiting to die.
    But you’re assuming people who have jobs will quit them. And even then, if you decide not to work when you’re relatively young and not set in your ways, that problem won’t necessarily manifest itself to the same degree as it would for someone who works almost their entire adult life before retirement. So neither age nor habit will be as large of a factor.

  424. For a lot of people, their job is what gives structure to their life. Witness those who, when they retire, end up just sitting around waiting to die.
    But you’re assuming people who have jobs will quit them. And even then, if you decide not to work when you’re relatively young and not set in your ways, that problem won’t necessarily manifest itself to the same degree as it would for someone who works almost their entire adult life before retirement. So neither age nor habit will be as large of a factor.

  425. Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.
    When I remember the excruciating depression I went through after the Kavanaugh hearings, and my ongoing horror about the long-lasting changes that are being made to the American bench, I cannot explain why this cast list (and particularly Squi) makes me laugh.

  426. Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.
    When I remember the excruciating depression I went through after the Kavanaugh hearings, and my ongoing horror about the long-lasting changes that are being made to the American bench, I cannot explain why this cast list (and particularly Squi) makes me laugh.

  427. But you’re assuming people who have jobs will quit them.
    I think some of them, especially those who don’t particularly like their specific job, will quit once it’s no longer necessary in order to keep food on the table. If they realized the downside, they might not — but how many people, before retiring, realize that they will find nothing much to do once they aren’t going to work every day?

  428. But you’re assuming people who have jobs will quit them.
    I think some of them, especially those who don’t particularly like their specific job, will quit once it’s no longer necessary in order to keep food on the table. If they realized the downside, they might not — but how many people, before retiring, realize that they will find nothing much to do once they aren’t going to work every day?

  429. I guess I thought it was obvious that I was implying that you were assuming lots of people would quit their jobs – enough that “death-by-idleness” would be a considerable issue.
    I can imagine people quitting jobs they don’t like and taking a jobs they do like but that wouldn’t pay enough absent a universal income.
    So you’d have people who weren’t working in the first place.
    You’d have people who would keep working the same job.
    You’d have people who would quit one job for a more enjoyable but lower-paying job.
    And you’d have people who would just stop working.
    Only a fraction of that last category would have the death-by-idleness problem, and they would likely be a smaller proportion of younger quitters than the proportion of traditional retirees with the same problem. The very reason for quitting for many would be to pursue other non-vocational interests.

  430. I guess I thought it was obvious that I was implying that you were assuming lots of people would quit their jobs – enough that “death-by-idleness” would be a considerable issue.
    I can imagine people quitting jobs they don’t like and taking a jobs they do like but that wouldn’t pay enough absent a universal income.
    So you’d have people who weren’t working in the first place.
    You’d have people who would keep working the same job.
    You’d have people who would quit one job for a more enjoyable but lower-paying job.
    And you’d have people who would just stop working.
    Only a fraction of that last category would have the death-by-idleness problem, and they would likely be a smaller proportion of younger quitters than the proportion of traditional retirees with the same problem. The very reason for quitting for many would be to pursue other non-vocational interests.

  433. I guess I thought it was obvious that I was implying that you were assuming lots of people would quit their jobs – enough that “death-by-idleness” would be a considerable issue.
    I don’t know that it would amount to “lots” of people. I do think that it is something that shouldn’t be just ignored when planning for something like this. If it turns out that the number is small enough to ignore, well hallelujah. But I’m guessing that it may not.
    I would also note that we have a bit an existing problem (at least in some places) with young people who, for whatever reason, cannot find work. And who get into trouble as a result of finding themselves sitting around all day with energy and nowhere constructive to expend it. Again, it may turn out to be small enough to ignore. But it seems worth at least thinking about it before we make it worse.
    Finally, there are some jobs (agricultural ones leap to mind) which are sufficiently undesirable that they are hard to fill already. And would be harder to fill absent economic necessity. Now we already know that we could get immigrant (legal or otherwise) labor to take them on. But at that point, we need to address what the eligibility criteria are for someone to arrive and receive the guaranteed income. Because clearly we are not in a position to guarantee it for the whole planet.
    Just to be clear, I think the basic idea has a lot of merit. But I think we need to think it thru, especially the unintended consequences, before we leap in.

