Hilariously enough I actually thought the Sacramento Bee quote was satire and that you had made a typo. Like that can't possibly be real. Right? Right...?
I increasingly feel like we're in a simulation programmed by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
I think Poland would do that and already kind of does, within its means, maybe same with the Scandinavians, but Germany is probably the most politically myopic place on Earth, France is too much of a mess internally, and no other countries on the continent have the economy or the clout. They could if they had a unity of vision but I don't and doubt they will develop it no matter what happens.
I fall into maybe a middle ground. I'm pretty cynical about Europe's ability to ever act as a coherent bloc without a somewhat firm hand from the US. I also think it's useful to have Europe as a friend, military ally, and partner in commerce.
What they do need is a conventional military deterrent capable of self defense with only token US contributions. We had two friendly Democratic administrations fail to make that case (to say nothing of Europeans, maybe cynically, failing to hear it) and now round two of MAGA that sort of understands the broader contours of the problem but is incapable of approaching it in a remotely constructive way.
Dude it's bad! And it's so easy to find yourself spending hours every night, mentally stressed, all from doing literally nothing. It's also easy to absent mindedly fall into. At least smoking used to have a kind of social component to it.
Europe needs to re-arm no matter the terms they are on with us. However I think they are only likely to do it in a coherent way that is helpful to US interests with our leadership and support, namely the things Trump is intent on wiping his a*s with.
I did a pre-Lent visit to the Shrine in DC on Saturday for confession then mass as kind of a mini pilgrimage to kick things off.
My battle is going to primarily be against my phone and the evening habit of constantly circling through various sites and social media of no good use to my mental or spiritual health. I found an old Kindle we had gathering dust in the basement and am going to try to use it as a means of just freaking looking at something else.
That sounds like a cool idea but way too complicated for my household especially with the biggest having baseball practice for his travel team on Fridays. I'm staring straight down the barrel of kraft mac and cheese, scrambled eggs, and probably that most traditional of all Lenten cuisine, the filet-o-fish.
Yes, there's also nukes and nukes. It's possible the big strategic nuclear weapon systems are in disrepair. However I doubt every single one their tactical weapons that can be launched from planes or submarines is a dud. No idea if they can still reliably hit the US eastern seaboard with the push of a button but it would surprise me if things were so bad they couldn't do damage the likes of which the world has never seen to Europe, including US installations there. There's also the fact that Putin has at least potentially been put on notice based on initial performance in Ukraine and there has been some correction.
Yea the concern was security and maintenance. I don't believe operational control of the weapons stationed in Ukraine was ever anywhere other than Moscow. Kiev never had the capability of using them.
I believe what Dark is implying here is that modern day Russia's nuclear weapons don't actually work. I've seen some speculation to that effect, especially in light of how badly maintained and hollowed out it's conventional forces have turned out to be. It's also the last hypothesis anyone should want to test. We mighti learn that it's the one weapon system they've stayed on top of.
Yea to me the big miscalculation was indecisiveness from the Biden admin. If you're worried about escalation you start pushing towards a settlement in 2022 when Ukraine had a bit of an upper hand and was taking back territory. If you want to see if Ukraine can win you're way more aggressive with aid, let them take the gloves off, and push the Europeans to also share more advanced weaponry.
Instead we tried to walk a middle ground, let Ukraine lose all momentum, and now Trump is back in charge operating with malice towards Zelenskyy and myopia about the larger strategic situation.
I've never been convinced he's bought and paid for, but he is amoral, selfish, and incurious, which in turn allows him to be used by more sophisticated actors than himself.
Long term I think we're about to get a big lesson on just how much global stability rested on a certain unity of mind of the US federal government. I've always been more dove-ish, and that unity of mind led us to some idiotic places and destruction of our own credibility, from Mogadishu to Kabul. Yet at a certain point the ability and willingness of the United States to go to bat, confront, and even be a little reckless with other major powers has upside to it, even if hard to measure. This sort of ramshackle, chaotic abandonment of that is going to go poorly.
The silver lining may be that it's hard for me to imagine a recipe more likely to implode a presidency than 'make food and energy more expensive' and 'cause recession.' Sometime later this month we will probably get 'kick people off health insurance' thrown into the bowl for good measure.
Yea my assumption would be there's an auto-enroll at the 'basic' option and some (again, greatly tamed) version of a 'private' excess insurance market pays to advertise on the government exchanges website with which they are of course accredited and fully integrated.
But it's hairy and falls way, way short of the egalitarian principles at least partially in play. There won't be any hiding it. Maybe at the end of the day no one cares because the only people on basic are mostly healthy under 30s subsidizing the 'basic' portion of the coverage for the over 65s, but then maybe not and it becomes its own kind of simmering grievance.
I think you're right and I also think this is where the discussion of cost becomes the wrong path politically. If it wins out it'll be more of a quality of life thing. Instead of being jerked around with administration and your employer, never knowing what the hell the fees are for or what's covered or isn't, you'll pick the plan that's right for your family, what it does and doesn't include will be clear, and you'll be able to use it at your favorite provider franchise between the fast food joints and big box stores on the main drag.
