Sure, but many Companies are attached to their location already... how will we get them to relocate beyond financial incentives? They are irrationally attached to certain places for status, social networks and other non-financial reasons.
The shift to service industries seems to be one big factor... but the other seems undoubtedly smoking. All things being equal, smoking really seems to beat-up the body.
Now, add-in some heavy partying and the pre-fitness craze... and yeah, that cohort aged like medieval peasants.
Heh, rather than fiddle-faddle with the Red/Blue team nonsense... can't we all just agree to keep arresting Billionaires with Global Capital interests as de facto and de jure unregistered Foreign Lobbyists?
I think that's the funny part, Barrack can likely legitimately look around and say... but this is what everyone I know does.
The idea that a Billionaire hedge fund manager managing Sovereign Wealth Funds is a lobbyist? Preposterous. That's for people who are paid wages.
Sure, sort of... two movable feasts that the livestock exchange tracks... so if you get your breeding right you can hit those moving dates - as I say, we just hit it by accident since we were doing a cull run.
But that's like triple word bonus, the other bonus is just a general meat shortage which is driving up prices right now... and that's just plain farming...When you chase the good prices, it turns out everyone is chasing the good prices which means the prices go down... for commodities especially.
Normal prices for these sorts of cull animals are more like $0.75 - $1.25 per pound live weight... I thought we might get as much as $1.50 since goats have been in 'higher' demand since about 2015... but $3.00? That's yahtzee.
I will say, though, at $3 live weight for Sheep/Goats, you could pay for a year of tuition with 50 market lambs/goats... which would require a breeding herd of about 30... which would be 'do-able' for an enterprising 14-18 yo.
Also at $3 live weight... commodity farming becomes almost viable. So let those prices float! End the Urban subsidies to farmers!
We just got the check from our local Livestock exchange where we took four nuisance billy goats; as it happens, we hit the goat livestock bonanza as I guess there's a muslim holiday upcoming. $3/lb LIVE weight... so about $800 for 4 dwarf nuisance billies. That's a really high price if you haven't been pricing out goats recently. Totally by accident on our part... just one of those chores we finally procrastinated into good fortune.
We also totaled our main car and the middle son lost the expensive kind of key for the truck... so, some good fortune to offset some misfortune... but still THREE DOLLARS a pound LIVE weight!
I also... ice cream > popsicle always. But, if I have to go for frozen artificial sugar flavors, it's Cherry... maximum cherry... like nuclear cherry. At our local Appaloosa festival I finally had a cherry ice so intense even I was like, settle down cherry master.
I used to play golf with my Grandpa as he was loosing his sight; I was his spotter. Then I worked at Golf Courses for several years through highschool... played a ton of golf then just stopped forever. It doesn't mesh with my temperment.
Heh, Yes. That's what the Supreme Court's gonna say. Or, Roberts will say that the executive isn't so much legislating as uncovering the penumbra of legislative wishes. So it's a law when it needs to be a law or a Regulation when it needs to be a regulation. Like a Mandate when a Tax would kill the Legislation and a Tax when a Mandate would kill the Legislation.
It's not clear to me whether historians will see Roberts as the Best Chief Justice EVER or the Worst... either way he's navigating more than judgerating.
It's XX% stimulus ... pulling forward funds from 2022 into 2021 and YY% anti-poverty by making people who didn't earn enough to qualify for Tax Credit get funds.
Because it is a Tax Code stimulus, I think it will poison some UBI thinking because it's not a net-new expenditure, it's re-jiggering your refunds (with some new expenditures added in)
But yes, my suspicion is that we're on track for an over-promise, under-deliver sort of thing... which we'll experience in April as the mid-terms are warming up.
At a minimum, if I'm reading that correctly, many folks who might have typically received a $1-2k refund might see significantly less than that... since they already got it as a pre-fund.
I haven't studied the minutiae of how all the different brackets will experience this... but I'd say there will be a non-zero number who will have to write a check and a much larger non-zero number who will be surprised that their usual refund is so small.
The biggest benefit... and I hasten to add, I'm in favor... is that folks who are outside of the Tax regime will get the funds. That's the anti-poverty part.
Yes, it is a pre-fund of a new and expanded Child Tax Credit... you have to qualify for it and the checks are going out based upon various IRS assumptions. But until you have completed your Fiscal 2021 earnings, the assumptions may or may not align.