  434. I guess I thought it was obvious that I was implying that you were assuming lots of people would quit their jobs – enough that “death-by-idleness” would be a considerable issue.
    I don’t know that it would amount to “lots” of people. I do think that it is something that shouldn’t be just ignored when planning for something like this. If it turns out that the number is small enough to ignore, well hallelujah. But I’m guessing that it may not.
    I would also note that we have a bit an existing problem (at least in some places) with young people who, for whatever reason, cannot find work. And who get into trouble as a result of finding themselves sitting around all day with energy and nowhere constructive to expend it. Again, it may turn out to be small enough to ignore. But it seems worth at least thinking about it before we make it worse.
    Finally, there are some jobs (agricultural ones leap to mind) which are sufficiently undesirable that they are hard to fill already. And would be harder to fill absent economic necessity. Now we already know that we could get immigrant (legal or otherwise) labor to take them on. But at that point, we need to address what the eligibility criteria are for someone to arrive and receive the guaranteed income. Because clearly we are not in a position to guarantee it for the whole planet.
    Just to be clear, I think the basic idea has a lot of merit. But I think we need to think it thru, especially the unintended consequences, before we leap in.

  435. But I think we need to think it thru, especially the unintended consequences, before we leap in.
    We are thinking it through (to the extent that blog comments matter). I just don’t think death-by-idleness is as likely to be as significant a problem as you do. (Not that I have the power to ignore the potential problem on behalf of the United States of America, nor would I if I did).
    I think the majority of people who would quit working entirely would be the ones not making much money, anyway, and who could use more time taking care of themselves and their families. That, or people who would rather play the guitar or write poetry or paint happy little clouds.

  436. But I think we need to think it thru, especially the unintended consequences, before we leap in.
    We are thinking it through (to the extent that blog comments matter). I just don’t think death-by-idleness is as likely to be as significant a problem as you do. (Not that I have the power to ignore the potential problem on behalf of the United States of America, nor would I if I did).
    I think the majority of people who would quit working entirely would be the ones not making much money, anyway, and who could use more time taking care of themselves and their families. That, or people who would rather play the guitar or write poetry or paint happy little clouds.

  437. Perhaps a portion of each person’s UBC could be used by some to start a business and hire others for decent salaries and benefits.
    There would be no law against working, I presume.
    Entrepreneurship, if you’ll pardon my French.
    Much like Obamacare freed up a few hardy souls to take a little more risk and venture out on their own in business, since their medical insurance wasn’t now a fucking life and death measure.
    If idleness is such a problem, what’s with every single financial site one visits running daily “sponsered ads” hyping articles like “How Macy and Ed retired at 35 and live a life of unfettered Freedom.”
    I guess if we met the real Marcy and Ed they would be catatonic with idleness except when they argue with each other over whether to take the Jaguar or the BMW out to Montauk for Sunday brunch.
    I suppose a few ornery conservatives on the UBC themselves will fall prey to idleness against their long-held principles that a little work never hurt anyone and you’ll take what you get and like it and, out of sheer habit, roll down their windows at intersections and tell perfectly innocent pedestrains who appear to be idle to “Get a job, ya layabout!”
    I certainly understand some in certain fulfilling professions growing morose over the loss of their lifelong callings, but why couldn’t they continue if not for ageism and “let’s ease Bob out, because he’s getting to be a bit of a weight on the bottom line, what with his chronic piles and all.”
    Myself, I find idleness to be a great boon.
    I was reading about elderly Jains in South Asia who strap their belongings to their backs and go on permanent pilgrimage, walking the mountain trails day after day, removing themselves as burdens on their families.
    They stop and have tea and perhaps read along the way.
    Sounds like more fun than reporting to some officious MBA about the status of this week’s inventory of crap that no one cares a whit about.
    Americans are afraid of too MANY people coming into possession of fuck-off money, for fear they will be told to fuck off.

