That persuades me, sure Saul, but it likely won't persuade the lower info voters who'll likely decide this contest. God(ess?) I wish it was otherwise. Yes the US has come through the Covid crisis better than any other country on the planet, but that's not the curve voters grade on.
I still think Biden has fundamental strengths and Trump fundamental weaknesses that should grow more and more evident as the election approaches but it'd sure be nice for my blood pressure if the bloody polls reflected that more than the flat out toss up we get currently (and yes, I know, it's still too early to expect polls to be predictive).
It's one heck of a pickle. In this centuries terms; gdp, employment, wage growth; this is a scintillating spectacular economy but in one major way, inflation, it's bad in a way we haven't seen for decades.
A very good point but a very painful point. The real brute aspect of free trade as a political issue is that its opponents are passionate with significant losses to absorb while its beneficiaries are everyone and the effect is subtle. That makes for absolutely savage politics and which is why it's so hard to do.
It is really a canard but it is somewhat harmless? I mean, sure, it's distortionary but I'm not honestly sure if shipping fully assembled cars from overseas actually pencils out vs shipping the parts and assembling them here. As distortions go it doesn't strike me as an egregious one- clearly Toyota, Honda, BMW etc feel the same way.
It sounds enormously plausible and Pinky's fascinating response suggests that you may well be right (I was in rural Canada through to the 2000's and just couldn't say).
I also agree. There are further considerations too. In the 90's and early aughts when American strength seemed overwhelming and, further, that wars for territory seemed backwards and pointless the question of defense was lower priority. Now, with both China and Russia nakedly exhibiting territorial lust defense considerations are more prominent. Civil manufacturing can be repurposed quickly to military manufacturing in many cases.
Further, absent from Mr. Thorntons' analysis is any mention of how purposefully, egregiously and destructively the Chinese have prioritized subsidizing and exporting manufacturing even to the detriment of their own people’s wellbeing. A strict free trader would say that free trade would remain advisable as it’d be, in essence, taking a subsidy from the Chinese to us but that would ignore the potential long term costs.
Finally, there is an element of chickens coming home to roost as free traders were generally very indifferent to the plight of the losers from free trade here at home. Liberals can, at least, honestly claim that they tried to help however imperfectly but the right has always been something between indifferent to disdainful to those people and now they find themselves shocked that the masses have little love of free trade.
But, yeah, free trade in the areas you talk about seems quite advisable and, ironically, a TPP style agreement would be an incredible boon to our position vis a vis the Chinese.
I wonder if this is what it was like when the PC movements' tide went out in the early 90's? I'm presuming not because the internet wasn't a thing at that time but I wonder if there're similarities.
For me it reminds me of how the right wing has kind of memory holed their vehement opposition to SSM now that they both have been routed and the predicted sky falling failed to materialize. Just a lot of silence, an uncomfortable kind of denial that it was ever a big deal and some perfunctory throat clearing.
For, what, posting that the identarian left is an awkward noisy fringe? Unless you're in a fortune 500 media company being paid to opine what're you doing posting anything about political stuff on the company server/website/dime?
Honestly, the rule hasn't actually changed "don't discomfort your employer." It's just now the people getting spun up about things are often identarian leftists (or rather were since the drumbeat of people getting fired for vague identarian "crimes" has slowed greatly) but in the 80's and 90's it was various moral majority right wing culture kooks and in the earlier years it was the pearl clutching conservative housewives or the anticommunist contingent. Companies have fired people for doing things in public that made trouble for the company as long as there’s been a company. Our latest iteration was just that companies had some new venues for whining that they hadn’t yet become inured to. That’s rapidly fading away.
I'd expect that they'd indulge in some military adventurism and terrorism. Then the Israeli's would flatten the block where the adventurers or terrorists came from and every block in sight of it. The world would mumble a bit but mostly shrug because Israel would be withdrawn and most everyone would say "What did you expect?" And then, in time, the Palestinian reaction to that kind of adventurism by their peers would go from "Allah Ackbar!" to "What the fish are you thinking you idiot, we're trying to get on with our lives. Cut it out!" And no, that’s not theory- that’s recent history. The Lebanese have taken that attitude towards Hezbollah.
You know the story about the Israeli offers are more complicated than that Lee, but I don't need to relitigation it because those are banked decisions and Israel has already spent down its credit. The Palestinians foolishness and poor choices led to Sharon deciding on unilateral withdrawal in the early 2000's and the Israeli's were rewarded with -decades- of virtually a free hand in their neighborhood as a result of that. That credit is spent.