If the assumptions are correct, and I expect they will be for most folks, it will be a wash.
Directly from the IRS website:
A1. You may want to unenroll from receiving advance Child Tax Credit payments for several reasons, including if you expect the amount of tax you owe to be greater than your expected refund when you file your 2021 tax return. The payments you receive are an advance of the Child Tax Credit that you would normally get when you file your 2021 tax return. Because these credits are paid in advance, every dollar you receive will reduce the amount of Child Tax Credit you will claim on your 2021 tax return. This means that by accepting advance child tax credit payments, the amount of your refund may be reduced or the amount of tax you owe may increase.
Belay the last sentence, the opt-out was way at the bottom and had to scroll past useless info to get to it... but it's there at least... just offscreen.
I kept getting letters telling me to get excited for my child pre-fund and my initial reaction was pure annoyance.
Sure, at last count I have something like a million kids, but since this is a tax-code thing all the high-level info was that I wouldn't qualify... which is fine if it's an anti-poverty thing (not great if it's pro-natalist thing)... so I was merely annoyed that they didn't know that I obviously wouldn't qualify.
Then I went to the website and saw I should get a couple hundred bucks plus or minus... and yeah, now I have to go and Opt-Out. While my taxes are very simple (all my income comes primarly from one tracked/taxed source) it is highly variable. And, as a result, I claim 0 dependents and do everything possible to maximize my witholdings because even though every penny goes through IRS charts for tax witholding, IRS charts are really bad with highly variable income. And it is painful to pay retail for taxes (the 5% don't get any breaks) *and* stroke a large check even though all your deductions are minimized.
I get it, no one cares about the top-5% tax problems... but this is a 5% tax problem I don't want to deal with.
A better system would be to look a *last* year's income... if I qualify based on that, I keep it - no matter what I make this year. If I don't, I don't get it. But I don't want checks that I'm going to have to pay back at tax time.
The regular IRS website, where I have an account, was useless... no obvious opt-out.
1992 is the closest we have to an awesome thought experiment around using the French Model for Presidential Elections.
That is... three candidates getting significant pluralities with a 3rd party receiving 19% of the popular vote.
Most analysis suggests Clinton would have won... but, since we didn't actually have a proper run-off system, I'm not entirely sure how the votes would have been allocated given that sort of option.
That is, without RCV or a meat space runoff option, we can't really assess what the 'rational' voter would have done.
WW8 - Honestly people, 1984 is the wrong novel... we're in Brave New World simulation right now; and Wilde should never be quoted sober or drunk but only during the first blush of the buzz. I didn't read the appellate court's objections but assume they were these?
But is it really the case that literary metaphor is considered inflammatory? Is that a general rule, or one applied depending on how badly the metaphor lands? Or something else?
Good observation when you think about it, our playgrounds were the imaginative projection of Basic Training for kids.
Not consciously, I don't think, but all the creative agility things in the 'new' playgrounds assumed we were going to climb cargo rope ladders in and out of troop transports. We all had to be proficient at climbing ropes up cliffs, or at least up to an observation tower and/or another ship.
None of this 'adventure' lifestyle... we weren't chasing experiences, experiences were chasing us.
I read through the doc and it strikes me as the 'good' kind of EO... that is, one which directs existing agencies under existing laws how to approach, prioritize and execute those laws.
I'd quibble that it would be better to call this the Biden Executive Branch Regulatory Guidance memo... fetishizing EO's as some sort of powerful action is kinda bad in short-, mid-, and long-term.
Three items where I have some familiarity struck me as sensible corrections IF, and this is a big IF, anything actually happens... which, to be honest, I kinda doubt... which is also why I don't like the EO fetish - it give the *appearance* of having done something.
The Ag stuff is mostly good... but this in particular is simply long overdue:
(C) prohibiting unfair practices related to grower ranking systems — systems in which the poultry companies, contractors, or dealers exercise extraordinary control over numerous inputs that determine the amount farmers are paid and require farmers to assume the risk of factors outside their control, leaving them more economically vulnerable;
On Winery and Beer distribution (I used to work on the Wine Distributor side)... this entire industry is sclerotic owing to the collusion between State Tax authorities and Distribution companies which work together to inhibit competition, prevent direct sales, and classically exact rents on other entities productivity... It needs a massive scrubbing, which I fear this directive will not address.
