Parsing Out Pete Buttigieg, Parenting And Otherwise
An item in Politico addressing the previously low-key absence of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg the last few weeks touched off the usual calm and rational discussion on social media and news media. And by calm and rational, we mean the effect of chum thrown into the water to get the sharks to the cage for the paying audience to see up close. Politico tee’d this all up by titling the article “Can Pete Buttigieg have it all?” One could write another column on the implications there, but to answer the rhetorical, yes politically connected and privileged government official with popularity in American media can indeed have it all. That isn’t the point, however.
They didn’t previously announce it, but Buttigieg’s office told West Wing Playbook that the secretary has actually been on paid leave since mid-August to spend time with his husband, Chasten, and their two newborn babies.
“For the first four weeks, he was mostly offline except for major agency decisions and matters that could not be delegated,” said a spokesperson for the Department of Transportation. “He has been ramping up activities since then.” As he does that, Buttigieg will “continue to take some time over the coming weeks to support his husband and take care of his new children,” the spokesperson added.
That ramp has been steep this week, as Buttigieg reverts to his “go everywhere” media habits.
Since Oct. 7, Buttigieg has appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” “MSNBC with Geoff Bennett,” CNN’s “New Day,” CNBC’s “Morning Bell,” Bloomberg TV’s “Balance of Power,” and the NPR Politics Podcast. He participated in virtual events to promote the infrastructure bill with the Commercial Club of Chicago and the Citizen Budget Commission of New York. He also attended a high-profile meeting with President JOE BIDEN Wednesday on supply chain bottlenecks.
In case reporters missed the flurry, the department blasted out an email to the press noting several of Buttigieg’s media appearances with the subject line, “ICYMI: Secretary Buttigieg Highlights Administration Efforts to Address Ongoing Supply Chain Disruptions.”
Let’s pull up and park right here for a second. One of the major drivers of this story was a certain highly rated prime time talking head using his program to say some really vile things about Pete Buttigieg that I’m not going to repeat here. Nor am I going to name his name, link to, or otherwise give oxygen to the bonfire of hatefulness that individual performs in a masturbatory fashion each evening to fuel his business model and bring glee to the sucking chest wound where most humans have a functional heart. I will not defile this publication, any of my platforms, or my own mental bandwidth by giving that person any of the attention he so desperately needs.
While we are being parenthetical and such, another full disclosure: I do not know the moves to the “High Hopes” Pete dance, thought he was an unsuitable candidate for president, and — as someone who spent more than half his adult life working in transportation — did not find him particularly qualified for Transportation Secretary. Having said that, there wasn’t any reason to deny him the post in the realities of political appointments for being a good Biden soldier during the 2020 campaign, either. I found there not to be much “there” there when evaluating Pete Buttigieg for higher office. His chief qualification and rise to national prominence was that he had the highly valuable skill of speaking — among several languages he has learned — fluent media, which made him uber popular among the highly educated and predominantly white media classes, and almost laughably unpopular with every other demographic. Which lead to the Democratic Party primary voters turning to the feller Pete now works for, President Joe Biden. Thus, Pete Buttigieg has been ensconced in the big office at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC since his confirmation.
Everyone up to speed? Good. So, let us parse this latest version of the Pete Principle out as fairly and objectively as we possibly can, shall we?
Yes, paternal leave is a good thing. Even the United States military has adjusted to the realization that family caregiving is essential, and though “paternal leave” has been moved under the more gender-neutral and expansive term of “secondary caregiving” new parents are entitled to two or three weeks of paid leave depending on the service and subject to the requirements thereof. Having watched my youngest child’s birth via webcam while in Iraq and not holding her for the first time until she was 4 months old at the airport coming home is the reality of the latter, and why I have great empathy and desire for all possible accommodation within reason for folks to get the former. The US Government has been moving that direction, and many larger private companies have organically been going that direction as well in a competitive labor market in which such benefits are becoming more and more meaningful to employees. Other countries give workers far more time off than Pete got here. Many workers in America get far less that what Pete got here. There’s a needed policy debate to be had there, and if Pete Buttigieg ushers that debate to the fore, then something positive will come from this hubbub.
