TSN Open Mic for the week of 3/6/2023

Jaybird

Jaybird is Birdmojo on Xbox Live and Jaybirdmojo on Playstation's network. He's been playing consoles since the Atari 2600 and it was Zork that taught him how to touch-type. If you've got a song for Wednesday, a commercial for Saturday, a recommendation for Tuesday, an essay for Monday, or, heck, just a handful a questions, fire off an email to AskJaybird-at-gmail.com

Related Post Roulette

157 Responses

  1. Chip Daniels says:

    With this weekends address to CPAC by Michael Knowles, and Donald Trump, the race to push the boundaries of what defines conservatism accelerated.

    Knowles’ call for transgenderism to be eradicated, and Trumps promise that they will never go back to the party of Bush, and that he is their retribution for grievances, establishes that conservatism cannot peacefully coexist the the rest of America.

    CPAC in this sense serves as a sort of Cooper Union inflection point, where the terms of conflict are established and a statement of “Rule or Ruin”.Report

  2. Damon says:

    U.S. Prepares New Rules on Investment in China
    Biden administration expected to seek money in its budget next week to set up program regulating investment abroad

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-prepares-new-rules-on-investment-in-technology-abroad-a451e035

    Specifically targeting China….Report

  3. Pinky says:

    NYC Mayor Adams, NYPD Call on New Yorkers to Ditch Masks When Entering Stores

    https://news.yahoo.com/nyc-mayor-adams-nypd-call-183538204.htmlReport

  4. Jaybird says:

    Gotta say, I’m not a big fan of so-called “gun control” but I can put myself in the mindset of someone who is and I can grasp many of the arguments, even if I don’t share the premises.

    It’s much more difficult to wrap my head around this sort of thing.

    Report

    • Slade the Leveller in reply to Jaybird says:

      You’re having trouble with throwing the book at straw purchasers? Those kinds of guns are often used while committing crimes. It’s a huge problem here in Chicago.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Jaybird says:

      Anytime I see a disproportional impact argument, I reject it. But I’m interested in who the people are who are ultimately getting the guns. If they’re otherwise law abiding people who need them for protection, this indicates a different problem.Report

      • InMD in reply to Pinky says:

        At least with respect to Chicago I believe the problem has been traced to a handful of FFLs in Indiana violating or at least being incredibly stupid with their licenses.

        Generally though the people who are making straw purchases are lying on the form 4473 which itself is a felony. There’s no defense for it and no justifiable reason to dodge the process.Report

  5. Slade the Leveller says:

    Interesting lawsuit in Texas, brought by some very sympathetic plaintiffs.

    https://www.npr.org/2023/03/07/1161486096/abortion-texas-lawsuit-women-sue-dobbsReport

    • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      McMegan wrote about this just this very morning!

      Report

      • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

        The Musa thread is really good. So is the one he embeds on public schools as public service, not a vehicle for the self-actualization projects for the people who work there.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to InMD says:

          In so very many cases, the question of the form “what is the point of education?” or “what is the point of policing?” or “what is the point of water treatment?”, the answer is something like “to provide jobs with a good middle class wage”.Report

          • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

            I think that’s right, and while in some ways understandable, this sort of confusion of first order and second order is exactly why we can never have nice things.Report

        • Slade the Leveller in reply to InMD says:

          It *is* a good thread. It’s also a cherry picker’s dream.Report

        • Marchmaine in reply to InMD says:

          Yeah, that’ll resonate far and wide.

          People are making fun of the ‘sign’ on Desantis’ podium… but if you get past the Local Politics Cringe factor, it basically plays. It isn’t however, a great showcase of his Presidential potential.

          https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/03/08/desantis_exposing_the_book_ban_hoax_i_think_most_parents_would_say_absolutely_not.html

          1. Addresses the silliness of the ‘bloggers must register’ nonsense.
          2. Made people look at the actual content that was being removed, not banned.
          3. Addressed the Media claim that To Kill a Mockingbird was banned in such a way that it set-up what most of us have come to learn as a standard tactic that:
          4. Duval County was posing with nonsense requirements that weren’t requirements as performative and willful misrepresentation.

          Echoes of McAuliffe/Youngkin again.

          I haven’t followed or seen much of RDS, so as a first impression? Underwhelmed. From a Presidential point of view. He screams middle-management to me. Not inspiring leadership.

          Maybe he can be Marianne Williamson’s VP? [call-out to JB]Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine says:

            He would make a *GREAT* VP.Report

            • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

              Heh, well, not sure about that either… other than the fact that licherally anyone can be a great VP as long as the President doesn’t die.Report

          • InMD in reply to Marchmaine says:

            The more I watch RDS the more it becomes apparent that Republicans still don’t actually understand what they’ve identified or the potential it has. DeSantis himself is already wandering off in exactly the wrong kinds of pathetically illiberal directions, playing into the hands of his opponents, and generally underwhelming.