(i) initiating a rulemaking to update the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s trade practice regulations;
(ii) rescinding or revising any regulations of the beer, wine, and spirits industries that may unnecessarily inhibit competition; and
(iii) reducing any barriers that impede market access for smaller and independent brewers, winemakers, and distilleries.
The biggest miss, IMO has to do with Broadband. It focuses on mostly useless things like Price transparency and fees reporting... which is a very minor issue for people who already have broadband. The broadband issue in the US isn't pricing, it's access. And this EO betrays a very BOS-WASH concern that simple 'doesn't get it'. I'm told this is also VP Harris's remit.
March's Broadband remediation EO would have at least the following:
*Requirements for Broadband companies to service all customers
*Fees to connect customers can be charged, but they will be regulated (like Electric)
*Broadband monopolies (various Pole rights) that were negotiated by localities under duress may be appealed... in some cases abolished, in other cases, sharing fees (regulated as above) to recoup investment are permitted.
*Broadband self-reporting coverage data in support of local contracts must be made public for analysis by third parties.
*etc.
So, to the extent that the Executive Branch uses discretion to enforce the laws on the books regarding their regulatory statues... this is a well, of course, sort of thing. To the extent that March is looking for 'real' enhancements to Business in America which refocuses the capitalist project to value labor proportionally to capital? Well, no this is not *that* kind of exciting Executive initiative.
Finally... on the 'hot-button' issue of consolidation, I'm in favor heeding the warning specific in The Wealth of Nations against consolidation... however, I think this topic is both more simple and more complicated than we presently understand. I'm much less concerned about Billionaires controlling XYZ than I am with corporations shaping markets with unfair advantages which ultimately distort or break markets only to see them reconstituted under new market ownership. That is, mostly a predatory business practice model vs. anti-markets.
Unless you need to replace the car... then definitely don't sell.
I didn't research this too much (since I didn't have a car to trade)... but some folks were saying that you only got movement on the New Car price if you had a Trade... which they would buy at the 'usual' KBB value and work the arbitrage. Plus, they just plain need stock on hand.
But private party selling used-car / buying used-car? Maybe that's just a wash. Just don't go anywhere near a dealer.
Reports suggest the chips should start flowing in a couple/few months... which might make the end of 2021 a great time to buy 2021's as the 2022's are hitting the market. It seems the 21's are built, they just can't get the chips to complete them. So... if you can wait, and can avoid the new model concupiscence... then might be great deals in NOV. +/-
My daughter got in to a fender-bender last week; or so we thought.
Turns out the car is 'totaled'
We were probably one or two years away from replacing that car... now we are a week away; or so I thought.
And OH MY GOD have you seen what the car market is like? Sure, I'd heard about chip shortages and high used car prices, but those things I treated as "stories" well, let me tell you that the are burying the lede.
'Lightly' Used cars cost what NEW cars used to cost... and by that I mean MSRP price, not the discounted price. New Cars? I've offered three places MSRP plus Tax and Tags (thinking they'd eat the fake 'dealer fees') and all three have told me to have a nice day... we were THOUSANDS off... they are looking for (and I suppose getting) 20% OVER MSRP. They didn't even counter.
Which, a week ago didn't matter to me. Today? Crisis.
On “From GOP to Grand New Party: Starting A New Party With An Old Name”
Sure, but many Companies are attached to their location already... how will we get them to relocate beyond financial incentives? They are irrationally attached to certain places for status, social networks and other non-financial reasons.
On “Rejoice, Ye Peoples of the Land, ‘Tis Infrastructure Week Again!”
Needs more Hyperloop.
On “Tenshot: Revisiting Ally McBeal”
The shift to service industries seems to be one big factor... but the other seems undoubtedly smoking. All things being equal, smoking really seems to beat-up the body.
Now, add-in some heavy partying and the pre-fitness craze... and yeah, that cohort aged like medieval peasants.
On “The 2022 Best Picture Race: Summer Projections”
Only two movies on that list strike me as something I might go see: Dune and Green Knight.
Pig I'm planning to see... but you left it off the list? You tweeted you saw it... so that bad?
Fair to say I'm not exactly the target audience for the Oscars, but it kinda begs who is?