You can discuss the Pete Buttigieg situation without winding up with a silly position on parental leave, which every expert, study, and parent will tell you is a good thing for families, companies, and society on the whole.
Yes, the amount of time off Secretary Pete got here is debatable. Let’s give some benefit of the doubt and assume in the Covid-19 world there are plenty of official duties that are still being done remotely and virtually so being home might not always equal not being available. But still, with almost all other standards of paternal leave being a few weeks, it’s time for Pete Buttigieg to bike, suburban, or otherwise make his way into the office and be the front of his cabinet-level branch of government. You want to be a leader, you want to bolster that resume that consists of “mayor of South Bend” and “super popular with the media primary candidate” but not much else, you need to at least go through the motions of doing the job. The flurry of media activity on tap for Pete Buttigieg would suggest Team Pete is acutely aware of this. It is very fair to point out that if you can take off that much time without anyone noticing, you might not be that important in the first place. It is also fair to point out with a transportation and supply chain crisis so prominent the President himself is having to do dedicated speeches and policy moves to address it, family situation or not the Secretary of Transportation should be front and center since these issues falls in his shop for the job taxpayers are paying him to do.
You can discuss Pete Buttigieg’s amount of time off, why there wasn’t any coverage of it until just now, why folks outside the DOT and administration seemed to not know about or notice his absence, and his role as Secretary of Transportation in the current crisis, without falling into silly hyperbole hinting that Pete Buttigieg could single handedly unload all 60 ships off the California coast by the sheer awesomeness of his presence and/or Christmas is going to be cancelled because he was offline for the better part of two months. Pete Buttigieg isn’t that powerful, settle down.
Yes, using the current situation to personally attack Pete Buttigieg’s sexual orientation and personal relationships is way out of bounds. Unless you have a documented history and evidence as to the sitting Transportation Secretary’s personal relationship dynamics being a deciding factor in DOT policy or performance, you are just telling on yourself by going there on a story that has far more legitimate and important angles. If you want your standard of rhetoric to be Don Blankenship, you have that right, but we are going to all point and laugh at you for being an insipid, small minded moron. Like we did with noted small minded moron Don Blankenship when he immortalized “Cocaine Mitch and his China family” in reference to former Transportation Secretary and wife of Mitch McConnell, Elaine Chao, who is originally from Taiwan. Children who now have a loving family with two engaged, stable, and successful parents is a good thing, and the rest of the Buttigieg family dynamics outside of some unknown maleficence or issue that pertains directly to his status as a public official is none of our business. The truly ugly reactions came out quick against Pete Buttigieg by the usual suspects on cable news, talk radio, and certain corners of the interwebs, and such commentary should be denounced for the hatemongering masquerading as politics it is.
You can discuss your opinions, political, personal, or policy wise, about Pete Buttigieg the public figure without dragging his family into it, which besides all other consideration is just base level adulting and common decency.
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg has plenty to answer for in his official capacity, and with the supply chain crisis not abating anytime soon he will remain in the hot seat. To be fair, things he in the capacity of his office can do about it are very limited, but that’s the gig when you want a resume line item on your climb up the ladder. You get the good and the bad when you are in the chair with a title placard in front of it. You have to do the job. Our job as citizens subject to the policies of his office is to hold Pete Buttigieg the public figure accountable for how he performs those duties. As a fellow citizen living in America, as Pete Buttigieg’s peers, our job is to protect his right to have a family that, unless his husband starts flame throwing on cable news or some such, are not in the game and should be off limits. Do unto others isn’t really a transportation principle, but it works here.
Congratulations, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, for your expanding family. May the children be blessed and bring you and yours joy, and may we never hear of them in the press other than you bragging on them — for all our sakes, but especially theirs.
Now, sir, if you are good and ready, get back to work.
And as for those of you who want to make hay out of anything other than Pete Buttigieg’s policy, politics, or job performance with viral attacks that are thinly or not-so-thinly veiled hatred towards him personally or his family: Shut up. Do better. Engage the issues of the day, not your own issues of every day forced onto them. You are only showing the world parts of yourself for us to judge accordingly, things that are far more meaningful than the policies of the Department of Transportation.