And the Palestinians don't need to be productive nor do I need to prove that they would be to justify Israel withdrawing from the territories because there's nothing about the occupation that enhances Israeli security. It's not 1950. If the settlements ever had any military/strategic value it's long, long since obsolete and all the occupation does is poison Israel's own politics, undermine their moral standing and make their eventual withdrawal harder.
I mean, for fish's sake Lee, look at the three of them: Israel, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. It boggles the imagination that of those three the PA (corrupt and schlorerick as it is) is now coming off as the most reasonably of the three parties! I get it, the Palestinians dissapointed the Israeli left and it imploded. That justifies a few years of the behavior we've seen from Israel but decades of right wing Israeli administration and settler policy? Come on now, it's nonsensical. I know you're not a likudnik.
This is not remotely equivalent to the failures of 9/11. It's not like it was a secret that Hamas wanted to attack and it's not like the US had planes secured and then diverted those resources so they could go steal land from the Canadians. The Israeli's know perfectly well that Likud is partially to blame for 10/7 which is why Bibi's name is mud in Israel right now.
As for your mind reading about the Palestinians, I can't help but be highly doubtful. The West Bank is a larger area with more Palestinians in it than Gaza and they haven't engaged in wild attacks on Israel despite constant settler provocation. Any point you try to make by pointing at Gaza is reversed and overwhelmed by the larger example of the West Bank.
Heck, I don't even carry a particular brief for the Palestinians themselves. I don't have any personal connections to any Palestinians like I do to Israeli's. My criticisms come solely from a cold eyed view of what is in Israel's long term interests. I've watched this drama for over twenty years and the trajectory looks pretty clear. If the Israelis keep clinging to that land it's going to be their undoing. It's been their undoing for decades.
They also know war is hard on them. They can't keep their reserves going forever and if they set the goals as "destroying Hamas" then they'll be at it forever. An administration worth a bucket of warm spit would cut a deal to get out of there quicker- though Israel doesn't currently have such such an Administration in place. It's not like everyone doesn't remember who propped up Hamas and put them in place in the first place- the same people screeching about destroying Hamas root and branch now.
Well Bibi and his minions would blow the whole thing up before they'd tolerate #1 since it'd quickly jack up pressure for a two state solution to levels they'd struggle to resist and the Israeli right has been propping up Hamas for decades to preclude that very thing.
#2 would not last long before it'd likely regress to something similar to #1.
#3 is laughable- The Allies weren't planning on expropriating German land while they were trying to "de-nazify" Germany.
#4 would cause a war with Egypt and other neighbors and probably would be the end of Israel as a modern integrated western nation (which in turn would, in time, quite possibly destroy Israel qua Iseal. I don't think even Bibi is dumb enough to try it.
#5 is equally laughable as the Saudi's would never agree to do it and, if the Israeli's tried to make them do it, would just lead to the Saudi's handing Gaza back to the PA which is #1 option which is a non-starter for the Israeli right.
You'd have to define stupidity. If you’re talking about name calling and other unpleasant speech Israel would be expected to tolerate all of it and would be welcome to call them all the horrible names they want in return. If you’re talking about actual physical attacks, I addressed that upthread.
Well, looking at the global reaction to the Gazan withdrawal under Sharon in 2005, I think it'd be safe to say that Israel wildly and disproportionately reacting to rocket attacks or raids with heavy destruction in the Palestinian areas that launched them would be readily accepted by the world and Israels’ Arab neighbors. A comparatively modest withdrawal with modest settlement removal from Gaza earned Israel close on to twenty years of the worlds’ tolerance and that was with Israels continued occupation and expropriation of land in the territories steadily undermining Israel’s moral position and with Gaza being under a near total siege.
So, the answer is complicated I suppose but, so long as Israel stuck to just viciously and disproportionately responding without re-occupying or trying to steal land, I’d guess global tolerance would be very high. As for how much specific terrorism they’d be expected to tolerate? That’s an open question but the answer is “not very much before they’d strike back” and the Palestinians would likely tire very quickly of the cost of such terrorism in the absence of the occupation to sustain their resentment.
On “Ukraine is Changing the Face of Warfare”
That is a good point and I accept it. DHD's are probably harder than I'm thinking when you factor in targeting and weight.
On “From Josh Barro: “This Is the Economy We’ll Be Going Into the Election With””
That persuades me, sure Saul, but it likely won't persuade the lower info voters who'll likely decide this contest. God(ess?) I wish it was otherwise. Yes the US has come through the Covid crisis better than any other country on the planet, but that's not the curve voters grade on.