On “Thomas Barrack Indictment: Read It For Yourself”
Heh, rather than fiddle-faddle with the Red/Blue team nonsense... can't we all just agree to keep arresting Billionaires with Global Capital interests as de facto and de jure unregistered Foreign Lobbyists?
I think that's the funny part, Barrack can likely legitimately look around and say... but this is what everyone I know does.
The idea that a Billionaire hedge fund manager managing Sovereign Wealth Funds is a lobbyist? Preposterous. That's for people who are paid wages.
On “Weekend Plans: Frozen Novelties”
Sure, sort of... two movable feasts that the livestock exchange tracks... so if you get your breeding right you can hit those moving dates - as I say, we just hit it by accident since we were doing a cull run.
But that's like triple word bonus, the other bonus is just a general meat shortage which is driving up prices right now... and that's just plain farming...When you chase the good prices, it turns out everyone is chasing the good prices which means the prices go down... for commodities especially.
Normal prices for these sorts of cull animals are more like $0.75 - $1.25 per pound live weight... I thought we might get as much as $1.50 since goats have been in 'higher' demand since about 2015... but $3.00? That's yahtzee.
I will say, though, at $3 live weight for Sheep/Goats, you could pay for a year of tuition with 50 market lambs/goats... which would require a breeding herd of about 30... which would be 'do-able' for an enterprising 14-18 yo.
Also at $3 live weight... commodity farming becomes almost viable. So let those prices float! End the Urban subsidies to farmers!
[Sorry, belay that last sentence... no politics]
"
We just got the check from our local Livestock exchange where we took four nuisance billy goats; as it happens, we hit the goat livestock bonanza as I guess there's a muslim holiday upcoming. $3/lb LIVE weight... so about $800 for 4 dwarf nuisance billies. That's a really high price if you haven't been pricing out goats recently. Totally by accident on our part... just one of those chores we finally procrastinated into good fortune.
We also totaled our main car and the middle son lost the expensive kind of key for the truck... so, some good fortune to offset some misfortune... but still THREE DOLLARS a pound LIVE weight!
"
I also... ice cream > popsicle always. But, if I have to go for frozen artificial sugar flavors, it's Cherry... maximum cherry... like nuclear cherry. At our local Appaloosa festival I finally had a cherry ice so intense even I was like, settle down cherry master.
I used to play golf with my Grandpa as he was loosing his sight; I was his spotter. Then I worked at Golf Courses for several years through highschool... played a ton of golf then just stopped forever. It doesn't mesh with my temperment.
On “Federal Judge Rules DACA “Illegally Implemented Program”, Blocks New Applications,”
Heh, Yes. That's what the Supreme Court's gonna say. Or, Roberts will say that the executive isn't so much legislating as uncovering the penumbra of legislative wishes. So it's a law when it needs to be a law or a Regulation when it needs to be a regulation. Like a Mandate when a Tax would kill the Legislation and a Tax when a Mandate would kill the Legislation.
It's not clear to me whether historians will see Roberts as the Best Chief Justice EVER or the Worst... either way he's navigating more than judgerating.
On “Child Tax Credit Checks Start To Go Out”
Dear IRS,
Enclosed please find endorsed Child Tax Credit Check, if you would be so kind as to apply to next year's taxes, we would be very much obliged.
Yours ever,
March
On “Linky Friday: Sowing Seeds, Reaping Whirlwinds Edition”
Ah, the Irish Catholic employment act they call it.
On “Child Tax Credit Checks Start To Go Out”
It's XX% stimulus ... pulling forward funds from 2022 into 2021 and YY% anti-poverty by making people who didn't earn enough to qualify for Tax Credit get funds.
Because it is a Tax Code stimulus, I think it will poison some UBI thinking because it's not a net-new expenditure, it's re-jiggering your refunds (with some new expenditures added in)
But yes, my suspicion is that we're on track for an over-promise, under-deliver sort of thing... which we'll experience in April as the mid-terms are warming up.
"
At a minimum, if I'm reading that correctly, many folks who might have typically received a $1-2k refund might see significantly less than that... since they already got it as a pre-fund.
I haven't studied the minutiae of how all the different brackets will experience this... but I'd say there will be a non-zero number who will have to write a check and a much larger non-zero number who will be surprised that their usual refund is so small.
The biggest benefit... and I hasten to add, I'm in favor... is that folks who are outside of the Tax regime will get the funds. That's the anti-poverty part.