  438. Perhaps a portion of each person’s UBC could be used by some to start a business and hire others for decent salaries and benefits.
    There would be no law against working, I presume.
    Entrepreneurship, if you’ll pardon my French.
    Much like Obamacare freed up a few hardy souls to take a little more risk and venture out on their own in business, since their medical insurance wasn’t now a fucking life and death measure.
    If idleness is such a problem, what’s with every single financial site one visits running daily “sponsered ads” hyping articles like “How Macy and Ed retired at 35 and live a life of unfettered Freedom.”
    I guess if we met the real Marcy and Ed they would be catatonic with idleness except when they argue with each other over whether to take the Jaguar or the BMW out to Montauk for Sunday brunch.
    I suppose a few ornery conservatives on the UBC themselves will fall prey to idleness against their long-held principles that a little work never hurt anyone and you’ll take what you get and like it and, out of sheer habit, roll down their windows at intersections and tell perfectly innocent pedestrains who appear to be idle to “Get a job, ya layabout!”
    I certainly understand some in certain fulfilling professions growing morose over the loss of their lifelong callings, but why couldn’t they continue if not for ageism and “let’s ease Bob out, because he’s getting to be a bit of a weight on the bottom line, what with his chronic piles and all.”
    Myself, I find idleness to be a great boon.
    I was reading about elderly Jains in South Asia who strap their belongings to their backs and go on permanent pilgrimage, walking the mountain trails day after day, removing themselves as burdens on their families.
    They stop and have tea and perhaps read along the way.
    Sounds like more fun than reporting to some officious MBA about the status of this week’s inventory of crap that no one cares a whit about.
    Americans are afraid of too MANY people coming into possession of fuck-off money, for fear they will be told to fuck off.

  439. I think the majority of people who would quit working entirely would be the ones not making much money, anyway, and who could use more time taking care of themselves and their families. That, or people who would rather play the guitar or write poetry or paint happy little clouds.
    A majority? I think so, too. But consider how many people, when retired or out of work, spend their days just sitting in front of the TV. (Commenting on blog posts at least engages the mind.) I’d say even a minority of, say, the size of the homeless population** would be big enough to worry about.
    ** Not saying the two groups have any relationship. Just an example of a relatively small part of the population which is nonetheless big enough to be a worry. At least for some.

  440. I think the majority of people who would quit working entirely would be the ones not making much money, anyway, and who could use more time taking care of themselves and their families. That, or people who would rather play the guitar or write poetry or paint happy little clouds.
    A majority? I think so, too. But consider how many people, when retired or out of work, spend their days just sitting in front of the TV. (Commenting on blog posts at least engages the mind.) I’d say even a minority of, say, the size of the homeless population** would be big enough to worry about.
    ** Not saying the two groups have any relationship. Just an example of a relatively small part of the population which is nonetheless big enough to be a worry. At least for some.

  441. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-takes-credit-giving-mccain-funeral
    An example of idleness being the Devil’s workshop for a person with a guaranteed stolen income.
    We WILL thank the future President who decrees no state funeral for this lout when he croaks, maybe an overpriced cortege of a buckboard led by a mule with three billy goats in attendance and a grave site in a flood plain.
    No 21-gun salute, but rather a nationwide Bronx cheer with one cheek lifted off the pew.
    Hail and Sleet on the Chief.
    America is a disgrace.

  442. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-takes-credit-giving-mccain-funeral
    An example of idleness being the Devil’s workshop for a person with a guaranteed stolen income.
    We WILL thank the future President who decrees no state funeral for this lout when he croaks, maybe an overpriced cortege of a buckboard led by a mule with three billy goats in attendance and a grave site in a flood plain.
    No 21-gun salute, but rather a nationwide Bronx cheer with one cheek lifted off the pew.
    Hail and Sleet on the Chief.
    America is a disgrace.