That's the unsexy but palatable vision, or at least I would think it is.
This is in part of why my probably unpopular opinion is that the ACA is underrated as a first step. The next steps probably involve starting to tame the big payers into something closer to public utilities. The last step is the hardest of all where you deal with moving people off employer plans entirely.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this point. Wherever they go on policy at some point you have to pick your strong issues/positions and take some stands. You can't be everything to everyone of course, but if I were in the room with the decision makers I'd still be advocating careful discretion as to where those stands are.
I think the possibility of system level savings accruing to the checking accounts of individual tax payers is at best very much TBD. I know it doesn't really play out that way in European systems I'm familiar with. Whether the average voter is sophisticated enough to understand that, I have no idea.
Big picture though the generosity of other governments is funded in significant part via not just higher income taxes but also VAT. The Democrats just lost the last election in large part due to inflation and cost if living issues. As I have seen you (rightly!) note, the Democrats plea of 'if only people understood how good the economy is' didn't work. I could take or leave Blair on any number of issues but I think his point about larger credibility of message is important. That in mind, the last place I'd want to go right now is a conversation about whether households will pay more, even if some of them also end up getting more in the net.
I think that's a bit of a misread about Bernie. Bernie is popular because he exudes 'take me as I am' authenticity. People love that, and it also happens to be the area where mainstream Democrats are at their weakest.
On the specific issues I think Tony Blair explains it well below. The fact that a lot of Bernie's ideas are popular in a vacuum should not be misinterpreted as broad appetite for the combination of European income tax rates plus VAT that would be required to fund many of them.
I think it's part 'it's in the US's interest for Russia to lose' and part 'peace cannot be secured by weakness but only by strength.' That doesn't mean we support Ukraine's most maximalist aims down to the last cent but it does mean a settlement that fails to account for the long term isn't a settlement at all.
Trump's instinct to end the conflict isn't wrong, it's that his methods of doing so are unlikely to succeed and may ultimately put the US in an even worse position down the road.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/3/2025”
Pretty disgraceful in light of the recent measles outbreaks. But not sure what else to expect. It's an administration of conspiracy theorist bufoons.
"
Hilariously enough I actually thought the Sacramento Bee quote was satire and that you had made a typo. Like that can't possibly be real. Right? Right...?
I increasingly feel like we're in a simulation programmed by Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
On “Comment Rescue: DavidTC on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Unfreezing of Funds”
I'm just glad they actually did. Because my gosh.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/3/2025”
I have spent enough time in Germany to know that even if it was in their interest to do something like that they never would.
"
I think Poland would do that and already kind of does, within its means, maybe same with the Scandinavians, but Germany is probably the most politically myopic place on Earth, France is too much of a mess internally, and no other countries on the continent have the economy or the clout. They could if they had a unity of vision but I don't and doubt they will develop it no matter what happens.
"
I fall into maybe a middle ground. I'm pretty cynical about Europe's ability to ever act as a coherent bloc without a somewhat firm hand from the US. I also think it's useful to have Europe as a friend, military ally, and partner in commerce.
What they do need is a conventional military deterrent capable of self defense with only token US contributions. We had two friendly Democratic administrations fail to make that case (to say nothing of Europeans, maybe cynically, failing to hear it) and now round two of MAGA that sort of understands the broader contours of the problem but is incapable of approaching it in a remotely constructive way.
On “Lent!”
Dude it's bad! And it's so easy to find yourself spending hours every night, mentally stressed, all from doing literally nothing. It's also easy to absent mindedly fall into. At least smoking used to have a kind of social component to it.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/3/2025”
Europe needs to re-arm no matter the terms they are on with us. However I think they are only likely to do it in a coherent way that is helpful to US interests with our leadership and support, namely the things Trump is intent on wiping his a*s with.
On “Lent!”
I did a pre-Lent visit to the Shrine in DC on Saturday for confession then mass as kind of a mini pilgrimage to kick things off.
My battle is going to primarily be against my phone and the evening habit of constantly circling through various sites and social media of no good use to my mental or spiritual health. I found an old Kindle we had gathering dust in the basement and am going to try to use it as a means of just freaking looking at something else.
"
That sounds like a cool idea but way too complicated for my household especially with the biggest having baseball practice for his travel team on Fridays. I'm staring straight down the barrel of kraft mac and cheese, scrambled eggs, and probably that most traditional of all Lenten cuisine, the filet-o-fish.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/3/2025”
Macron has too many of his own problems and France is too small and limited in its ability to project power.
Unfortunately as was proven with Merkel last go 'round it's the US or no one.
"
Yes, there's also nukes and nukes. It's possible the big strategic nuclear weapon systems are in disrepair. However I doubt every single one their tactical weapons that can be launched from planes or submarines is a dud. No idea if they can still reliably hit the US eastern seaboard with the push of a button but it would surprise me if things were so bad they couldn't do damage the likes of which the world has never seen to Europe, including US installations there. There's also the fact that Putin has at least potentially been put on notice based on initial performance in Ukraine and there has been some correction.
