Month: April 2020

It’s October, and the economy is struggling. Unemployment is still in double digits, and there is no improvement in sight. The polls show Biden and the Democrats winning a smashing victory. Fortunately for the health of our system, Trump refuses to believe them, and has no plans to cancel the election; after all, he wasn’t supposed to beat Hillary, was he? The polls are just more fake news!

GOP candidates for Congress have a dilemma. If they continue to identify with the man on golf cart, they stand to lose support from angry swing voters that they desperately need to stay in office; if they don’t, they know a Twitter blast is coming from their increasingly paranoid leader, and the base may stay home. What do they do?

Let’s hope we find out.

The country is starting to reopen. This represents an implicit judgment that a level of deaths that is appallingly high by historical standards is acceptable for the near future as long as our health care system is not overwhelmed. What does this mean for the next year or so, and are there any alternatives?

Without a vaccine or a much more rigorous regime of testing and contact tracing, distancing will remain the order of the day, whether it is officially mandated or not. Large segments of our economy can adjust to that, but parts of it can’t. Many, perhaps most, restaurants will not survive at lower levels of capacity, regardless of whether they are driven by regulations or a lack of consumer confidence. Tourism will continue to be moribund. Sports will take place in empty stadiums. Cultural events will be cancelled. The unemployment that will result will perpetuate the current recession, albeit at higher levels of activity that we see today, until we have a vaccine. There will be no V-shaped recovery.

There are two alternatives. One of them is a total Chinese-style lockdown, to include closing the borders, until we have a vaccine. That would result in fewer deaths, but far less economic activity. The second is the Swedish solution: trade more deaths today for less economic impact and the hope of herd immunity in the future. In this country, only a few Republicans support that approach, mostly in the hope that it would get Trump re-elected.

Are these alternatives preferable to what amounts to a middle way? From my perspective, no. It would be better, however, if we debated them openly, rather than using the current approach as a default.

Trump loves to take hostages, but so does Mitch McConnell. His MO is to threaten an outcome that is obviously inconsistent with the national interest (e.g., defaulting on the national debt) and to leverage that threat into a substantive concession that is consistent with GOP ideology. This negotiating tactic only works because McConnell (again, like Trump) comes across as a credible madman who actually would kill the hostage without the concession. It’s completely irresponsible, and it needs to stop.

As you would expect, McConnell and Trump have signaled that they will demand concessions on sanctuary cities, or employer liability, or something to be determined later in exchange for assistance to state and local governments. It’s time for the Democrats to say no, because the failure of the legislation will deepen the recession and thereby damage the GOP in November. In other words, the hostage is a potential Republican victory; if they want to shoot him, so what?

The Chinese have typically responded to recessions in the past by shoveling money at state-owned enterprises and by planning and building massive new infrastructure projects. That doesn’t appear to be happening today. Why?

The Economist suggests that the government is afraid of generating too much activity too soon and creating a second wave of the virus. That may be part of it, but I think a bigger part is the evolution of the Chinese economy, even since 2008. There are fewer big infrastructure projects to be built; public works projects don’t necessarily create huge number of jobs in an advanced economy driven largely by services and domestic consumers; and state-owned enterprises aren’t the cutting edge of the Chinese economy in 2020.

Given the absence of an adequate safety net, the predominance of private businesses, and the problems with exporting to countries that are still struggling with the virus, the government would be wise to send money directly to workers and consumers instead of relying on the old recession remedies. Will Xi listen to me? I’m guessing not.

FDR notoriously promised a balanced budget during the 1932 campaign. Once in office, he became a Keynesian due to the absence of any other viable alternatives in the face of an emergency. The country effectively shifted to the left, and has never been the same again.

In 2020, Biden ran as the moderate candidate in the primaries–not the promoter of massive structural changes. Could that change as the result of the virus?

Yes. Once again, circumstances could require it. Time will tell.

If Trump doesn’t successfully push for a reopening of the economy, he loses votes from impoverished businessmen and workers. But if he does, and deaths from the virus increase (as seems inevitable), he runs the risk of losing votes from the elderly, who are a huge part of his base.

Poor little guy! My heart bleeds for him.

About a year ago, I was road testing campaign slogans for the future Democratic nominee. My favorite options at the time were “Stop the Madness” and “Make America Good Again.” In light of the dramatically changed circumstances, I would like to suggest a new candidate: “Rebuild America.”

Why? It’s short and punchy. It looks to the future, but it has its roots in the past. It sounds like a plan for infrastructure, but it also has a political and moral dimension. For me, it describes the essence of the task in the post-Trump years.

What do you think?

Here’s where the factions stand on aid to state and local governments:

1. CLs: Ugh! Federal subsidies are always bad! Let the locals fend for themselves!
2. CDs: Preserving jobs and local service levels is clearly a good idea.
3. PBPs: We don’t care. Just keep those business subsidies coming, and we’ll be happy.
4. Reactionaries: We can accept this in part as a mechanism to keep the economy rolling and get Trump re-elected. The deficit is of no interest to us. We’re not crazy about subsidizing blue states that are run by coastal elites for the benefit of illegal immigrants, gays, and minorities, however. Try to keep the program focused on red and purple states full of real Americans.

Conclusion: Trump is blowing hot and cold on this issue. Given the divisions in his party, you can see why.