            And yet if those shots from ‘Gender Queer’ are accurate I’m comfortable saying that should never be in any public school. Pornography is to some degree in the eyes of the beholder but it’s clearly very adult and there’s nothing anti-gay about removing it as totally inappropriate.Report

            • Marchmaine in reply to InMD says:

              Yeah, The Republican Party (TM) is a trainwreck and lacks any sort of coherent idea of what good governance would look like… which is why when I watch people like RDS it doesn’t give me confidence that he knows where he’s going; he’s just harvesting windfall apples. At some point there aren’t any apples to pick up. Worse, the orchards need real healing and you’ve still no idea what that means.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Marchmaine says:

                The Republican Party (TM) is a trainwreck and lacks any sort of coherent idea of what good governance would look like

                They.
                DO.
                NOT.
                Care.

                About anything then obtaining and keeping power. Period. They do not care about good governance, and the only good economic policy they want is that which grants them untold fortune on the backs of every one else. They will happily destroy our multi-cultural, liberal democracy in the service of power. Because

                They.
                DO.
                NOT.
                Care.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Philip H says:

                Pretty much.
                Like I said below, they know all their bullsh!t is bullsh!t, so it’s not worth our time to play along.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

                I
                Don’t
                Care
                if
                they
                Care
                or
                Don’t
                Care

                That’s a weird thing to care about.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Marchmaine says:

                I think that’s just about how you feel about your opponents.

                There’s also a Haidt element to it, where if you can’t understand your opponents, you tell yourself it’s because they’re completely wrong and contradictory and don’t care.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Pinky says:

                Me? I don’t see Team Red as opponents; if anything I understand them and their failings from the inside.

                My critiques of Team Red pre-date GWB. They foreshadow Trump. I get Trump; I won’t claim to have predicted Trump (I didn’t), but I’m not surprised by Trump. Trump is political malpractice by Team Red itself. And my hunch is that RDS is/was on team malpractice and finds himself where he is not by design, but by political accident – which he’s smart enough to capitalize on, but I wonder whether he’s got the goods to lead it anywhere productive.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Marchmaine says:

                OK, I made two comments here. One was to point out why Philip pushed the “they just don’t care” line. I think it alleviates the requirement to listen to, understand, and respond to one’s opponents. As for the other thing, thanks for responding, and I’ll look over your comments about the GOP and bad governance.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Pinky says:

                Fair enough, thought maybe it was that thread.

                I mean my pragmatic ‘we live in a society’ position is that Solidarity (broadly speaking) would beat both teams… it’s just a matter of who gets there first.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine says:

                Trump is political malpractice by Team Red itself.

                Yeah. The amount of failures to require him to get where he got are legion. The fact that he still is a threat (or a “threat”) indicates more failures.

                I don’t know what has to fail for this whole situation to be taken more seriously…

                Ah, well. It was a good run.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

                The problem with failure mode is that you’d think we could see the path it would take; but it won’t take that path.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Marchmaine says:

                Trump is not in any way a failure for ordinary Red Americans. He’s not even a failure for Republican politicians. He is the next iteration in the 50 year march to consolidate power. He’s the mouthpiece for white grievance. And he motivated a lot of voters that no other candidate could have motivated.

                He is what Republicans wanted. He’s what they designed the party to produce. and because he still benefits them with huge primary voter turnouts they are willing to continue to tolerate his outbursts.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

                Shrug. Failure stalks Team Blue. It won’t take the path you think it will.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine says:

                The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky says:

                Republicans do not care about good governance. Just look at their voting record the last 5 or 6 years. Look at their rhetoric – which is no less important. That has nothing to do with understanding or not understanding.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Marchmaine says:

                I’m not sure why you see it that way. Republicans don’t always agree on everything, and states have greater freedom so one would expect to see greater variation. Governance as style, or as principles? I’m just not sure what you’re going for.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Pinky says:

                Sorry, I’m not sure what you’re asking?

                I don’t think the Republican Party has reckoned with the (failed) partial realignment with an agenda that could be positively positioned.

                Almost all of the glue holding it together at the moment is negative partisanship.

                When I point out the ‘good’ things RDS is doing, it’s mostly common sense reaction to the excesses of Team Blue. That plays, and could possibly play into an election victory here, there, and maybe nationally.