I still think Biden has fundamental strengths and Trump fundamental weaknesses that should grow more and more evident as the election approaches but it'd sure be nice for my blood pressure if the bloody polls reflected that more than the flat out toss up we get currently (and yes, I know, it's still too early to expect polls to be predictive).
"
It's one heck of a pickle. In this centuries terms; gdp, employment, wage growth; this is a scintillating spectacular economy but in one major way, inflation, it's bad in a way we haven't seen for decades.
On “Will the Real Free-Trade Party Please Stand Up?”
A very good point but a very painful point. The real brute aspect of free trade as a political issue is that its opponents are passionate with significant losses to absorb while its beneficiaries are everyone and the effect is subtle. That makes for absolutely savage politics and which is why it's so hard to do.
"
If only we'd listened to that boy instead of walling him up in the abandoned coke oven.
"
It is really a canard but it is somewhat harmless? I mean, sure, it's distortionary but I'm not honestly sure if shipping fully assembled cars from overseas actually pencils out vs shipping the parts and assembling them here. As distortions go it doesn't strike me as an egregious one- clearly Toyota, Honda, BMW etc feel the same way.
"
It sounds enormously plausible and Pinky's fascinating response suggests that you may well be right (I was in rural Canada through to the 2000's and just couldn't say).
"
Sure, but the criticisms of Japan were a lot more emotive and baseless than the critiques of China are now.
"
Which was marketed as free trade and, objectively, was free-er trade than the status quos at the time.
"
I also agree. There are further considerations too. In the 90's and early aughts when American strength seemed overwhelming and, further, that wars for territory seemed backwards and pointless the question of defense was lower priority. Now, with both China and Russia nakedly exhibiting territorial lust defense considerations are more prominent. Civil manufacturing can be repurposed quickly to military manufacturing in many cases.
Further, absent from Mr. Thorntons' analysis is any mention of how purposefully, egregiously and destructively the Chinese have prioritized subsidizing and exporting manufacturing even to the detriment of their own people’s wellbeing. A strict free trader would say that free trade would remain advisable as it’d be, in essence, taking a subsidy from the Chinese to us but that would ignore the potential long term costs.
Finally, there is an element of chickens coming home to roost as free traders were generally very indifferent to the plight of the losers from free trade here at home. Liberals can, at least, honestly claim that they tried to help however imperfectly but the right has always been something between indifferent to disdainful to those people and now they find themselves shocked that the masses have little love of free trade.
But, yeah, free trade in the areas you talk about seems quite advisable and, ironically, a TPP style agreement would be an incredible boon to our position vis a vis the Chinese.
On “Open Mic for the week of 5/13/2024”
If this story repeats it'll be because the hedge fund types are quietly going long on those stocks this time.
"
You'd be a #2 in Jay's cited breakdown then.
"
I wonder if this is what it was like when the PC movements' tide went out in the early 90's? I'm presuming not because the internet wasn't a thing at that time but I wonder if there're similarities.
For me it reminds me of how the right wing has kind of memory holed their vehement opposition to SSM now that they both have been routed and the predicted sky falling failed to materialize. Just a lot of silence, an uncomfortable kind of denial that it was ever a big deal and some perfunctory throat clearing.
On “Republicans Defending Joe Biden”
Yeah what few policies Trump has proposed would make Erdoğan blush.
On “US Presidents Sorted Into Hogwarts Houses”
The author is conservative.
On “Open Mic for the week of 5/6/2024”
For, what, posting that the identarian left is an awkward noisy fringe? Unless you're in a fortune 500 media company being paid to opine what're you doing posting anything about political stuff on the company server/website/dime?
Honestly, the rule hasn't actually changed "don't discomfort your employer." It's just now the people getting spun up about things are often identarian leftists (or rather were since the drumbeat of people getting fired for vague identarian "crimes" has slowed greatly) but in the 80's and 90's it was various moral majority right wing culture kooks and in the earlier years it was the pearl clutching conservative housewives or the anticommunist contingent. Companies have fired people for doing things in public that made trouble for the company as long as there’s been a company. Our latest iteration was just that companies had some new venues for whining that they hadn’t yet become inured to. That’s rapidly fading away.
"
I'd expect that they'd indulge in some military adventurism and terrorism. Then the Israeli's would flatten the block where the adventurers or terrorists came from and every block in sight of it. The world would mumble a bit but mostly shrug because Israel would be withdrawn and most everyone would say "What did you expect?" And then, in time, the Palestinian reaction to that kind of adventurism by their peers would go from "Allah Ackbar!" to "What the fish are you thinking you idiot, we're trying to get on with our lives. Cut it out!" And no, that’s not theory- that’s recent history. The Lebanese have taken that attitude towards Hezbollah.