In addition to reading books about the Tudors and watching the draft on TV, I’ve been rediscovering my record collection. A few days ago, I listened to three Bruce Springsteen classics: “Born to Run”; “Darkness on the Edge of Town”; and “Born in the USA.” Here are my reactions:

1. There’s so much you can say about “Born to Run.” It’s an American version of “Quadrophenia,” but much better. It could work as a musical. Every individual song is as vivid as a movie. It does for New Jersey what the Beach Boys did for California. Mostly, it’s perfect, and timeless. It sounds as fresh today as it did in 1975. I wouldn’t change a single note.
2. “Darkness” is brilliant, too, but different. It’s much more raw, and edgy. You hear a lot more of Springsteen’s snarling guitar. The biggest change is that it isn’t timeless; it’s rooted in the apparent decline of America in the late 1970’s. The lyrics are largely about the decay of a way of life.
3. “Born in the USA” is the least of the three, but outstanding in its way. After I listened to it, I went back and found that I was right; the songs were actually written during the depths of the 1982 recession. They are even more downbeat than the songs in “Darkness.” The combination of the apparently patriotic album cover, the glossy production, and the release of the record during “Morning in America” in 1984 gave it an optimistic meaning to stupid people that was completely unintended.

Why am I writing about this in a politics blog? Because the states that Springsteen was singing about in the late seventies and early eighties recovered. New Jersey today is a prosperous bright blue state. Pittsburgh is an attractive center for medical research, not a steel town. Destruction can be followed by creation; you just have to be smart and persistent and patient. Whining about how the government has screwed you over in favor of people who want cuts in line, screaming for tariffs, and voting for Trump doesn’t get it done.

At some point in the Hilary Mantel trilogy–I’m afraid I don’t remember exactly where–Cromwell observes that his job is to anticipate Henry VIII’s wishes even before the king does, and notes the danger involved if he misreads his capricious boss. It’s foreshadowing, because that’s exactly what happens, and he pays for it with his head.

If you think this is a lesson with no contemporary relevance, consider the plight of Brian Kemp, who thought he was doing exactly what Trump wanted, only to see the man on golf cart unexpectedly saw off the limb on which he was precariously perched. Kemp isn’t the first such victim, and he probably won’t be the last.

Like virtually everything, the stay at home orders divide the factions, as follows:

1. CLs: Ugh! Freedom of association is a God-given right! If I infect myself and others, so be it–life is less precious than freedom!
2. PBPs: Sure, we’d love to open up as soon as possible, but the customers won’t come. Do it slowly, and subsidize us in the meantime.
3. CDs: Preserving lives is the highest priority. Money doesn’t matter at times like these.
4. Reactionaries: The virus is an urban thing. It’s killing lots of people who aren’t real Americans, which is a plus for Trump. For the rest of us, let freedom ring!

So what would the constitution of the Reactionary States of America (RSA) look like? Here are some ideas:

1. Oklahoma City would be the capital of the RSA, for several reasons: it is located more or less in the center of the country; it is a thriving oil and gas hub; and it was, of course, the site of the famous bombing. McVeigh is no longer viewed as a terrorist; he is now seen as a sort of John Brown figure, and a founding father of the RSA.
2. The constitution leaves most powers to the states, but, of course, bans abortion and requires gun ownership.
3. Taxes are extremely low, and are regressive. The economy of the new country relies primarily on cheap labor and the exploitation of natural resources. Infrastructure is poor, and education is, by USA standards, horribly underfunded. The country’s GDP per capita is a small fraction of that of the USA, but hey– money isn’t everything! We’re free!
4. There are religious, property, and racial tests for office-holding and voting.
5. There is no welfare state as such; welfare is left to religious institutions. Due to popular demand, however, a form of Social Security is maintained for white Christians.
6. NASCAR is the national sport, followed by college football and hunting.
7. Radio stations are required to play only country music and religious programming. Fox News is the state TV channel.
8. The national anthem is (choose one): “Dixie”; “Free Bird”; “God Bless the RSA”; or “Born in the RSA” (just kidding about the last one).

Sounds great, doesn’t it?

It is the central paradox of American politics: blue state voters support a robust national welfare state; the welfare state results in massive transfers of wealth from blue to red states; and the red states respond by electing representatives who do everything in their power to reduce the size of the welfare state that sustains them. Call it the institutionalization of ingratitude, or cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And so, we are treated to spectacles like Mitch McConnell, senator from a state which relies heavily on transfers from blue states, opposing “blue state bailouts.”

You occasionally hear about efforts in red states–particularly Texas–to secede from the Union. Perhaps that should be encouraged! Maybe the rugged individuals in McConnell’s Kentucky should have to stand on their own two feet! Wouldn’t that be great!

I can see it now: the red states become a new country, called the Reactionary States of America (RSA). What would the RSA look like? For that, see my next post.

Men who seek public office don’t have to be saints, particularly with regard to their relationships with women. Furthermore, what we frequently call “character” is not indivisible; it is perfectly possible, for example, to be an honest coward. As a result, character issues aren’t disqualifying, to me, unless they reach the point of being embarrassing, and making it impossible to function properly in the job. Telling thousands of documented lies in office, paying off porn stars, and urging people to ingest Lysol meets that standard.

I thought Blasey Ford was credible, but her testimony against Kavanaugh didn’t interest me, because she was talking about an episode that allegedly occurred during high school. Kavanaugh only lost me when he responded to her statements in an angry, partisan, Trumpian way that was inconsistent with the demands of the job he was seeking. By contrast, I don’t believe Tara Reade for all of the reasons I described in a previous post, and because I don’t feel compelled to “believe women” any more than I believe men. But even if her allegations were true, a single incident that occurred 27 years ago wouldn’t prevent me from voting for Biden, particularly when the alternative is Lysol man.

Fox News follows everything he says, so I think Sean, Laura, and Tucker should be the first to volunteer for the new virus treatment.