Good perspective, Andrew. There is enough there there to completely hammer the administration without wading into social issues that are, frankly, beside the point. The supply chain problem didn’t just materialize. It was a happening before the head of the DOT decided to take as much time off as he did. And it’s obviously still a problem with no immediate end in sight. The decision of not communicating to the American public that he was taking leave is a big problem however – as is never having a plan in place to get on the problem sooner. Under any other time, they all could have gotten away with it, but certainly in August 2021 they should have anticipated this blowing up. That’s on the Biden Administration and is representative of their judgment, or lack thereof, on this and several other issues from the border to Afghanistan. Wading into the social aspects only gives the administration a way to change the conversation away from their incompetence. Foolish to do that, imo.Report
Thanks for readingReport
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg has plenty to answer for in his official capacity, and with the supply chain crisis not abating anytime soon he will remain in the hot seat.
This booty has been judged: Guilty.Report
Out of deference to Andrew’s instructions I won’t mention the name of the vile person.
But I will mention, over and over again, that the vile person is one of the most watched and has the devoted attention not just of a clear majority of the Republican party, but has access to the most powerful members of American politics.
And I will never stop pointing out that the Republicans behave as if none of this matters. A latter day Father Coughlin spews Radio Rwanda level ethnic fear and hatred every night, and not one sitting Republican can bring themselves to call for his censure and shame.
Not one! Even the Mitt Romneys and Susan Collinses who get regular tongue baths from the media about their dignity and gravitas and statesmanship, flinch and wet themselves in impotent fear.
Attention isn’t the oxygen that bullies need, but indifference. The vile person is relying on our silence and acquiescence, on our willingness to turn our heads and feign ignorance.
The vile man has about 60 million willing accomplices. We can’t allow the accomplices to escape the shame.Report
It’s not a dictate of course, but the best course of action for what I try to do here both individually as a writer and as part of the OT team. Folks can of course do as they see fit with TFGReport
Early on, a lot of my fellow liberals tried to treat Trump like an annoying toddler, or a braying jackass on the streetcorner; Ignore him, maybe point and mock, or give him a silly nickname like “Hair Furor”.
This was based on a terrible misunderstanding of the dynamics. They thought he and his followers were conventional politicians, vulnerable to the normal tools of partisan warfare like mockery and embarrassment.
But the proper lens to understand our current political moment is the lens of fascism and ethnic tribal warfare. Like the Balkans in the 90s, or Rwanda, or maybe the Italian Fascists in the 1930s.
The Trumpists didn’t get to the place they are by reason and can’t get out by it. The Jesse Kellys, Jack Prosobiecs, the Proud Boys and Boogaloos don’t want a future of peace and prosperity they want conflict and an epic battle in which their hated enemies are no more. They aren’t embarrassed or shamed.
Its too late for silence, too late to hope they will just get tired and go away. Jan.6 was a dress rehearsal and they have learned and are improving their strategy for the next election.
And like I keep saying, they are banking on one fact that we, people like us here on this blog, can take them from.
They are banking on that vast army of onlookers who will be silent and turn away and passively accept whatever they do. The multitudes who will equivocate and waffle and dither in feigned helplessness. Those who can still be shamed and cajoled and persuaded.
We can deprive them of this tool by demanding that our fellow citizens take a stand and choose a side.Report
NO NOT THAT ONEReport
I’m reminded of the chronically bad at strategery Ryan Grimm, now of the Intercept, and a few others making the decision to change all HuffPost coverage of then-candidate Donald Trump to the entertainment section thinking this was a brilliant statement. It was not only foolish but had the exact opposite affect since it was, to the Trump fans, one more example of (insert various grievance trope about media here, there are many to choose from). Folks fueled by that stuff are like dealing with the Borg, nothing you throw at them is going to work, it just assimilates into their worldview of never being wrong and everyone out to get them. That’s not a unique thing to Trumpian die-hards, but they are the glaring example at this particular moment in time.
I’m reminded of when we did firefighting training, they douse hay bails in accelerant and then place them in the corners of the fire tower. The reason – and lesson for the newbies – is if you hit a flaming hay bail directly with the hose, instead of putting out the fire the water pressure explodes it like a bomb and spreads fire all over the room. But you can use indirect methods to change the flow of oxygen in that same room, and lessen the fire and then attack it in the weakened state. Fire doesn’t negotiate, it eats fuel and breaths oxygen and relentlessly seeks out both regardless what you think about it, so the reality of that needs to be drilled into the heads of those tasked with stopping it.
