Category: Uncategorized

What will America look like when the vast majority of Boomers are gone–say, in 2050? Here are some predictions:

1. THE DEMOGRAPHIC PROBLEM IS GONE: With the Boomers dead and lots of new immigrant workers in place, the issues involved in paying for the welfare state have disappeared.
2. THE RACIAL ISSUE HAS CHANGED: Woke members of Gen Z are now running the country. They went to integrated public schools and are contemptuous of racists. The influx of Hispanic immigrants, however, has created a society in which immigrants do all of the hard work and Anglos reap most of the benefits. This presents serious political and social problems for the future.
3. CHRISTIANITY IS A SPENT FORCE: America has seen periods of religious fervor at seemingly unlikely times in the past, but no longer. The corrupt bargain between reactionary politicians and Christians which empowered the latter in the short run has destroyed any enthusiasm for Christianity among members of Gen Z and their children. The chickens have come home to roost.
4. CLIMATE CHANGE MEANS CLIMATE CHANGES: The Southwest is almost uninhabitable. Parts of California have been depopulated. Florida now belongs exclusively to the wealthy and to tourists, neither of whom are present during hurricane season. Mountain property values are skyrocketing. The Northeast and the Midwest are becoming more popular. Lots of new climate regulations are in place, too; government seems to be everywhere these days.
5. THE SEARCH FOR A HAPPY MEDIUM CONTINUES: America needs both ample incentives for entrepreneurs and a large, stable middle class. Finding just the right balance of incentives and regulations to produce both results has always been a difficult task. It still is.

You have probably noted that the America I have described is a nightmare for reactionaries. That is why they are trying today to turn the clock back, and why they will fail in the long run.

Brexit meant different things to different people, but more than anything else, it meant limits on immigration. The Conservative government that implemented it has largely delivered on the promise. As a result, the UK is short of essential workers, most notably in the NHS and agriculture. Both businesses and consumers have suffered.

Ron DeSantis wasn’t watching this–or, perhaps, he just didn’t care. Florida’s economy, which is based on tourism, construction, and the care of elderly people, depends on immigrant labor, but the Florida GOP is about to approve a series of measures to make the lives of immigrants as miserable as possible. The base hates immigrants, so the outcome is not in doubt, even though business interests are objecting. The ultimate result will be skyrocketing costs and labor shortages, as in the UK.

This is just one of a series of anti-business measures that have been approved as part of the Florida GOP “freedom” agenda. Why, the next thing you know, DeSantis will be going to war over wokeness with a huge employer that attracts millions of tourists to the state. Oh, right!

It is clear that DeSantis believes the GOP base is looking for a more electable, more competent, more conventional version of Trump. He can provide tangible results on wokeness; Trump only provides noise and drama. Is he right?

No, because Trump’s base relishes his transgressions. They respond emotionally to his endless cycles of outrage, blue team response, and cries of victimization. What most of us see as corruption and incompetence assures them that he will never sell them out. They will cheer him on when he burns it down; that is what they want, too.

DeSantis’ plodding style says “establishment” to the base. No matter how much red meat he delivers to them, he can’t speak for them the way Trump does. He would be wise to stop trying.

The continued impressment of American sailors by the British Navy left Jefferson with no good options. It was an affront to the national dignity, but America was in no position to go to war with Great Britain; in addition, to do so would force Jefferson to dramatically increase the size of the American government, which was inconsistent with his core political principles. His response was to apply economic sanctions, in the form of the Embargo Act.

The Act was actually a blast from the past; the colonists had used embargoes to influence Parliament prior to the Revolution. Circumstances had changed, however. In the 1770s, the colonists were British subjects, and had a claim on the sympathy of the British government; in 1807, they were aliens with an insignificant military, and Britain was engaged in a life-and-death struggle with Napoleon. As a result, the chances of impacting British policy weren’t very good.

Enforcing the embargo was unpopular, and made Jefferson look like a tyrant and a hypocrite. One of his last actions as president was to sign the act repealing it.

This analogy obviously isn’t perfect; our nation is far stronger relative to China than we were relative to Britain in 1807. The central point is valid, however; sanctions come with costs, and often don’t work. They definitely won’t work if the public isn’t prepared to make sacrifices when the other side retaliates.

I’m ambivalent about Tik Tok, which, of course, I don’t use. On the one hand, there is a genuine possibility that the data generated by the company could be appropriated by the Chinese government, and the reactions of the government and the Chinese public are proof that all large Chinese corporations, like it or not, are effectively agents of the state. On the other hand, a ban would be largely unenforceable, and it would result in serious First Amendment issues. Do we really want to create the equivalent of the Great Firewall of China? I have my doubts.

Tik Tok is just the beginning. Any attempt to uncouple our economy from the country that provides us with most of our manufactured goods is going to come with significant costs. Is Biden doing anything to prepare us to make those kinds of sacrifices? Is Trump? DeSantis? I don’t see it.

Imposing economic sanctions on countries with tiny economies doesn’t create major problems. Doing the same thing with larger countries with whom you are interdependent is another story–one that doesn’t have to end well. I will discuss one such instance in my next post.

Like many other GOP politicians who have tried to look respectable while showing “respect” for the reactionary base, DeSantis has done his best to avoid answering questions about the “rigged” election and January 6. He typically minimizes the danger presented by the rioters without commenting on the justice of their cause.

That approach is unlikely to survive the presidential primaries–Trump will see to that. Then what? If he continues to dodge the question during the debates, he will look like a wimp to both the base and more moderate voters. If he agrees with Trump that the election was rigged, he is effectively admitting that Trump won and should be president today, which completely undercuts his argument that Trump is a loser. If he openly condemns the plot to overturn the election and the rioters, he will no longer have any claim to the votes of the base. Which is the least bad choice?