  443. Ed is SO idle that he has a wife named Macy AND a girlfriend named Marcy, which has got to be a sticky wicket when calling out in the dead of night.

  444. Ed is SO idle that he has a wife named Macy AND a girlfriend named Marcy, which has got to be a sticky wicket when calling out in the dead of night.

  445. I think there is something to be said for readying an expansion of Americorps (for example) as part of the planning for guaranteed income.

  446. I think there is something to be said for readying an expansion of Americorps (for example) as part of the planning for guaranteed income.

  447. Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.
    Hope you’re teaching law school in your spare time, Snarki.

  448. Particularly not with Lawless, StripSearch, Token, Kav and Squi in the majority.
    Hope you’re teaching law school in your spare time, Snarki.

  449. a UBI of $15K would require $4,800,000,000,000 in taxpayer money.
    that’s about $1,400,000,000,000 more than the IRS took in last year.

  450. a UBI of $15K would require $4,800,000,000,000 in taxpayer money.
    that’s about $1,400,000,000,000 more than the IRS took in last year.

  453. a UBI of $15K would require $4,800,000,000,000 in taxpayer money
    Not quite that much. You’d pay a lower rate to (the guardians of) dependent children, $5k say. And you’d save about $500bn on non-medicaid benefits. And you’d make the UBI tax-free, but all income above it taxable, so that in effect it would attract a marginal tax rate of, say, 22% on average. Overall your cost would be about $2.8tn. Which is still not cheap.

  454. a UBI of $15K would require $4,800,000,000,000 in taxpayer money
    Not quite that much. You’d pay a lower rate to (the guardians of) dependent children, $5k say. And you’d save about $500bn on non-medicaid benefits. And you’d make the UBI tax-free, but all income above it taxable, so that in effect it would attract a marginal tax rate of, say, 22% on average. Overall your cost would be about $2.8tn. Which is still not cheap.

  455. $2.8T
    So that what, two stupid foreign wars and a massive tax-break/giveaway to the űberrich?
    File it under “why we can’t have nice things”

  456. $2.8T
    So that what, two stupid foreign wars and a massive tax-break/giveaway to the űberrich?
    File it under “why we can’t have nice things”

  457. A piece of Watergate history, updated.
    It is not a pleasant story:
    https://timeline.com/martha-mitchell-smear-campaign-nixon-watergate-a357a81480be
    The only bright spot for Martha was that Nixon didn’t get away with it. In 1974, amid impeachment proceedings, the president gave a televised address announcing his resignation. In 1975, John Mitchell was convicted on five counts for the cover-up and served 19 months in federal prison. Martha said later, “Four years ago we had everything, and now we have nothing.” By 1976, she was dead at the age of 57, from a rare bone cancer…
    …Things went better for Stephen King, the agent who detained and kicked Mitchell. He went on to have an illustrious career in chemical manufacturing. In 2017, President Donald Trump appointed him ambassador to the Czech Republic…

  458. A piece of Watergate history, updated.
    It is not a pleasant story:
    https://timeline.com/martha-mitchell-smear-campaign-nixon-watergate-a357a81480be
    The only bright spot for Martha was that Nixon didn’t get away with it. In 1974, amid impeachment proceedings, the president gave a televised address announcing his resignation. In 1975, John Mitchell was convicted on five counts for the cover-up and served 19 months in federal prison. Martha said later, “Four years ago we had everything, and now we have nothing.” By 1976, she was dead at the age of 57, from a rare bone cancer…
    …Things went better for Stephen King, the agent who detained and kicked Mitchell. He went on to have an illustrious career in chemical manufacturing. In 2017, President Donald Trump appointed him ambassador to the Czech Republic…