"
Yes, it is a pre-fund of a new and expanded Child Tax Credit... you have to qualify for it and the checks are going out based upon various IRS assumptions. But until you have completed your Fiscal 2021 earnings, the assumptions may or may not align.
If the assumptions are correct, and I expect they will be for most folks, it will be a wash.
Directly from the IRS website:
A1. You may want to unenroll from receiving advance Child Tax Credit payments for several reasons, including if you expect the amount of tax you owe to be greater than your expected refund when you file your 2021 tax return. The payments you receive are an advance of the Child Tax Credit that you would normally get when you file your 2021 tax return. Because these credits are paid in advance, every dollar you receive will reduce the amount of Child Tax Credit you will claim on your 2021 tax return. This means that by accepting advance child tax credit payments, the amount of your refund may be reduced or the amount of tax you owe may increase.
"
Belay the last sentence, the opt-out was way at the bottom and had to scroll past useless info to get to it... but it's there at least... just offscreen.
"
I kept getting letters telling me to get excited for my child pre-fund and my initial reaction was pure annoyance.
Sure, at last count I have something like a million kids, but since this is a tax-code thing all the high-level info was that I wouldn't qualify... which is fine if it's an anti-poverty thing (not great if it's pro-natalist thing)... so I was merely annoyed that they didn't know that I obviously wouldn't qualify.
Then I went to the website and saw I should get a couple hundred bucks plus or minus... and yeah, now I have to go and Opt-Out. While my taxes are very simple (all my income comes primarly from one tracked/taxed source) it is highly variable. And, as a result, I claim 0 dependents and do everything possible to maximize my witholdings because even though every penny goes through IRS charts for tax witholding, IRS charts are really bad with highly variable income. And it is painful to pay retail for taxes (the 5% don't get any breaks) *and* stroke a large check even though all your deductions are minimized.
I get it, no one cares about the top-5% tax problems... but this is a 5% tax problem I don't want to deal with.
A better system would be to look a *last* year's income... if I qualify based on that, I keep it - no matter what I make this year. If I don't, I don't get it. But I don't want checks that I'm going to have to pay back at tax time.
The regular IRS website, where I have an account, was useless... no obvious opt-out.
On “Linky Friday: Sowing Seeds, Reaping Whirlwinds Edition”
1992 is the closest we have to an awesome thought experiment around using the French Model for Presidential Elections.
That is... three candidates getting significant pluralities with a 3rd party receiving 19% of the popular vote.
Most analysis suggests Clinton would have won... but, since we didn't actually have a proper run-off system, I'm not entirely sure how the votes would have been allocated given that sort of option.
That is, without RCV or a meat space runoff option, we can't really assess what the 'rational' voter would have done.
Moral? End first past the post.
On “Wednesday Writs: Soulless Enterprise of Death Edition”
Dang, imagine being a prosecutor in Florida and being denied use of the term 'Florida Man'
"
WW8 - Honestly people, 1984 is the wrong novel... we're in Brave New World simulation right now; and Wilde should never be quoted sober or drunk but only during the first blush of the buzz. I didn't read the appellate court's objections but assume they were these?
But is it really the case that literary metaphor is considered inflammatory? Is that a general rule, or one applied depending on how badly the metaphor lands? Or something else?
On “Wistful for War: The Flawed Nostalgia of the Steel Playground Slide”
Good observation when you think about it, our playgrounds were the imaginative projection of Basic Training for kids.
Not consciously, I don't think, but all the creative agility things in the 'new' playgrounds assumed we were going to climb cargo rope ladders in and out of troop transports. We all had to be proficient at climbing ropes up cliffs, or at least up to an observation tower and/or another ship.
None of this 'adventure' lifestyle... we weren't chasing experiences, experiences were chasing us.
On “Charlottesville Removes Statues of Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson”
Noooo. Not Sacagawea.
You know, she's great with large groups...
On “President Biden’s Executive Order on Economic Competition: Read It For Yourself”
I read through the doc and it strikes me as the 'good' kind of EO... that is, one which directs existing agencies under existing laws how to approach, prioritize and execute those laws.
I'd quibble that it would be better to call this the Biden Executive Branch Regulatory Guidance memo... fetishizing EO's as some sort of powerful action is kinda bad in short-, mid-, and long-term.