                But, what you do when you win an election based on negative partisanship? That’s where I’m honestly not sure if RDS has a plan, a team, or a set of ideas that are right for the moment.

                I’ve consistently told my Trump voter friends (before, during, after) that you can’t be president on Grievance Style – you have to build a movement that includes a broad coalition of people who will staff and manage the direction you’d like to take Govt. should you win on Style points.

                The Party isn’t doing this effectively. And, as I’ve written here – even as I’m ‘defending’ common sense policies of RDS – I’m not sure he knows what to do beyond common sense fixing of Team Blue over-reach.

                Like, his reform of FL New College seems unsophisticated, which gives me concern that he’s not really a leader, but a middle-manager. Which is fine to be as FL Governor. Might be his Peter Principle. President is a different project.

                I’m watching, sure… but you ask why I see it that way – that’s what I see. Show me more either by RDS demonstrating a bigger vision than he has shown or the Party itself coming up with principles of governance that aren’t a flavor of grievance studies or rehashed libertarianism – or some mashup of both.Report

              • InMD in reply to Marchmaine says:

                Somewhere, a RDS aid is whispering ‘and next, tell them you’ll cut taxes…we’ll save the sunset provisions on entitlements for your second term.’Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to InMD says:

                Saved only by the aids whispering in Dem ears: let’s tax savings — we’ll target ‘the rich’ because in America that means everyone except me, and save the detailed phase ins until after the next election.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Marchmaine says:

                Do you believe that Elon Mush and Warren Buffet pay their fair share of taxes for the benefits they receive from the nation?Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

                I’ve written extensively before that I think Labor should be compensated with productivity gains proportionally as a much better response to tax and re-distribute.

                So, I’d say simply, y’all are fighting the wrong fight.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Marchmaine says:

                I’m watching, sure… but you ask why I see it that way – that’s what I see. Show me more either by RDS demonstrating a bigger vision than he has shown or the Party itself coming up with principles of governance that aren’t a flavor of grievance studies or rehashed libertarianism – or some mashup of both.

                From the Left we’d love to see such a thing. Really. But I lost all expectation of that in the second Reagan term.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

                God put GHWB in the Presidency for one reason only… to oversee the fall of the USSR. Which he did masterfully… if only he’d won a second term for that sole reason.

                I give credit to the New Democrats (and their avatar, Clinton) for building a proper coalition and team (they learned from Reagan) that snootched the election in 1992.

                But the New Dems and Reaganauts are the authors of the realignment we’re seeing now. What’s weird is that neither team has effectively re-adjusted… they just think that their coalition is sound and has no where else to go.Report

              • InMD in reply to Marchmaine says:

                So far they’ve been right, at least on the ‘nowhere else to go’ part, or at least right enough to avoid total electoral wipeout. The damage it’s doing at the expense of the country on the other hand…Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to InMD says:

                Good point… its RCV or whoever pivots first.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Marchmaine says:

                I’m not a DeSantis guy; I’m a conservative-who-wins guy. I’m for anyone who opposes the left’s social agenda, governs more or less responsibly, and has a working brain and moral code. Maybe I’m aiming too low, but we’ve had worse (for 14 years running). Would a more positive domestic/fiscal agenda be more marketable? Probably, but I don’t see that happening in the next two years.

                And it’s not like the social agenda that can be most succinctly described as “anti-left” is grievance-based or defensive. It’s healthy communities and equal opportunity.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky says:

                Well then you need to start voting for Democrats – as nothing coming out of state or federal GOP legislators in any way leads to healthy communities and equal opportunity.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

                Yeah. Maybe we can have a Baltimore or a San Francisco everywhere.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Pinky says:

                Online commenter:”Republicans aren’t grievance based!”

                Donald Trump, likely Republican standard bearer: “I will be your retribution!”Report

      • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird says:

        Ah yes, McArdle finds a way to blame the libs for DeSantis and you agree with it. This is about as surprising as days that end in y.Report

        • CJColucci in reply to Saul Degraw says:

          Look what you made us do.Report

        • Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw says:

          I really don’t want to have the federal government seize Fox News and shut it down and throw all the hosts in Gitmo.
          I really dont!

          But what can I do? They are forcing me to embrace a tit for tat prisoners dilemma iterated game.

          Conservatives should really do some soul searching and ask themselves what they can do to avoid further antagonizing centrists like me before we start talking about mandatory abortions and forced Sharia Law Burka drag shows.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

            If you consider that an optimal play, be sure to call for it and do your best to follow through.

            The last thing in the world you want is to be playing by Marques of Queensbury rules.Report

            • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

              PLAY?
              You need to read her article.
              This isn’t a “play”. It isn’t a choice or decision people make.