  459. If my calculations are correct, using fingers and toes, the $4,800,000,000,000 figure divided by the roughly 210,000,000 working adults in the country is something under $23,000 cost per person.
    In the interest of the environment and to reduce costs, I used the other side of the envelope Arthur Laffer used to calculate the Giggle Curve, which posited that the curvaceousness of Marilyn Monroe’s pelvis, if exercised equally by each of her hips while she was on an oceangoing cruise, could cause tidal waves in distant parts of the globe, some alteration in the Earth’s magnetic field, not to mention sinking the ship and its lifeboats, so there you go.
    Graduating the tax burden according to income to whatever level would not relegate Warren Buffet to a life of idleness, ennui, and perhaps crime, of course, would do whatever it does, but I would need to grow more fingers and toes to tell you what.
    Whatever happens, the IRS’ budget and staff must be increased to collect the taxes the laws say should be collected, but we live in a lawless country by choice now.

  460. If my calculations are correct, using fingers and toes, the $4,800,000,000,000 figure divided by the roughly 210,000,000 working adults in the country is something under $23,000 cost per person.
    In the interest of the environment and to reduce costs, I used the other side of the envelope Arthur Laffer used to calculate the Giggle Curve, which posited that the curvaceousness of Marilyn Monroe’s pelvis, if exercised equally by each of her hips while she was on an oceangoing cruise, could cause tidal waves in distant parts of the globe, some alteration in the Earth’s magnetic field, not to mention sinking the ship and its lifeboats, so there you go.
    Graduating the tax burden according to income to whatever level would not relegate Warren Buffet to a life of idleness, ennui, and perhaps crime, of course, would do whatever it does, but I would need to grow more fingers and toes to tell you what.
    Whatever happens, the IRS’ budget and staff must be increased to collect the taxes the laws say should be collected, but we live in a lawless country by choice now.

  461. It was a paper napkin, not an envelope, for the pedants out there.
    Would that Laffer had been dining in a Chinese restaurant and only read-only cloth napkins would have been available for writing down bullshit.

  462. It was a paper napkin, not an envelope, for the pedants out there.
    Would that Laffer had been dining in a Chinese restaurant and only read-only cloth napkins would have been available for writing down bullshit.

  465. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/why-are-we-doing-this-trump-aides-dont-understand-mccain-conway-attacks
    OK, a new theory regarding what p is up to.
    He is faking mental illness, thus laying the ground for being removed from office once the 25th Amendment invokes his incapacity to serve as ….. ahhahahahahhahehhanhehehe ….. President of the United States as brought to us by Chuck Jones, Chuck Barris Enterprises, and the Worldwide Wrestling Federation.
    This will enable him, like any mid-level mob boss or corporate liar worth his thinly-sliced garlic and represented by a battalion of bombastic bushkins whose only prior legal experience was sitting in hospital emergency waiting rooms squirting fake blood from up their sleeves on alleged comatose patients with bad comb overs and confined to gurneys, to show up for his many dozens of trials once he is out of office in a wheelchair with a blanket over his knees, a sippy cup in one hand while the other moves up and down over his mouth blubbering his lips to sound like a whackjob, trailed by an IV feed, and to plead “urghungaflapazoid, you loser.”
    “Your Honor, our client, as you can see for yourself, is too incapacitated to stand trial and, may we point out, to be executed by firing squad. May we suggest confinement to the penthouse of Mar-a-Lago with full Twitter access and daily tongue bathings by David Nunes, Sean Hannity, and KellyAnne Conthemallalltheway.”

  466. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/why-are-we-doing-this-trump-aides-dont-understand-mccain-conway-attacks
    OK, a new theory regarding what p is up to.
    He is faking mental illness, thus laying the ground for being removed from office once the 25th Amendment invokes his incapacity to serve as ….. ahhahahahahhahehhanhehehe ….. President of the United States as brought to us by Chuck Jones, Chuck Barris Enterprises, and the Worldwide Wrestling Federation.
    This will enable him, like any mid-level mob boss or corporate liar worth his thinly-sliced garlic and represented by a battalion of bombastic bushkins whose only prior legal experience was sitting in hospital emergency waiting rooms squirting fake blood from up their sleeves on alleged comatose patients with bad comb overs and confined to gurneys, to show up for his many dozens of trials once he is out of office in a wheelchair with a blanket over his knees, a sippy cup in one hand while the other moves up and down over his mouth blubbering his lips to sound like a whackjob, trailed by an IV feed, and to plead “urghungaflapazoid, you loser.”
    “Your Honor, our client, as you can see for yourself, is too incapacitated to stand trial and, may we point out, to be executed by firing squad. May we suggest confinement to the penthouse of Mar-a-Lago with full Twitter access and daily tongue bathings by David Nunes, Sean Hannity, and KellyAnne Conthemallalltheway.”