Part of dealing with fire is understand what is already on fire is gone already even if it isn’t completely invovled yet, so you pick your line and stop the spread, starve it, then kill it. The damage done by the populist Trumpist that have gone full cult of personality isn’t changeable by normal means, and its foolish to pretend the fire damage isn’t there. But going forward we can attack it with indirect methods, and as it burns all its own fuel up deny it further fuel and oxygen and contain it going forward. That’s not a popular thing, like with a fire the house is probably already damaged beyond repair. But it’s your only option for dealing with it. Trumpism is going to continue to seek fuel and chase media/political oxygen. Those tasked with stopping it need to realize and come to terms with that if they are going to be successful in opposition.
Just how I approach it.Report
I think the worst things citizens can do is think in terms of strategy and gamesmanship, as though we were clever political consultants instead of engaged citizens.
We see a bully whipping up a thuggish mob to hate on an outgroup .
What’s the clever play? What super savvy trick can be deployed?
If it doesn’t begin with “speak the truth loudly even if your voice trembles” then it is foolish.
The thuggish mob isn’t the target of speaking, but the bystanders who might possibly be formed into a counter group to stop it. But only if they hear us speak and know that they are not alone. Because to remain silent gives them the false impression that we ourselves are supporting the mob.Report
I don’t like Tucker, I don’t watch him, I don’t trust him. If he’s the monster you depict him as, I’d want him exposed. But I’ve never heard him actually do the things you often claim about him. So, where’s the proof? I remember one time he used the word “replacement”, which scandalized some liberals so much that they felt the need to lie about what he said. Other than that, he’s controversial, and not particularly a good journalist or interviewer, but I need proof he’s worse than that. As for this story, I found one line he said that was pointed derision at both same-sex marriage and paternity leave, but I can’t believe that was enough to move him to Voldemort status.Report
You’ve already made your choice, so you really aren’t the target of my comments. I’m talking to the bystanders who can see and understand Tucker’s comments.
I’m speaking to those who can look at the Trump rallies, Fox News, the tweets of prominent Trumpists, bloggers and the comment sections where everyday Trumpists let their unguarded thoughts fly and put it all together into a picture of a faction that is driven by ethnic and cultural resentment and belligerent grievance. And that this faction now sees democracy as an obstacle to their goals.Report
Then help them put the picture together by giving a second example of Tucker’s racism.Report
Honest question, is the supply chain problem something that’s the Secretary of Transportation’s responsibility and/or something he has the policy levers to address?Report
If he doesn’t (and I’m not saying he does), who would?
“This is outside of the purview of the government!” is something that I normally say and get a lot of pushback on.Report
“This is outside of the purview of the government!” is something that I normally say and get a lot of pushback on.
In this case, outside the purview of the federal government might be accurate. Biden has announced that LA’s ports will operate 24/7. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are managed by the Harbor Departments of those two cities respectively. The Alameda Corridor reportedly handles 15% of all US container traffic and is owned and managed by a combination of those two city governments and the two port authorities. The California Air Resources Board has a great deal of say about how ships, trains, and trucks all operate in accessing the ports. Beyond the state and local governments per se, there’s a ton of union contracts, the fact that a surprising amount of the container traffic belongs to a handful of giant companies (eg, Wal-Mart) who have their own constraints, and so on.
I’d be more impressed by the plan if Buttigieg were delivering a message that said, “The EPA agrees not to punish California for air quality violations for two years, and the administration is willing to direct sizeable funds to electrification and the regional electric grid in the not too distant future, if the cities and other players will increase the ports’ throughput right now.”Report
This is where I do the dumb thing and remember arguments given in the past.
How is this not Interstate Commerce?Report
All the interstate commerce power means is that IF the federal government enacted laws that would give it a role here, they would be constitutional. It isn’t self-executing.Report
Please understand: I’m coming at this from the perspective of someone who had it argued that the AUMF covered bombing Syria on behalf of the “moderate rebels”.
So I find it odd to hear that the federal government has not, in fact, enacted any laws that might give it a role here.