              For example, when a college deplatforms a conservative speaker, or students force them to take down a statue;

              There are no choices or decisions being made. These are the natural and inevitable reaction to conservative provocations.

              You should talk to your conservative friends and tell them to move to the center and compromise.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw says:

          Eh, this is just me seeing things through the lens of game theory again.

          Seriously: Tit for Tat is considered an optimal play in an iterated game. It’s got a Wikipedia Page and everything.

          You really need to stop pretending that this is the first time you’ve heard of this way at looking at the world.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      Ron DeSantis argument to the Republican base is that he should be the nominee rather than Trump because he is the disciplined, intelligent fascist that can get things done. But Trump going full fascist in 2020 did not work to win him even an electoral college victory. I’m not sure what DeSantis’ strategy to win a general election would be but hope that the press does what it usually does in these instances and not tell the truth.Report

      • Pinky in reply to LeeEsq says:

        It’s not just that you’re using words outside their proper meaning, it’s that that misuse is driving you into positions that don’t make sense. The tipoff is that you admit you can’t understand the actions of the parties involved. This is the difference between being an ideologue and a blind ideologue.Report

  6. Chip Daniels says:

    While Ron DeSantis uses the power of the state to silence critics, Gavin Newsom is trying to prevent women from suffering fates like this:
    The women found themselves furtively crossing state borders to seek medical treatment outside Texas, worried that family and neighbors might report them to state authorities. In some cases, the women became so ill that they were hospitalized. One plaintiff, Amanda Zurawski, was told she was not yet sick enough to receive an abortion, then twice became septic, and was left with so much scar tissue that one of her fallopian tubes is permanently closed.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/06/us/texas-abortion-ban-suit.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-shareReport

  7. Jaybird says:

    This solves a problem.

    That makes me think that it’ll be reversed in due order.

    Report

    • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

      Ha. After all the denunciations of virtual learning in this very web site for its educational inadequacy never mind its technological inequity you think this solves a problem?

      Wow.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

        The problem being solved doesn’t involve making sure that the educational potential of the troublemakers is fulfilled.Report

        • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

          Well duh. because they have bene branded “troublemakers” so there’s no need to see to their educational potential, now is there.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

            Of course there is. That’s why they’re being given virtual learning.Report

            • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

              I was being sarcastic man.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

                Then I will go back to note that the problem being solved is not the problem of the child being given the opportunity to explore virtual learning.

                Even back in the paleolithic era when I went to school, we had in-school suspension. This seems like a step up from that.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

                removing disruptive behavior form the school class room without addressing the root causes of the behavior is not doing anyone any favors, including those staying behind. And while in school suspension could have a whiff of educational opportunity waved in its general direction, sending kids home to “learn” in environments with unequal internet access and perhaps unequal laptop access isn’t doing that work.

                What is does is reinforce the notion that some people are disposable due to their choices, even if they really could act any other way for one reason or another.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

                removing disruptive behavior form the school class room without addressing the root causes of the behavior is not doing anyone any favors, including those staying behind.

                I disagree. It is very much doing those staying behind a favor.

                sending kids home to “learn” in environments with unequal internet access and perhaps unequal laptop access isn’t doing that work.

                I’ve got good news! They’re virtual students *ON SITE*.

                Seriously, the article got into this.

                They’re creating *OPPORTUNITY ROOMS*. The students will be virtual students in these opportunity rooms and that directly addresses your criticisms of unequal internet/laptop access!Report

  8. Chip Daniels says:

    A bit of good news:
    A GOP war on ‘woke’? Most Americans view the term as a positive, USA TODAY/Ipsos Poll finds

    By 56%-39%, Americans say ‘woke’ means being aware of social injustice, not being overly politically correct.

    I think part of the problem is what we’ve discussed here, where the term “woke” has been used so promiscuously by Republicans that most people see it as meaning “anything black or LGBTQ”.Report

  9. Philip H says:

    Nice to see that at least when their professional standing is on the line, Trump’s attorneys tell the truth:

    Jenna Ellis was censured by a disciplinary judge in Colorado Wednesday, in the latest effort to hold accountable attorneys who boosted former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election reversal gambits.

    Ellis signed a stipulation stating that several comments she made about the 2020 election violated professional ethics rules barring reckless, knowing or intentional misrepresentations by attorneys, according to documents posted by Colorado’s Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. As part of the stipulation, Ellis agrees to pay $224.

    Among the false statements highlighted in the stipulation were comments by Ellis on social media and in TV appearances claiming that the Trump campaign had evidence the election was “stolen.”

    https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/09/politics/jenna-ellis-former-trump-attorney/index.htmlReport

    • Chip Daniels in reply to Philip H says:

      Which demonstrates a point, in light of the revelations from the Dominion lawsuit.