"
Yea the concern was security and maintenance. I don't believe operational control of the weapons stationed in Ukraine was ever anywhere other than Moscow. Kiev never had the capability of using them.
I believe what Dark is implying here is that modern day Russia's nuclear weapons don't actually work. I've seen some speculation to that effect, especially in light of how badly maintained and hollowed out it's conventional forces have turned out to be. It's also the last hypothesis anyone should want to test. We mighti learn that it's the one weapon system they've stayed on top of.
"
Yea to me the big miscalculation was indecisiveness from the Biden admin. If you're worried about escalation you start pushing towards a settlement in 2022 when Ukraine had a bit of an upper hand and was taking back territory. If you want to see if Ukraine can win you're way more aggressive with aid, let them take the gloves off, and push the Europeans to also share more advanced weaponry.
Instead we tried to walk a middle ground, let Ukraine lose all momentum, and now Trump is back in charge operating with malice towards Zelenskyy and myopia about the larger strategic situation.
"
I've never been convinced he's bought and paid for, but he is amoral, selfish, and incurious, which in turn allows him to be used by more sophisticated actors than himself.
Long term I think we're about to get a big lesson on just how much global stability rested on a certain unity of mind of the US federal government. I've always been more dove-ish, and that unity of mind led us to some idiotic places and destruction of our own credibility, from Mogadishu to Kabul. Yet at a certain point the ability and willingness of the United States to go to bat, confront, and even be a little reckless with other major powers has upside to it, even if hard to measure. This sort of ramshackle, chaotic abandonment of that is going to go poorly.
"
The silver lining may be that it's hard for me to imagine a recipe more likely to implode a presidency than 'make food and energy more expensive' and 'cause recession.' Sometime later this month we will probably get 'kick people off health insurance' thrown into the bowl for good measure.
But man is it going to hurt.
"
Maybe. At some point I have to think other countries say f- it, if you're going to do it then do it.
"
Tariffs on Canada and Mexico tomorrow. This promises to suck.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/03/03/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico/
"
Yea my assumption would be there's an auto-enroll at the 'basic' option and some (again, greatly tamed) version of a 'private' excess insurance market pays to advertise on the government exchanges website with which they are of course accredited and fully integrated.
But it's hairy and falls way, way short of the egalitarian principles at least partially in play. There won't be any hiding it. Maybe at the end of the day no one cares because the only people on basic are mostly healthy under 30s subsidizing the 'basic' portion of the coverage for the over 65s, but then maybe not and it becomes its own kind of simmering grievance.
"
I think you're right and I also think this is where the discussion of cost becomes the wrong path politically. If it wins out it'll be more of a quality of life thing. Instead of being jerked around with administration and your employer, never knowing what the hell the fees are for or what's covered or isn't, you'll pick the plan that's right for your family, what it does and doesn't include will be clear, and you'll be able to use it at your favorite provider franchise between the fast food joints and big box stores on the main drag.
That's the unsexy but palatable vision, or at least I would think it is.
"
This is in part of why my probably unpopular opinion is that the ACA is underrated as a first step. The next steps probably involve starting to tame the big payers into something closer to public utilities. The last step is the hardest of all where you deal with moving people off employer plans entirely.
"
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this point. Wherever they go on policy at some point you have to pick your strong issues/positions and take some stands. You can't be everything to everyone of course, but if I were in the room with the decision makers I'd still be advocating careful discretion as to where those stands are.
"
I think the possibility of system level savings accruing to the checking accounts of individual tax payers is at best very much TBD. I know it doesn't really play out that way in European systems I'm familiar with. Whether the average voter is sophisticated enough to understand that, I have no idea.
Big picture though the generosity of other governments is funded in significant part via not just higher income taxes but also VAT. The Democrats just lost the last election in large part due to inflation and cost if living issues. As I have seen you (rightly!) note, the Democrats plea of 'if only people understood how good the economy is' didn't work. I could take or leave Blair on any number of issues but I think his point about larger credibility of message is important. That in mind, the last place I'd want to go right now is a conversation about whether households will pay more, even if some of them also end up getting more in the net.
"
I think that's a bit of a misread about Bernie. Bernie is popular because he exudes 'take me as I am' authenticity. People love that, and it also happens to be the area where mainstream Democrats are at their weakest.
On the specific issues I think Tony Blair explains it well below. The fact that a lot of Bernie's ideas are popular in a vacuum should not be misinterpreted as broad appetite for the combination of European income tax rates plus VAT that would be required to fund many of them.
https://youtu.be/FPqc9xEqRTY?si=l4TwTJI5-eL3krA8
On “Group Activity The Full, Unedited Trump, Zelenskyy, and Vance Video”
I think it's part 'it's in the US's interest for Russia to lose' and part 'peace cannot be secured by weakness but only by strength.' That doesn't mean we support Ukraine's most maximalist aims down to the last cent but it does mean a settlement that fails to account for the long term isn't a settlement at all.
Trump's instinct to end the conflict isn't wrong, it's that his methods of doing so are unlikely to succeed and may ultimately put the US in an even worse position down the road.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.