Like, to the point of incredulity.Report
So I find it odd to hear that the federal government has not, in fact, enacted any laws that might give it a role here.
Take that up with someone from whom you heard that. You brought up Interstate Commerce, I explained what it has to do with the question here, which is basically nothing.Report
I am talking about the whole “outside of the purview of the Federal Government” thing.
“Interstate Commerce” is how I’d see this as falling under the umbrella of the Federal Government in response to arguments that this is only a State issue.
(Insert paragraphs about Wickard and Raich here.)Report
Interstate commerce is commerce between and among the states.
That has nothing to do with commerce between America and the rest of the world. I mean you’ve probably noticed the distinct lack of references to the commerce clause in trade treaties, right?
You seem to be casually conflating the two with utter disdain for reality. Why?Report
Because I remember during the Obamacare discussions and during the Raich discussions asking the question “Can you name something that would *NOT* be interstate commerce according to the definition we have now?”
And pointing out that even congress with one’s spouse would qualify as Interstate Commerce given the definition in Raich.
And, all the time, the answer was staring us in the face:
Shipping ports.Report
“The Congress shall have power . . . .[3] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
—U.S. Const., Art. I, Sec. 8 (emphasis added)
And it would be pretty silly to grant Congress the power to regulate commerce between Virginia and Massachusetts, but not grant the power to regulate commerce between the US and France.Report
CJ, have you read Raich?
Dig this: the argument was that Angel Raich was given (NOT SOLD) marijuana that was grown in California, by people who lived in California, using California soil, using California sunshine, and went on to be ingested in California and the argument Raich gave was that, therefore, this did not qualify as Interstate Commerce.
Can you believe that?
Anyway, the Supreme Court found, and let me copy and paste this:
Given that “substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity” (AND THAT IS A DIRECT QUOTATION!) is the standard we’re using, I find myself standing agape at the argument that people are seriously arguing that INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING PORTS do not qualify.Report
Of course I’ve read Raich. It’s my f*****g business to read and know such things. I share your astonishment (though not surprise) at any argument that Congress lacks authority — if it chooses to exercise it — over international shipping ports, but no one has to scare up edge cases like Raich or Wickard, which some folks disagree with. This is right in the uncontroversial wheelhouse of the commerce power.Report
I completely misread you and thought you were agreeing with the proposition that Congress lacks authority over international shipping ports.
Mea culpa.
I would like to say that my comment from October 19, 2021 at 12:38 pm ought be aimed at JS and not you.
I apologize.Report
The real question remains, though, what do people think would have been done, or would be done now, if the feds regulated the big shipping ports?Report
Probably screwed everything up.
(More DEI training, though.)Report
I think we should normalize when criticizing somebody in government for something requiring that we be clear about why its their job to handle it and what tool the public gave them that could be used to fix it. Otherwise its just heckling at our inferred betters rather than holding a public servant accountable.Report
Are we going to have that standard tomorrow too?
Are we just using it today?Report
If you’ve come up in Canadian politics, is a constant issue that informed people keep track of and get frustrated with the rubes about. So yes, this is an important everyday standard to look at.Report
Well, I’d hate to think that it’d be a standard that we demand when we are in power and abandon the second (AND I MEAN *THE SECOND*) that our opponents win an election.Report
Remember when the world economy was going to hell in 2008*, and our friends on the Right told us bailing out banks and granting cheap loans to beleaguered businesses wasn’t the answer. That would create moral hazard; the thing to do was nothing. Let it all collapse and the Invisible Hand would build it back better. (Sort of like, let everyone get Covid and the survivors will have natural immunity; so much less Communist than government -mandated vaccinations. Or even employer- or business owner-mandates.)
Why not the same recommendation? It would be awfully unkind to say our friends on the Right are compromising their principles to win a news cycle.
* In anticipation of Obama, our friends on the Right told us.Report
As it is, everybody got bailed out and nobody went to jail.
Just like our friends on the left wanted.Report
No.
The supply chain problem isn’t something like “Oh this one port is a problem”.
It’s every aspect of the supply chain, from top to bottom, in every country on earth. From the transport of raw materials and finished goods to the manufacturing of parts everywhere, including the parts to increase production lines.