  467. Lawyers, pay attention. There is money in them thar pustules:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/21/gop-governor-doesnt-believe-chickenpox-vaccines-he-took-his-nine-kids-pox-party-instead/?utm_term=.6e6fe8b28942
    Smart guy, Bevin. Exposing his children to chickenpox and this possibly exposing other children not his, who were possibly kicked off Kentucky’s statewide ACA and Medicaid at his pleasure, and thus possibly denied medical care (they are forced exchange a chicken for a diagnosis and treatment of chickenpox and shingles) by the same fuck whose children exposed them to the pox seems a risky bit of full of shitness for a guy with such deep pockets for tort lawyers to plunder in the cause of justice.
    Not to mention, there are rumors that Bevin’s offspring also somehow, theories abound, passed along syphilis to these other children, not to mention character flaws and AynRand disease, which causes one’s nose to point straight up in air while stepping on homeless people’s throats in stiletto heels.
    His water quality policies have caused cholera outbreaks in Lexington.

  468. Lawyers, pay attention. There is money in them thar pustules:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/21/gop-governor-doesnt-believe-chickenpox-vaccines-he-took-his-nine-kids-pox-party-instead/?utm_term=.6e6fe8b28942
    Smart guy, Bevin. Exposing his children to chickenpox and this possibly exposing other children not his, who were possibly kicked off Kentucky’s statewide ACA and Medicaid at his pleasure, and thus possibly denied medical care (they are forced exchange a chicken for a diagnosis and treatment of chickenpox and shingles) by the same fuck whose children exposed them to the pox seems a risky bit of full of shitness for a guy with such deep pockets for tort lawyers to plunder in the cause of justice.
    Not to mention, there are rumors that Bevin’s offspring also somehow, theories abound, passed along syphilis to these other children, not to mention character flaws and AynRand disease, which causes one’s nose to point straight up in air while stepping on homeless people’s throats in stiletto heels.
    His water quality policies have caused cholera outbreaks in Lexington.

  471. https://www.balloon-juice.com/2019/03/21/what-the-hell-were-they-regulating/
    When I purchased my Boeing 800 Max, the showroom sales liar pointed out to me when I asked why the floor model had only one wing, that the second wing was available as an option for another one million dollars, with additional charges of course, amortized over the life of the lease, for the accompanying jet engine affixed to the second wing to prevent the plane from listing to one side and possible flying in circles.
    When I accused him of upselling me, a practice now unavoidable across every product line in thieving Wharton-trained pigfucker America, he added, with a broad, ingratiating smile which displayed his Burt Lancaster chiclets that gleamed a blinding wattage much like the fake moons Chinese cities are about to loft over their metropolitan areas, that additional options available for sizable charges include a fuel gauge, fire retardant seat fabrics, landing gear, oxygen feeds, and on-board toilets.
    Flushable versions of toilets were yet another incremental charge.
    No drink caddies were available for nervous nellies, even those with bottomless bank accounts.
    Stock equipment provided gratis includes a monitor over each passenger seat which records a charge to each customer’s credit card for each scream, prayer, and curseword emitted by said customer as the nose of the plane is mysteriously forced down, while the pilot and crew leaf thru the fatal error message section of the 7000-page driver’s manual (“It says ‘adjust the rudder’ right here; does this model come with a rudder, I wonder?”) also available for an extra hundred-thousand dollar Franklins in the 12-volume leather bound set from Chico Marx Enterprises, which will double as flotation devices in the unlikely event of a water landing.

