Month: December 2024

(It’s 5:00 on December 24. Bob Cratchit is working in his cubicle at Scrooge, LLC when the boss, in “managing by walking around” mode, comes by.”

C: Mr. Scrooge, sir.

S: What is it . . . (he ostentatiously looks at the nameplate on the cubicle) . . .Cratchit?

C: Can I have tomorrow off, sir?

S: Why in the world would I do that?

C: Why . . . because it’s Christmas, sir.

S: Not in China, it isn’t. How am I supposed to compete with those people and their low labor costs if I give people like you unnecessary days off?

C: Actually, the Chinese get a whole week off for Chinese New Year. We should never have come back to the office, anyway. The pandemic might officially be over, but the virus is still out there, and I might get sick and give it to my child. He has special needs, you know.

S: (Sees a picture of Tiny Tim in the cubicle) Is that him?

C: Yes, sir.

(Scrooge walks around the office with an exaggerated limp)

C: There’s nothing funny about it, sir! He’s in really bad shape! If he gets the virus, it could kill him!

S: I don’t have time for that political correctness crap.

C: You sound just like Donald Trump, sir.

S: Well, Trump isn’t wrong about everything. That’s why he won the election.

C: And I suppose you voted for him.

S: With some reluctance, yes.

C: Why were you reluctant?

S: Because I hate the idea of his tariffs, and I know he’ll make people like me suck up to him every day of his life. He’s too capricious to be trusted. He does everything for the benefit of his own ego, not my bottom line.

C: Then why did you vote for him?

S: Because Biden and Harris were worse, and because he promised to keep my taxes low. I can trust him on that. Plus, the deregulation part is excellent, and keeping Elon around is a great idea.

C: Do you really think Elon cares about people like you?

S: He genuinely hates regulations. He may be more concerned about his own interests than people like me, but he’ll do his best for entrepreneurs in general. I’m confident of that. I just hope Trump doesn’t run him off before he can finish the deregulation job.

C: So what about Christmas?

S: Biden’s still in charge for now, and his regulations are still in place. If I don’t give in, he might use his last month in office to get you people to unionize. And Vance might go along with that. I don’t trust him, either. Why couldn’t Trump have picked someone like Rick Scott as his VP?

C: So I get the day off?

S: Sort of. There will be a Zoom meeting at noon. I’ll text you the password.

C: Thank you, sir!

S: And don’t even think about ghosting me!

David French, like many others, wonders how Christians can be so cruel. He concludes it is because some of them believe they have a monopoly on truth and a corresponding unlimited right to impose their views on others. He’s right, but this phenomenon isn’t limited to Christians; the CCP and the extremely woke fall into that category as well.

French is writing about liberal democracy as much as Christianity. As I’ve noted before, liberal democracy requires voters who are willing to admit they might be wrong and who are tolerant of their opponents’ rights as a result. Liberals, in the classical sense, in other words.

Does this condition still exist in today’s America? Can liberal democracy exist without liberals? The answer to the first question is a qualified yes; only about half of Trump voters, by my estimate, want to burn it down and use the power of the executive branch to reinstate the society of the 1950s. The answer to the second question, however, is no.

Syria, to put it mildly, is a mess, albeit one in which there is now reason to hope. Assume for the moment that the rebels are the Islamic moderates they claim to be, and that they succeed in gaining control of the entire country. What happens to our erstwhile allies, the Syrian Kurds?

Trump admires Erdogan even more than Putin. Don’t expect him to be swayed by any sense of loyalty or obligation here. He’ll sell out the Kurds in a heartbeat.

I can almost hear it in the distance; Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are telling the Democrats they should be grateful they couldn’t eliminate the filibuster. Are they right?

Not really, because the GOP has taken a legislative abortion ban off the table, and the rest of its legislative agenda revolves around tax and spending issues that will be addressed through reconciliation. The most extreme manifestations of Trumpism will be accomplished through executive action, not legislation. As a result, the filibuster will only be marginally relevant during the next two years, and probably not at all after the 2026 midterms.

I predicted some time ago that the legal frontier on abortion would involve the extraterritorial application of red state laws in blue states. As I understand it, this is already happening; the great state of Texas is taking action against an abortion provider in, I believe, New York who mailed pills to a Texas resident. How will these cases turn out?

I can imagine three different fact situations: the one described above; a doctor performs an abortion on a red state resident in a state in which the abortion is legal; and a red state tries to prosecute blue state residents for putting information about obtaining an abortion on the web. My guess is that the Supreme Court decides that the first provider is subject to Texas law, because he deliberately took an action that had direct effects within the boundaries of Texas, but that the other two actors are protected by blue state laws, because their actions are not sufficiently connected to the particular red state to meet requirements of federalism and due process.

CLs despise a large state regardless of who runs it and for what purpose. Reactionaries don’t long for a government that can be drowned in the bathtub, but they do hate the portions of it that they think work against the interests of “real Americans.”

The point of commonality is the desire to make large cuts in discretionary spending on the sectors of government both factions dislike, such as education. Expect that to be a major theme of the Trump years virtually from his first day in office.

Democrats are united on their vision of a multi-ethnic liberal democracy which uses the power of the state to promote economic growth, increased equality, and justice for historically oppressed groups. The divisions among them relate, not to the vision, but to their perceived ability to push changes past the voters and through the system. That’s why I have always identified the blue team factions as “fundis” and “realos.”