"
You know the story about the Israeli offers are more complicated than that Lee, but I don't need to relitigation it because those are banked decisions and Israel has already spent down its credit. The Palestinians foolishness and poor choices led to Sharon deciding on unilateral withdrawal in the early 2000's and the Israeli's were rewarded with -decades- of virtually a free hand in their neighborhood as a result of that. That credit is spent.
And the Palestinians don't need to be productive nor do I need to prove that they would be to justify Israel withdrawing from the territories because there's nothing about the occupation that enhances Israeli security. It's not 1950. If the settlements ever had any military/strategic value it's long, long since obsolete and all the occupation does is poison Israel's own politics, undermine their moral standing and make their eventual withdrawal harder.
I mean, for fish's sake Lee, look at the three of them: Israel, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. It boggles the imagination that of those three the PA (corrupt and schlorerick as it is) is now coming off as the most reasonably of the three parties! I get it, the Palestinians dissapointed the Israeli left and it imploded. That justifies a few years of the behavior we've seen from Israel but decades of right wing Israeli administration and settler policy? Come on now, it's nonsensical. I know you're not a likudnik.
"
This is not remotely equivalent to the failures of 9/11. It's not like it was a secret that Hamas wanted to attack and it's not like the US had planes secured and then diverted those resources so they could go steal land from the Canadians. The Israeli's know perfectly well that Likud is partially to blame for 10/7 which is why Bibi's name is mud in Israel right now.
As for your mind reading about the Palestinians, I can't help but be highly doubtful. The West Bank is a larger area with more Palestinians in it than Gaza and they haven't engaged in wild attacks on Israel despite constant settler provocation. Any point you try to make by pointing at Gaza is reversed and overwhelmed by the larger example of the West Bank.
Heck, I don't even carry a particular brief for the Palestinians themselves. I don't have any personal connections to any Palestinians like I do to Israeli's. My criticisms come solely from a cold eyed view of what is in Israel's long term interests. I've watched this drama for over twenty years and the trajectory looks pretty clear. If the Israelis keep clinging to that land it's going to be their undoing. It's been their undoing for decades.
"
I think it's proof that the summer doldrums have come early that the chattering classes are wasting this much time and ink on both sides.
"
So they weren't nothingburgers then.
"
They also know war is hard on them. They can't keep their reserves going forever and if they set the goals as "destroying Hamas" then they'll be at it forever. An administration worth a bucket of warm spit would cut a deal to get out of there quicker- though Israel doesn't currently have such such an Administration in place. It's not like everyone doesn't remember who propped up Hamas and put them in place in the first place- the same people screeching about destroying Hamas root and branch now.
"
Well Bibi and his minions would blow the whole thing up before they'd tolerate #1 since it'd quickly jack up pressure for a two state solution to levels they'd struggle to resist and the Israeli right has been propping up Hamas for decades to preclude that very thing.
#2 would not last long before it'd likely regress to something similar to #1.
#3 is laughable- The Allies weren't planning on expropriating German land while they were trying to "de-nazify" Germany.
#4 would cause a war with Egypt and other neighbors and probably would be the end of Israel as a modern integrated western nation (which in turn would, in time, quite possibly destroy Israel qua Iseal. I don't think even Bibi is dumb enough to try it.
#5 is equally laughable as the Saudi's would never agree to do it and, if the Israeli's tried to make them do it, would just lead to the Saudi's handing Gaza back to the PA which is #1 option which is a non-starter for the Israeli right.
"
You'd have to define stupidity. If you’re talking about name calling and other unpleasant speech Israel would be expected to tolerate all of it and would be welcome to call them all the horrible names they want in return. If you’re talking about actual physical attacks, I addressed that upthread.
"
Well, looking at the global reaction to the Gazan withdrawal under Sharon in 2005, I think it'd be safe to say that Israel wildly and disproportionately reacting to rocket attacks or raids with heavy destruction in the Palestinian areas that launched them would be readily accepted by the world and Israels’ Arab neighbors. A comparatively modest withdrawal with modest settlement removal from Gaza earned Israel close on to twenty years of the worlds’ tolerance and that was with Israels continued occupation and expropriation of land in the territories steadily undermining Israel’s moral position and with Gaza being under a near total siege.
So, the answer is complicated I suppose but, so long as Israel stuck to just viciously and disproportionately responding without re-occupying or trying to steal land, I’d guess global tolerance would be very high. As for how much specific terrorism they’d be expected to tolerate? That’s an open question but the answer is “not very much before they’d strike back” and the Palestinians would likely tire very quickly of the cost of such terrorism in the absence of the occupation to sustain their resentment.