  472. https://www.balloon-juice.com/2019/03/21/what-the-hell-were-they-regulating/
    When I purchased my Boeing 800 Max, the showroom sales liar pointed out to me when I asked why the floor model had only one wing, that the second wing was available as an option for another one million dollars, with additional charges of course, amortized over the life of the lease, for the accompanying jet engine affixed to the second wing to prevent the plane from listing to one side and possible flying in circles.
    When I accused him of upselling me, a practice now unavoidable across every product line in thieving Wharton-trained pigfucker America, he added, with a broad, ingratiating smile which displayed his Burt Lancaster chiclets that gleamed a blinding wattage much like the fake moons Chinese cities are about to loft over their metropolitan areas, that additional options available for sizable charges include a fuel gauge, fire retardant seat fabrics, landing gear, oxygen feeds, and on-board toilets.
    Flushable versions of toilets were yet another incremental charge.
    No drink caddies were available for nervous nellies, even those with bottomless bank accounts.
    Stock equipment provided gratis includes a monitor over each passenger seat which records a charge to each customer’s credit card for each scream, prayer, and curseword emitted by said customer as the nose of the plane is mysteriously forced down, while the pilot and crew leaf thru the fatal error message section of the 7000-page driver’s manual (“It says ‘adjust the rudder’ right here; does this model come with a rudder, I wonder?”) also available for an extra hundred-thousand dollar Franklins in the 12-volume leather bound set from Chico Marx Enterprises, which will double as flotation devices in the unlikely event of a water landing.

  475. additional options available for sizable charges include a fuel gauge, fire retardant seat fabrics, landing gear, oxygen feeds, and on-board toilets.
    “If the oxygen masks deploy, make sure to put on your own mask first. Then look from side to side for Trumpers to punch and take away their masks. The lack of oxygen can’t make their brain damage any worse, amirite?”

  476. additional options available for sizable charges include a fuel gauge, fire retardant seat fabrics, landing gear, oxygen feeds, and on-board toilets.
    “If the oxygen masks deploy, make sure to put on your own mask first. Then look from side to side for Trumpers to punch and take away their masks. The lack of oxygen can’t make their brain damage any worse, amirite?”

  477. One more thing:
    https://www.balloon-juice.com/2019/03/21/lets-compare-and-contrast/
    We’re fucking insane, as a class of shitheads occupying the contiguous U.S. of A.
    Instead of crash test dummies for observing the effects on humans of automobiles hitting bridge abutments at 80 mph, let’s use real human specimens.
    Load up a Boeing 800 Max with unwitting live humans, point the nose down, and let’s reconstruct what happens.
    Tell you what, instead of lining up teachers on their knees and shooting pellets at their backs as a “safety” lesson, let’s tie any one of the NRA assholes starring in those YouTube videos to a chair in a classroom and shoot them point blank in the head with live ammo.
    Record it and show it to all of the conservative vermin in this country as a word to the wise regarding their personal safety.

  478. One more thing:
    https://www.balloon-juice.com/2019/03/21/lets-compare-and-contrast/
    We’re fucking insane, as a class of shitheads occupying the contiguous U.S. of A.
    Instead of crash test dummies for observing the effects on humans of automobiles hitting bridge abutments at 80 mph, let’s use real human specimens.
    Load up a Boeing 800 Max with unwitting live humans, point the nose down, and let’s reconstruct what happens.
    Tell you what, instead of lining up teachers on their knees and shooting pellets at their backs as a “safety” lesson, let’s tie any one of the NRA assholes starring in those YouTube videos to a chair in a classroom and shoot them point blank in the head with live ammo.
    Record it and show it to all of the conservative vermin in this country as a word to the wise regarding their personal safety.