Not that many places will increase production, because everyone knows once pent-up demand (and the shift many companies are making to warehouse a lot MORE critical goods than they’d previously kept under pure JiT logistics), demand will drop back to normal. It’d cost an arm and a leg more to get what they needed to increase their production (because, duh, supply chain issues) and then in two or three years they’d have an idle, massively overpriced production line.Report
Nevertheless, there are big container ships sitting for weeks/months outside the LA ports. There is evidence that the same thing is happening on the East Coast. Empty containers are piling up all over the US. I would be interested in knowing how things stand outside Rotterdam. If I were in the Biden administration, I would look at those numbers and think, “Black Friday’s not happening this year. Sh*t.”Report
Yeah it’s wild bleak and I can’t think of anything to suggest and just shake my head.Report
The situation in Western Europe is probably worse. Felixtowne (UK) is so congested that some lines (Maersk among them) are simply dropping UK bound cargo into Rotterdam and let consignees sort it out (which, after Brexit, is not a trivial, load it on a truck, thing).
At least in Europe, the root cause, so far, is the lack of heavy and long haul truck drivers. The industry has been hemorrhaging jobs for decades now, with little new blood entering into it and retirees not being replaced. In Europe, Eastern European countries (Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria, the Baltic’s) have been supplying the bulk of drivers in the last two decades. As these Eastern EU countries’ economies have improved, the number of drivers they supplied has fallen, being replaced by Ukrainians and other ex soviet nationals. Those, too, are not enough now, and several EU countries (Germany and Italy jump to mind) have established work and residence permit processes for non-EU truck drivers to move in https://www.make-it-in-germany.com/en/visa-residence/types/other/professional-drivers .
What COVID has brought to the fore is that our economic system does not have enough resilience. Resilience is expensive, involving investing real money today to avoid something bad that perhaps would never happen, and the first mover to implement it will lose out to its cheaper, less resilient, competitors.
A government mandate for resilience all along the supply chain would partially alleviate this prisoner’s dilemma, forcing all competitors to engage in this exercise, except that voters would punish a government who raised the cost of everything on the excuse of a pandemic, or global warming, or people not wanting to be a truck driver, or whatever.
Back to the original subject of the post, since I believe Buttigieg is a person of above average intelligence (full disclosure, I voted for him in the primaries) I think he understands the problem better than most. However, I don’t know how much can he do to change essentially the way we (the whole planet “we”) have been doing business for the better part of five or six decades, since the rise of Japan Inc., the JIT concept, offshoring, and the social -and economic- decline of blue collar jobs like long haul trucking.
This didn’t start in August, when Buttigieg’s children were born, or in January, when Biden was inaugurated, or in Feb 2020, when China went into lockdown. This is the progression of a myriad things that happened before, and continue to happen now. Things will change dramatically, in the next few decades. I trust the gods that future President Buttigieg will help with that transition.Report
I’ve always assumed that he or Kerry is in line for the VP slot if Harris becomes president during this term.Report
The average age of an American truck driver is 54. Not exactly old but not quite spring chicken either. Plus it is questionable how many people want to do long haul v short haul.Report
Not to mention that, like Uber, the whole trucking industry is looking at self-driving.
And the smart drivers realize it’s coming.
it’ll start with auto-pilot and drivers at the wheel and handling last-mile stuff and loading/unloading but it’ll eventually move away from that, requiring less and less skill — and wanting to pay less and less money.Report
“Not to mention that, like Uber, the whole trucking industry is looking at self-driving.”
I think this is not going to happen anytime soon. Uber and Lyft are still bleeding money.Report
Self-driving is like cold-fusion.
I’m sure we’ll get there someday.Report
There is zero chance of having fully self-driving trucks anytime soon. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations and insurance issues alone will prevent it, let alone the technology.Report
Back when Road Scholar was commenting regularly, he often said he welcomed self-driving trucks for the long stretches over the interstate or similar highways. He pointed out that the complex parts of his job were supervising the loading and unloading, cargo monitoring and management during the trip, etc, etc.Report
There’s a little parable in there isn’t it.