      Namely, that none of the revelations that Fox and the Republican leadership are habitual liars, has made any impact on the party base.

      Ordinarily, when it is revealed that the leaders have been lying, the base would be expected to react with shock and outrage. But, none of that has happened.

      The Republican base knows they are being lied to. They know that the election wasn’t stolen, they know that gay teachers aren’t grooming children for sex, they know that adolescents aren’t being pressured to transition they know that students are not being indoctrinated to hate America or their white skin.

      They know that all these things are baldfaced lies, but not only accept them, but demand them and become furious when corrected.
      This is why Carlson and the Fox anchors are so terrified of the base.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

      I like her. She’s an occasional guest on a show I listen to, and I thought she did a good job defending Trump without claiming the election was stolen. I guess she crossed the line elsewhere.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to Pinky says:

        In the Colorado Bar Association proceedings, she admitted to 10 specific misrepresentations. Some of the quotes from cable news shows were “The election was stolen and Trump won by a landslide”, and “…we know that the election was stolen from President Trump and we can prove it”, and “We have over 500,000 votes (in Arizona) that were cast illegally.”

        Those short direct statements — as opposed to weasel-wording it — will get you every time.Report

  10. Saul Degraw says:

    Biden gears up for a political fight with the House by proposing a budget with increased social spending and increased taxes on corporations, the extremely wealthy, etc: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/09/us/biden-budget-tax-news

    I like it. Go bold or go home.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      Finally. A democrat takes a gun to a gunfight.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to Philip H says:

        Time to make bets? There will be no joint budget resolution, the shutdown will last three weeks, and then Congress will pass a continuing resolution.Report

        • I can kick that can… forty-nine weeks down the road!Report

        • Philip H in reply to Michael Cain says:

          SO I’m going to beat my usual dead horse here – the budget resolutions don’t fund government. They simply tell us what a house of Congress might want to think about being adjacent to passing.

          Appropriations bills fund government. There used to be 11 of them – they even have their own committees on both side of Capitol Hill. The committee staff will have their answers to the President’s Budget Request (which started being released this week) by the end of the month. Then members will sit on it, dither, make bloviated statements and rush to pass continuing resolutions because actual appropriating means putting down markers on what you as a member think is important. Markers that can be used against you in your next campaign.

          Neither Appropriations nor Budget resolutions by themselves raise the debt limit – which is only about paying obligations incurred in prior appropriations. That requires additional language in a bill somewhere.

          Having lived through both prior partial shutdowns (because certain agencies keep right on working), I don’t want to do it again. Either fund us or not.

          But lets keep the lanes straight shall we?Report

  11. Jaybird says:

    It’s one thing to cause mayhem for Mexico. It’s quite another to cause mayhem for *TOURISTS* in Mexico.

    Report

  12. Jaybird says:

    Not an indicator yet… but it might be an indicator of an indicator to come.

    Report

    • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

      I’d be curious what the time frame they’re looking at is. During the Great Recession a lot of people opted for more school who might not normally have, along with the extra debt. If this is just regression to the mean with the strong labor market then it’s nothing to worry about. It might even be a good thing, particularly if it results in cuts to administrative bloat and downward pressure on tuition.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to InMD says:

        They’re not talking about grads not going to get their Masters’, they’re talking about high school grads not going to go get their Bachelors’ (or their “some college”s).Report

        • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

          I picked up on that from the guy in the interview. Based on what he’s doing instead (working at a theater program) I don’t see it as a bad thing. I mean, if that’s what he wants to pursue right now I think it’s fair to ask whether hypothetically spending a bunch of time and money or going into debt for a bachelor’s in theater instead would really be a worthwhile investment. If I were his dad I’d say almost certainly not. So let him make his run, and maybe theater works out, and if it doesn’t he goes back as a non-traditional student for something more practical. Better than getting a useless degree you can’t trade in based on adolescent passion.Report

        • Michael Cain in reply to Jaybird says:

          If I were doing everything after high school over, I would be tempted to hit the right CC to go into precision machining. Then keep up to date on the new tech, since I could handle the math and software. Peak annual income wouldn’t be as high, but I could have gone to pretty much any metro area and gotten a good job quickly. From what I can tell, still could.