The GOP, on the other hand, contains supporters of wildly different visions for America. CLs want as small a state as possible in order to promote negative forms of “freedom” and increased economic growth; they look forward to a glorious libertarian future, not the past. Reactionaries, on the other hand, want a robust state to bring back the economy and the society of the 1950s. CLs lionize superstar businessmen and dream of Galt’s Gulch; Reactionaries are suspicious of billionaires and clamor for tariffs and deportations to recreate, in their eyes, the Godly Society.

The Democrats have historically been successful in getting large parts of their agenda through the system because progressives prefer half a loaf to nothing. The first Trump term, on the other hand, was legislatively sterile because Republicans are only united on what they dislike, tax cuts being the exception that proves the rule. The 38 CL votes against yesterday’s version of the CR are evidence that the divisions persist. As a result, Trump 2.0 will probably resemble the first term with regard to the lack of legislation; executive actions, of course, are another matter.

Leaving aside the obnoxious attempt by Elon Musk to be their boss, the sticking point with the latest version of the CR was the attempt to exempt the first two years of Trump from Democratic leverage on the debt ceiling. Why not double down on the issue? Get rid of the debt ceiling altogether! That would do the Democrats a lot more good in the long run than preserving it for use in the short run.

WE’LL SHUT DOWN FOR CHRISTMAS

We’ll shut down for Christmas.

You can count on us.

You should know

The bill won’t go

It fills us with disgust.

____________

Christmas Eve will find us

Sending out pink slips.

We’ll shut down for Christmas

‘Cause Musk just let it rip.

Bret Stephens is done being a Never Trumper. He still recognizes Trump’s shortcomings, of course, but he has decided the left is far worse. All those smug coastal cultural elitists looking down on the working class–they deserve their comeuppance.

The Never Trumpers have hit a dead end. You can understand why they would be trying to return to the fold, particularly when Musk and Ramaswamy represent hope for their tax cutting and deregulatory ideology. But please spare us the crap about the elites, Bret. If someone wanted to take a picture of a prominent, wealthy coastal neoliberal who has nothing but disdain for struggling American workers, it would look just like you.

Why did Trump win? He somehow persuaded the voting public to ignore the cataclysmic events of 2020 and to use 2019 as a baseline. Inflation and interest rates were worse in 2024 than in 2019, so he could claim that Americans were better off under him than under Biden.

Of course, Trump took over a growing Obama economy with low unemployment and inflation and only made it very slightly better. That was the baseline in 2016. Everyone ignored that, too.

The Democrats need to make a big effort to publicize the actual baseline economic numbers for the second Trump term. If the numbers are worse in 2028 than they are today–a very real possibility, given the problems the tariff and deportation regime will create–the left needs to hang them around J.D. Vance’s neck.

I’ve got those dirty, lowdown fading lame duck blues.

You have to be aware of it; it’s all over the news.

I’ve got to keep extremists out, but now I have to choose.

If, under pressure, I resign, my candidates would lose.

__________

I have to do all that I can to beat Marine LePen.

The showdown is approaching soon; I just don’t know quite when.

I lost the last election, so I don’t have many friends.

The center isn’t holding; my PM might fall again.

________________

I’ve got the blues.

The neo-Vichy blues.

The center has been voted out.

For that, there’s no excuse.

We’re standing on a precipice

Between the two extremes.

That’s our new reality;

It isn’t a bad dream.

CLs: Tariffs are an unwarranted expansion of central government power. They drive up prices and encourage arbitrary treatment and corruptions. We hate them. Fortunately, Trump is just bluffing when he talks about using them.

PBPs: Ditto, and they screw up our supply chains and reduce profits, too. Fortunately, Trump is just bluffing when he talks about using them. His economic team will see to that.

Reactionaries: Tariffs and mass deportations are the cornerstone of the Godly Society. Trump consistently promised them during his campaign. We’re sure he will keep his promises.

As you can see, tariffs are the quintessential issue on which half of the Trump supporters hope he will keep his promises and half are certain he won’t. Someone is going to be very disappointed here. Based on Trump’s record over several decades, it’s going to be the CLs and the PBPs.

During the second Obama term, GDP grew at roughly 2.5 percent per year. Inflation was minimal. Trump ran in 2016 on a promise to use tax cuts and deregulation to increase the growth rate substantially. On its own terms, the huge tax cut was a failure, as it did not result in a significant increase in investment. The tariffs did not bring back manufacturing jobs, either, and the deficit exploded. On a more positive note, the tax cut did, in fact, create a small boom in consumption. On the whole, 2017-2019 saw a very slight increase in the rate of GDP growth from the Obama years. Then came the pandemic, and the economy fell into recession.

The postscript to the pandemic was inflation, which was exacerbated a bit by Biden’s spending. The spending increased growth rates, however, and inflation today is almost normal. GDP growth during the Biden years has been virtually identical to the figure during the Trump years if you toss out the impact of the pandemic on both 2020 (Trump) and 2021 (Biden).

Trump is once again promising a huge increase in growth from tax cuts, deregulation, tariffs, and deportations. Based on the historical record for the first two and common sense for the last two, why would anyone believe that?

The 1914 analogy, of course, assumes that America is playing the role of the UK–the imperial status quo power in slight decline. The UK, however, fought and won World War I with the assistance of powerful allies. Trump is more interested in offending allies than making them. As a result, he looks a lot like Kaiser Wilhelm II, whose inept attempts at a bullying form of “diplomacy” left Germany with only the feeble Austro-Hungarian Empire to help fight the war in Europe (the Ottomans didn’t contribute there). In the final analysis, that probably doomed the German war effort.