Three items where I have some familiarity struck me as sensible corrections IF, and this is a big IF, anything actually happens... which, to be honest, I kinda doubt... which is also why I don't like the EO fetish - it give the *appearance* of having done something.
The Ag stuff is mostly good... but this in particular is simply long overdue:
(C) prohibiting unfair practices related to grower ranking systems — systems in which the poultry companies, contractors, or dealers exercise extraordinary control over numerous inputs that determine the amount farmers are paid and require farmers to assume the risk of factors outside their control, leaving them more economically vulnerable;
On Winery and Beer distribution (I used to work on the Wine Distributor side)... this entire industry is sclerotic owing to the collusion between State Tax authorities and Distribution companies which work together to inhibit competition, prevent direct sales, and classically exact rents on other entities productivity... It needs a massive scrubbing, which I fear this directive will not address.
(i) initiating a rulemaking to update the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s trade practice regulations;
(ii) rescinding or revising any regulations of the beer, wine, and spirits industries that may unnecessarily inhibit competition; and
(iii) reducing any barriers that impede market access for smaller and independent brewers, winemakers, and distilleries.
The biggest miss, IMO has to do with Broadband. It focuses on mostly useless things like Price transparency and fees reporting... which is a very minor issue for people who already have broadband. The broadband issue in the US isn't pricing, it's access. And this EO betrays a very BOS-WASH concern that simple 'doesn't get it'. I'm told this is also VP Harris's remit.
March's Broadband remediation EO would have at least the following:
*Requirements for Broadband companies to service all customers
*Fees to connect customers can be charged, but they will be regulated (like Electric)
*Broadband monopolies (various Pole rights) that were negotiated by localities under duress may be appealed... in some cases abolished, in other cases, sharing fees (regulated as above) to recoup investment are permitted.
*Broadband self-reporting coverage data in support of local contracts must be made public for analysis by third parties.
*etc.
So, to the extent that the Executive Branch uses discretion to enforce the laws on the books regarding their regulatory statues... this is a well, of course, sort of thing. To the extent that March is looking for 'real' enhancements to Business in America which refocuses the capitalist project to value labor proportionally to capital? Well, no this is not *that* kind of exciting Executive initiative.
Finally... on the 'hot-button' issue of consolidation, I'm in favor heeding the warning specific in The Wealth of Nations against consolidation... however, I think this topic is both more simple and more complicated than we presently understand. I'm much less concerned about Billionaires controlling XYZ than I am with corporations shaping markets with unfair advantages which ultimately distort or break markets only to see them reconstituted under new market ownership. That is, mostly a predatory business practice model vs. anti-markets.
On “Weekend Plans Post: Post Revelry Relaxation”
You should totally sell.
Unless you need to replace the car... then definitely don't sell.
I didn't research this too much (since I didn't have a car to trade)... but some folks were saying that you only got movement on the New Car price if you had a Trade... which they would buy at the 'usual' KBB value and work the arbitrage. Plus, they just plain need stock on hand.
But private party selling used-car / buying used-car? Maybe that's just a wash. Just don't go anywhere near a dealer.
Reports suggest the chips should start flowing in a couple/few months... which might make the end of 2021 a great time to buy 2021's as the 2022's are hitting the market. It seems the 21's are built, they just can't get the chips to complete them. So... if you can wait, and can avoid the new model concupiscence... then might be great deals in NOV. +/-
"
My daughter got in to a fender-bender last week; or so we thought.
Turns out the car is 'totaled'
We were probably one or two years away from replacing that car... now we are a week away; or so I thought.
And OH MY GOD have you seen what the car market is like? Sure, I'd heard about chip shortages and high used car prices, but those things I treated as "stories" well, let me tell you that the are burying the lede.
'Lightly' Used cars cost what NEW cars used to cost... and by that I mean MSRP price, not the discounted price. New Cars? I've offered three places MSRP plus Tax and Tags (thinking they'd eat the fake 'dealer fees') and all three have told me to have a nice day... we were THOUSANDS off... they are looking for (and I suppose getting) 20% OVER MSRP. They didn't even counter.
Which, a week ago didn't matter to me. Today? Crisis.
On “Haitian President Jovenel Moise Assassinated”
Yeah, it's starting to look like a preview of the next Knives Out with the cast of possible conspirators.