          Anecdata… Shortly after I went to work at Bell Labs I broke one of the nose pieces on my wire rim glasses. I was moaning about the cost of getting a new pair when someone told me to take everything down to the machine shop and see what they said. The (to me then) old guy looked at it and said, “Piece of cake.” I got to watch under 50x magnification while he used a five- or six-armed jig to align the break perfectly, then used a torch that was too small to see clearly with the naked eye to silver solder the break. Even then I was tempted to ask, “Where do I go to apprentice for that kind of work?”Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain says:

            If I could do it again so that I were graduating in 1991, I’d probably try to avoid philosophy (probably fail, but I’d try) and go into programming. C started in 1972, C++ in ’85… if I could have gotten a degree in C++, I could have gotten hired by MCI in the mid-90’s and ridden that wave straight to the top.

            If I were graduating in 2023, I have no freakin’ idea. I’d probably think about the old community college for two years before I figured out where my head was.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

              Man, Pikes Peak has gone nuts too, though. More than $250/credit hour and that’s with the College Opportunity Fund baked in. If you want to get your bachelor’s in Nursing or Paramedic or Emergency Service administration, prepare to pay more than $350/credit hour.

              I paid less than $100 an hour at UCCS. (And $88 dollars in 1995 translates to $172.75 in today’s dollars.)

              This is madness.Report

            • Pinky in reply to Jaybird says:

              Browns walk-on quarterback. 1985, 1995, 2025, it doesn’t matter. Top three on the field is doable.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

      It’s not a trend until we get a third story:

      Report

  13. Saul Degraw says:

    https://www.rawstory.com/watch-lauren-boebert-wants-comprehensive-ed-banned-from-public-schools/

    Teenage mom Lauren Bobert whose 17 year old son just got his 15 year old girlfriend pregnant wants to ban comprehensive sex ed from schools.Report

    • CJColucci in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      Her son probably learned what he needed to learn to get the job done on his own – like most of us.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      Comprehensive sex ed gives young women the tools to say no and to keep from suffering “consequences” for moral misdeeds, while also forcing boys to reckon with their actual responsibilities in a sexual relationship. You can’t build a white male conservative patriarchy under this conditions.Report

      • InMD in reply to Philip H says:

        This comment is so hilarious because it illustrates exactly why we can’t have it. Not only do we have the religious nuts opposing it on (insane) principle but the people pushing hardest are now the ones who would include critical facts like that consent isn’t possible for women unless both parties walk around the toad stool 3 times chanting ‘affirmatively yes!’ (and even then..) or that unlike all other primates human sex is on a spectrum.Report

  14. Pinky says:

    A commentator calls out a racist narrative on ESPN:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bBmJ4scYXIReport

  15. Jaybird says:

    Good news! House votes to declassify info about origins of COVID-19.

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The House voted unanimously on Friday to declassify U.S. intelligence information about the origins of COVID-19, a sweeping show of bipartisan support near the third anniversary of the start of the deadly pandemic.

    The 419-0 vote was final approval of the bill, sending it to President Joe Biden’s desk to be signed into law.

    Report

    • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

      That may be the first time that Congress has directed the White House to declassify things in near real time. Watching this play out will be . . . fascinating.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

        I am interested in whether it gets vetoed. (Which makes me wonder what that 419 turns into afterwards.)

        There’s also the whole thing about whether we can trust these agencies (“Why would the Department of Energy have an opinion on this?” “China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs says that the wet market theory is the accurate one!”) is currently in superposition until Biden signs the bill.

        Maybe it’d be better if he didn’t?Report

        • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

          It depends on what the actual resolution says. If its just a broad declassification directive then the agencies still have to go through their normal legal actions if Biden signs it. If it has more specific direction . . . ultimately they have to comply.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

            Fine, I’ll look it up. Here.

            IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
            March 1, 2023
            Mr. Hawley (for himself, Mr. Braun, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Lee, and Mr. Scott of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

            A BILL
            To require the Director of National Intelligence to declassify information relating to the origin of COVID–19, and for other purposes.

            Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

            SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

            This Act may be cited as the “COVID–19 Origin Act of 2023”.

            SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

            It is the sense of Congress that—

            (1) identifying the origin of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19) is critical for preventing a similar pandemic from occurring in the future;

            (2) there is reason to believe the COVID–19 pandemic may have originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology; and

            (3) the Director of National Intelligence should declassify and make available to the public as much information as possible about the origin of COVID–19 so the United States and like-minded countries can—

            (A) identify the origin of COVID–19 as expeditiously as possible, and

            (B) use that information to take all appropriate measures to prevent a similar pandemic from occurring again.

            SEC. 3. DECLASSIFICATION OF INFORMATION RELATED TO THE ORIGIN OF COVID–19.

            Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence shall—

            (1) declassify any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19), including—

            (A) activities performed by the Wuhan Institute of Virology with or on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army;

            (B) coronavirus research or other related activities performed at the Wuhan Institute of Virology prior to the outbreak of COVID–19; and

            (C) researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who fell ill in autumn 2019, including for any such researcher—

            (i) the researcher’s name;

            (ii) the researcher’s symptoms;

            (iii) the date of the onset of the researcher’s symptoms;

            (iv) the researcher’s role at the Wuhan Institute of Virology;

            (v) whether the researcher was involved with or exposed to coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology;

            (vi) whether the researcher visited a hospital while they were ill; and

            (vii) a description of any other actions taken by the researcher that may suggest they were experiencing a serious illness at the time; and

            (2) submit to Congress an unclassified report that contains—

            (A) all of the information described under paragraph (1); and

            (B) only such redactions as the Director determines necessary to protect sources and methods.

            Report

            • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

              So it’s ALL about Wuhan then. Noted.

              It won’t bring us closer to any real understanding of the origin, it won’t prevent another one, and its looking for a lot of data that’s already publicly available from NIH.

              Lovely playacting at governance.

              Don’t expect much.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

                How can you rule out this increasing our understanding of the origin and improving our ability to prevent the next one?Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky says:

                The US Intel community will have little to no visibility on hospitalizations by the staff at Wuhan, much less whether they were covid positive. They won’t have much if anything on the funding to Wuhan by the Chinese Army – much like the Chinese would have little to no data about what the DoD funds in that at NIH or any other US facility. And there’s no direction to release or declassify any other information relating to any other source of outbreak or about work by Wuhan.

                This is about scoring political points regarding China. it’s not about better understanding or preventing.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

                You’re probably right about Section 3 (1)(C). And 3 (1)(A) and 3 (1)(B) aren’t as specific. But it looks to me like they do call for the release of, as you said, “any other information relating to any other source of outbreak or about work by Wuhan”.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

                I kinda thought superposition would last longer than *THAT*.

                But maybe that’s good news! Biden can sign the bill into law, the stuff can become declassified, and we can say “See? No new information. Therefore you don’t know how it started. Therefore the wet markets.”Report

      • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

        I could see Biden resisting on National Security / Executive Powers grounds. Especially since it’s declassifying Intelligence findings (vs. Dept. of Ag minutes or something similar). Will be interesting to see what the administration says.Report

  16. Jaybird says:

    Oh, and we had a bank failure earlier today.

    Report

    • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

      Which sort of proves that preserving moral hazard in banking should still be a thing.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

        I just checked to see if there were any commercials for SVB.

        I figured that we probably wouldn’t luck out and and find some “WE’RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT THE GUYS IN SUITS SAY WE SHOULDN’T!” like WaMu had but thought maybe I’d find something that said something like “we’re changing the way that banking is done”.

        I only found Jim Cramer singing their praises.

        Wait, they were behind Zelle?

        Got one:

        Report

      • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H says:

        This one wasn’t bankers blowing themselves up because of interesting products.

        This was a good old fashion bank run. They were handed a lot of cash, they invested it in gov bonds, interest rates have gone up so the value of the bonds has gone down… but that doesn’t matter if they’d been allowed to hold them until they mature.

        Then Crypto platforms had runs on them, which meant (as their banker) Silicon Valley had to sell those bonds at a loss right now.

        So the core problem was the normal mismatch between long term investments and short term cash needs. No bank is solvent if all of their customers ask for their money back at the same time.Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird says:

      As far as I can tell, the bank run began on Wednesday with rumors that the bank was over extended and the California state government and FDIC moved in quickly. There is no evidence that crypto was involved but higher interest rates have been making it harder for start-ups to generate oodles of investment money like before.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw says:

        Larry Summers is calling for a 100% bailout.

        Apparently 93% of the deposits were over the FDIC $250,000 limit.

        I got worried so I asked Maribou if our bank account was under the FDIC’s limit and she told me that it is.Report

        • Philip H in reply to Jaybird says:

          Larry Summers can pound sand. Had he overseen the unwinding of the lax regulations that got us into the last near banking system collapse I might be more inclined to listen to him. But he didn’t.Report

  17. Philip H says:

    Books by well known authors like James Patterson, Toni Morrison, and Jodi Picoult are now off the shelves in Martin County schools.

    “Once you start inserting scenes of curses and graphic sexual content, you render them inappropriate in some settings,” parent Paul Marcucci said. “They might be fine in a local library or for personal purchase, but not for schools.”