  479. And would hurt the airlines to give me a little more legroom so that I can straighten my legs and brace myself for impact.
    How many dicks to Americans need to suck in this country for a little fucking humanity free of the fine science of incentives and disincentives.

  480. And would hurt the airlines to give me a little more legroom so that I can straighten my legs and brace myself for impact.
    How many dicks to Americans need to suck in this country for a little fucking humanity free of the fine science of incentives and disincentives.

  481. Tweet from John Hart, NZ farmer:
    “Until today I was one of the New Zealanders who owned a semi-automatic rifle. On the farm they are a useful tool in some circumstances, but my convenience doesn’t outweigh the risk of misuse.
    We don’t need these in our country.
    We have make sure it’s #NeverAgain”

  482. Tweet from John Hart, NZ farmer:
    “Until today I was one of the New Zealanders who owned a semi-automatic rifle. On the farm they are a useful tool in some circumstances, but my convenience doesn’t outweigh the risk of misuse.
    We don’t need these in our country.
    We have make sure it’s #NeverAgain”

  485. I was in Phoenix last week to take in some MLB spring training and took a day to drive thru the Sonoran Desert town to the border town of Nogales, Arizona after reading about the military festooning the border wall that cuts thru the center of town with concertina razor wire.
    I think I’ve witnessed the endgame for Manifest Destiny, that made-up thing.
    It reminded me of the photos of the Gulag or the camps during World War II. Beautiful, sparkling in the sun, just like p promised. Only the best.
    Oddly, Nogales, Mexico looked better that the U.S half of town from where I stood.
    The city fathers on this side, as the tourist info lady explained to me, are dead set against the razor wire and have protested with Homeland Security.
    https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS774US774&q=nogales+border+fence+festooned+with+razor+wire&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiHguTgo5ThAhWY94MKHQ8dCQMQsAR6BAgIEAE&biw=1280&bih=616
    Not a good look for the land of the squi and the home of the knave, unless we’re living in a Cormac McCarthy novel.
    In the 1950s, apparently, a previous time the wrong sort acted out, the U.S. repurposed razor wire from the Japanese internment camps constructed during World War II along the Southern border, which goes to show that fascists can be budget conscious.
    I imagined the staff of the p Administration trying to get hung up in the wire in their cheap suits as they try to get over the wall into Mexico once we create Jurassic Park on this side and chase them thru the Sonoran Desert with heavy artillery supported by vast squads of armed drones during the coming troubles.
    Will vultures stoop so low to dine on Steve King and his wife Jeanine Pirro?

  486. I was in Phoenix last week to take in some MLB spring training and took a day to drive thru the Sonoran Desert town to the border town of Nogales, Arizona after reading about the military festooning the border wall that cuts thru the center of town with concertina razor wire.
    I think I’ve witnessed the endgame for Manifest Destiny, that made-up thing.
    It reminded me of the photos of the Gulag or the camps during World War II. Beautiful, sparkling in the sun, just like p promised. Only the best.
    Oddly, Nogales, Mexico looked better that the U.S half of town from where I stood.
    The city fathers on this side, as the tourist info lady explained to me, are dead set against the razor wire and have protested with Homeland Security.
    https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS774US774&q=nogales+border+fence+festooned+with+razor+wire&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiHguTgo5ThAhWY94MKHQ8dCQMQsAR6BAgIEAE&biw=1280&bih=616
    Not a good look for the land of the squi and the home of the knave, unless we’re living in a Cormac McCarthy novel.
    In the 1950s, apparently, a previous time the wrong sort acted out, the U.S. repurposed razor wire from the Japanese internment camps constructed during World War II along the Southern border, which goes to show that fascists can be budget conscious.
    I imagined the staff of the p Administration trying to get hung up in the wire in their cheap suits as they try to get over the wall into Mexico once we create Jurassic Park on this side and chase them thru the Sonoran Desert with heavy artillery supported by vast squads of armed drones during the coming troubles.
    Will vultures stoop so low to dine on Steve King and his wife Jeanine Pirro?

Comments are closed.