Often there’s an assumption improved capital will render labour obsolete, like Marx assumed in Kapital, when typically it just makes labour more productive by removing tasks plains apes are less good at than machines.Report
Oh absolutely. Uber and Lyft basically jumped the gun about a decade early.Report
In the link I posted above, there is a link to a long financial white paper. Apparently there are bizarre pricing incentives in shipping containers that make it cheaper to send back empty shipping containers to Asia right now.Report
https://slate.com/business/2021/10/supply-chain-shortages-retail-united-states-explained.html
This is a good overview of the problem. It is a product of Americans buying a lot more stuff combined with ongoing pandemic issues ( Covid zero policies shutting down international ports and factories) and pre-pandemic just in time shipping and other incentives that the global financial class refuses to budge on.Report
I for one hope Pete is doing alright and am glad he is getting a free few minutes with his children. Shame on anyone who shames him for it and I hope this freedom can be extended to all dads one day.Report
I put out a fairly long comment in response to Michael Cains 8:02 pm post that has disappeared, perhaps because it had a link to a German state website. I hope it could be recovered, because it’s quite interesting, even if I say so myselfReport
Released. Not sure why it went to moderation, unless you edited it. Editing comments that contain a link puts them straight into mod because of internal WordPress stuff.Report
Many, many, thanksReport
Good news! He’s doing his job again:
Report
Gawker points out that there is a silver lining:
Report
This is not wrong as much as you are trying to troll. Part of the issue is increased demand meeting much more limited supply because the rest of the world is still dealing with COVID and has COVID zero stances which can shut down entire ports or factories plus American management still being unwilling to move from just in time shipping.Report
The problem isn’t the “filling the containers that get taken to our ports”. The supply is currently floating off of the coast of California.
Report
Same story at the Port of Savannah (third for container traffic after LA/Long Beach and Newark/New York), per the NYT. Too little space to store containers at the port. Too little transportation capacity to haul it away from the port. Too little warehouse capacity to stack the stuff anywhere else if they could haul it away.Report
That ain’t a “demand problem”. I wouldn’t call it a “Just In Time” problem either.Report
Well, all of it’s a JIT problem in the sense that the supply chain has evolved to fit a model where most “lumpiness” in production or consumption is predictable, there’s just enough storage buffer to deal with it, and transport can be quite steady.
Lumpiness has increased. Queueing theory tells us the answer is to increase the size of the buffers (storage). Long, slow process, that.Report
The grocery store was out of the good Charmin again the other day. I checked the aisle with the Liquid Plumber and saw that that had not been restocked since I purchased the last bottle.
We’ve got a vascular problem.Report
Somewhere in Moscow a former KGB officer-turned oligarch is reading about Americans queuing for toilet paper and laughing hysterically.Report
Is the ormer KGB officer-turned oligarch using the word “Biden”?Report
I was watching a video about how terrible things are in Cuba, but when it showed the Communist secret police arresting someone in their home, all I could do is stare in wonderment at the closet full of toilet paper. And supersize pudding.Report
Were the people being arrested shouting stuff like “this doesn’t happen in America!” and the cops telling them “yes, it does!”Report
And this is because the average trucker is 54 years old and driving those things takes a good amount of training.Report
My cousin the Teamsters organizer shared an article last week about a high school in the CA Central Valley that has added a “truck driving” track to the high-school curriculum that covers the whole gamut of skills necessary. Graduates can get a commercial license for inside California, but have to be 21 before they can get an interstate license.Report
If only they were 52. We could live like it were 2019.Report
My former managing partner got her trucking license around the age of 60 through a six week community college program. I don’t think it takes a lot of training, but she did it to demonstrate she could get the license, and I think she would agree it takes more to commit to the job.Report
Is this really even a problem, though?
My wife ordered groceries and as usual ordered pudding cups for my afternoon snack.
They delivered super-sized jumbo pudding cups with an apologetic note about “supply chain disruption” making the regular size unavailable, so no added charge.
I got extra freaking pudding at no charge!
Thank you Pete Buttigieg!!Report
Yes. I am looking for “But This Is Good, Actually” to show up more and more in the wild.
Thank you.Report
A friend of mine manages the food and catering at a large Houston hospital.