    Because keeping them out of schools and out of teaching curricula will definitely prepare students to grapple with them elsewhere . . . . Never mind that one (small) group of parents has decided their morality is the community’s morality and they get to restrict the freedom and liberty of others because of that.

    https://www.wptv.com/news/education/dozens-of-books-removed-from-martin-county-schoolsReport

  18. Chip Daniels says:

    The DeSantis book burning continues apace:
    Greg Sargent, writing in WaPo:

    Ron DeSantis’s book ban mania targets Jodi Picoult — and she hits back
    Numerous titles by well-known authors such as Jodi Picoult, Toni Morrison and James Patterson have been pulled from library shelves. The removal list includes Picoult’s novel “The Storyteller” about the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor who meets an elderly former SS officer. It contains some violent scenes told in flashbacks from World War II and an assisted suicide.

    In the case of “The Storyteller” and virtually all the other books by Picoult and others that are getting removed, the county’s removal directive cites guidance from Florida’s Department of Education. It directs educators to “err on the side of caution,” urging them to nix material that they wouldn’t be “comfortable reading aloud.”

    B-but we were told this was merely to rein in bad DEI, pornography, and CRT!

    But of course, we were told this by liars.Report

  19. Jaybird says:

    Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

      If you’re confused by this, as I am, you may find that this thread helps (as I did).

      The main reason seems to be something like this:

      The business model is therefore:

      1) make cheap loans to elite startups and convince yourself they’re definitely going to raise money again to pay you back
      2) grow the capital base massively via deposit requirements connected to those loans
      3) get some yield on those deposits
      What was done with those deposits is the source of SVB’s troubles.

      In an effort to chase yield and provide a decent return on equity, SVB bought billions of dollars of long-dated mortgage-backed securities paying ~1.6%.

      In a world where interest rates are hovering around zero, ~1.6% is pretty good.

      We no longer live in that world.

      And so the bank experienced a run.

      And here we are.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

        If I wanted to make a case against a bailout, it would feature stuff like this prominently:

        Report

        • Slade the Leveller in reply to Jaybird says:

          Here you go: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-financial-accounting-instantview/instant-view-u-s-eases-mark-to-market-accounting-idUSTRE5314PX20090402

          SVB’s treasury bong assets are not strictly toxic, but the yields are laughably low in today’s bond world, so they might as well be considered as such.Report

          • CJColucci in reply to Slade the Leveller says:

            I’m not a banker or any other type of financial expert, but even I know that banking is inherently risky because banks borrow short and lend long. I also know that historically-low interest rates don’t last forever. If you invest most of your deposits in long-term, low-interest assets, even if perfectly sound, you have to hedge against interest rate hikes and put some of the deposits into higher-yielding assets.
            How come they couldn’t figure this out?Report

            • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci says:

              That’s a can of worms. It’s effectively asking “What in the heck was their risk manager doing?”

              And then you look at the risk manager and what the risk manager was doing.

              And you don’t want to do that.Report

            • Dark Matter in reply to CJColucci says:

              “higher-yielding assets” in the context that they were working in was “long term bonds”, as opposed to “short term bonds”.

              Because of Covid, interest rates were effectively zero and there weren’t many investments worth chasing.

              We’ve had a breath-takingly large increate in interest rates in the last year. Not only large absolutely but absurdly large relatively.

              That means the reduction to their bond value has been extremely large… which doesn’t matter as long as they don’t need to cash them in right now (i.e. sell them). Without a run on the bank, they can just sit on the bonds and cash them in at maturity.Report

              • Slade the Leveller in reply to Dark Matter says:

                My point in posting the Forbes article in the comment wasn’t to point out the pros and cons of anyone’s risk management strategy. It was to highlight how banks like this got the Feds to ease mark to market accounting rules. If strict mark to market rules had been in place, everyone would have known the true value of the bonds SVB was holding vs. their depositor liability.Report

  20. Jaybird says:

    Whew! It’s a good thing Biden’s in charge. Trump might not have bailed out SVB!

    Report

    • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird says:

      The FDIC knows what it’s doing and the assets, if not worth what they once were, are sound, so SVB is likely only illiquid, not insolvent. It seemed likely to me that all the guaranteed depositors would get their money and that everyone else would get most of theirs after a brief pause. If nobody has to take a haircut and short-term cash needs (like payroll) can be met in the interim, that’s good news.Report

  21. Jaybird says:

    Regulators close crypto-focused Signature Bank, citing systemic risk:

    U.S. regulators on Sunday shut down New York-based Signature Bank
    , a big lender in the crypto industry, in a bid to prevent the spreading banking crisis.

    “We are also announcing a similar systemic risk exception for Signature Bank, New York, New York, which was closed today by its state chartering authority,” Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC said in a joint statement Sunday evening.

    Report