He describes what he has been living on for the last several months as a nightmare. He doesn’t know what part of his orders will show up, and when. We had dinner on Saturday: Coke only delivered a third of his order, Pepsi, half (lucky him, my supermarket doesn’t have Pepsi products), Doctor Pepper was a no show. And he has to have six different products in each soda dispensing machine, so he had to creatively distribute his limited soda inventory across the different cafeterias. They are not getting the regular disposable dishes and cutlery they are supposed to use in a CoVid world, and have to improvise. Menus that are supposed to be scheduled months in advance, to lock in prices, are up on the air because they don’t know what food will show up tomorrow morning.
Next time your wife orders puddings, she might have to take beans instead. Beggars can’t be choosers. Asians make great sweet snacks with beans. That is, if she didn’t have to take ketchup instead of sugar, because supply chain issues.Report
Its a lot like what we learned about the food stream during the mad cow crisis.
That the global supply chains are so complex and interrelated that it isn’t possible to make a simple connection between a stalled supply here, to a short demand there because in between there are a dozen links and steps and they are all interlinked with other steps and links.
Its wildly efficient as long as all the links are working properly but if only a few fail, the entire system binds up.Report
Perhaps the problem lies not in the supply chain, but in the fact that Americans are spoiled:
Report
Full Disclosure: The Warshington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos.Report
I’m not one to extend charity to the WaPo but I don’t think that’s the right read. Yea it sucks, yea the government should be doing what it can to fix the situation. It’s critical they figure it out quickly because there are service/retail industry and tight margin businesses at risk of being hit bad by yet another economic shock.
But I also try to remember that my grandfather was asked to storm Japanese held beaches against machine gun and artillery fire. I can deal with not getting my preferred TP for awhile and not getting the new phone I was hoping for until some time next year. Perspective is good.Report
I guess I’m misreading “American consumers might have been spoiled, but…”Report
We have been. I figured that out when I spent an August in a small university town in Germany.
Nothing was ever open. Ever. The only saving grace was that there were still self-serve cigarette machines every 10 yards.Report
I think that we might be able to shift back to a 1970’s lifestyle if we could shift back to a 1970’s lifestyle.
It would require bringing guitar solos back, though.
(Pragmatically, bringing that up after a crisis strikes me as a loser in the short term.)Report
I’d definitely make the trade-offs for guitar solos.Report
We could solve a lot of problems with the high cost of healthcare if we just returned to a 1970s standard of healthcare.Report
If we returned to a 1970’s weight in this country, we wouldn’t even notice COVID.Report
Bosnia has an obesity rate comparable to what the US had in the 1970s, and they’re currently #2 in the world behind Peru in terms of COVID-19 death rate.Report
borgenproject.org/hunger-in-bosnia-and-herzegovina/
8% Stunting in children under the age of 5 doesn’t seem very comparable to America in the 1970s.
Peru is at 30% stunting, so, your mileage may vary.Report
Another variant:
Report
Remember all those polls showing that young people think capitalism has failed?
I’m sure standing in line for toilet paper will fix that right up.Report
DID SOMEBODY MENTION POLLS?!?!?
Here’s the new one from Quinnipiac.
There is stuff in there about Trump. You’ll probably want to quote it in response to this particular section:
Oh, here’s what wikipedia says about Quinnipiac:
Report
I read it.
Bad news for economic conservatism.
I suspect the 2022 Republican Party messaging will be something like “We’re From The Government, And We’re Here To Help!”Report
Personally, I find most polling questions to be obvious variants of “do you support Team Good?” and people answer “Do you support Biden’s policy on kidney dialysis machine regulation?” with whether they support Biden even though they have never heard of his policy on kidney dialysis machines.
The questions that I don’t think are quite as obvious are the questions involving whether we’re on the right track or whether we’re better off now than X years ago.
Now, of course, both have a *HUGE* political bias because, let’s face it, they are merely somewhat less obviously asking “Do you support Team Good?”
But it’s a good indicator for the mushy middle that isn’t quite as sophisticated as the extremes. They might be answering without guile.Report
Right Track/ Wrong Track doesn’t tell us much since there are a multiplicity of tracks to choose from, but only two teams to choose from.
For example, I think the country is on the wrong track, even though Pete Buttigieg got me free pudding.Report
And if the pollster asked you which track you think we’re on… which would you answer?
Keep in mind: “wrong track” will be read as “I support the unfashionable team.”Report