A more astute tactician would condemn the rioters and seek to unite the 70 percent against Trump on the basis that the 30 percent has nowhere else to go in the general election. I have seen no indication that DeSantis is likely to do this. I suspect he will continue to avoid the question, to howls of derision from both the right and the left.

Easter and spring are a perfect match. When the sun is out, the leaves are unfurling on the trees, the new MLB season has just started, and the Masters is on, it’s much easier to believe in the death/resurrection story. Don’t you wonder how it works in the Southern Hemisphere?

This year the story is particularly vivid for us, because our house is starting to emerge from the wreckage. We’ve spent the last three months cleaning, reinstalling, moving, and replacing virtually everything. We’re not done yet, and we’ve run into countless obstacles along the way, but we’re reasonably close now. We’re functioning at about 80 percent, which is tolerable, if not great.

We will be fleeing DeSantistan for the mountains in a few weeks. I’ll have more to say about that later. In the meantime, happy Easter!

A column in the NYT about a week ago made the case that the Fed’s attempts to reduce inflation by focusing on wage increases constitutes class warfare. The author went on to argue that wage increases aren’t necessarily inflationary, because businesses could choose to accept lower profits instead of raising prices. Does this argument hold water?

Not really. It is true–at least in my opinion–that wage increases are not the principal reason for the current rate of inflation, so I don’t support additional interest rate action by the Fed. However, to the extent that interest rate increases actually do limit inflation in today’s environment, it is largely by reducing asset prices and thereby making affluent consumers feel poor; that doesn’t sound like class warfare to me. As to the second proposition, the events of the past year have proved otherwise; businesses aren’t going to be willing to accept lower profits in the name of the public interest.

If you want to improve the lot of workers without just adding more inflation, it has to be done through the tax system. Period.

Put yourself in Putin’s position. The winter offensive isn’t going particularly well. What do you do now? Should you consider engaging in meaningful negotiations?

At this point, barring a decision from the Chinese to give you more help, your best option is probably to give up fighting on the offensive, hang on to what you have won, and hope that either Trump or DeSantis will hand you the rest of Ukraine on a silver platter in a couple of years. Let’s face it–it could happen.

If you continue with the World War I analogy, Bakhmut looks a lot like Verdun: a gory battle of attrition over a location with limited strategic significance. At this point, it also appears that the result of the battle will be the same: a victory for the defenders.

There is one meaningful difference. I could never figure out why the German General Staff thought attrition was a viable tactic. The Russians, however, have an obvious manpower advantage, so attrition makes some sense.

The GOP would have you believe that paying hush money to cover up discreditable activity that could have an impact on the outcome of an election is not a big deal, so the indictment makes Trump a political martyr, not a criminal. Well, when Richard Nixon did it, wasn’t it considered a big deal, even by many Republicans?

Changing times, changing standards. As I’ve noted before, Nixon would have survived Watergate if Fox News had been in his corner.

If this case goes to trial, I’m sure Trump will insist on testifying in his defense. Cross-examination should be fun.

Several months ago, I predicted that Ian meant the end of the Florida “freedom project,” because it would either force the legislature to raise taxes for a massive insurance company bailout or impose tough new regulations on coastal development. I was wrong, because for once, I underestimated the cynicism of Florida Republicans. They have “solved” the insurance crisis by replacing insurance with the illusion of insurance.

What do I mean by that? Three things. First of all, the new legislation takes much stronger steps to prohibit Florida property owners from buying from the state-owned insurance company: Citizens. This is consistent with the GOP’s desire to avoid “socialism,” but private companies in Florida have a history of refusing to pay valid claims, and still going under. Second, the legislation is clearly designed to shift as much liability as possible from Citizens and the private companies to FEMA. Third, and most importantly, the legislation makes it much more difficult to file and successfully pursue a claim. The new attorney fee provision, in particular, will put desperate homeowners in a weaker position relative to the insurance companies, who will then refuse to pay claims and dare the owners to sue them. Most owners will be in no position to do so and will take whatever crumbs are thrown their way in lieu of the full compensation they deserve.

The idea here is that the private insurance companies will eventually charge less for the mere illusion of insurance, so the affordability crisis will be resolved without tax increases or new land use regulations. The problem is that the companies will be called out in the media on a regular basis for the unscrupulous tactics that the Florida Legislature is clearly encouraging (this is already happening), so the illusion won’t last. In any event, even the illusion of insurance costs lots of money after a huge hurricane, so the companies are still raising their rates. There will be no short-term relief even with the new “reform.”

Do you know who has figured this out? A man who knows a hustle when he sees one–Donald Trump! He is attacking DeSantis for encouraging insurance companies to rip off Floridians.

For once, good for him.

As I’ve noted many times before, the anti-anti-Trumpers agree with most of the man on golf cart’s reactionary agenda, but recoil from his innumerable personal shortcomings. Between 2016 and 2020, therefore, they concentrated on attacking Trump’s enemies instead of defending the man himself. They presumably felt this kept them on the side of both the angels and the militant right.

When a DeSantis candidacy became more and more plausible, they came out openly against Trump in language that wouldn’t be out of place in this blog. But what will they do if Trump wins? How do they unring the bell?

They will just return to AAT mode and hope desperately that Trump and his principal supporters forget what they said in 2023. My reaction? Good luck with that; Trump never forgets a slight.

On the 45th President Trump.

The indictment turned him to a grump.

But there’s irony there

For the base doesn’t care.

It’s DeSantis who’s now in a slump.

Trump is back at Mar-a-Lago, discussing the indictment circus with one of his attorneys.

T: Well, that was a huge success, don’t you think?

A: What do you mean?

T: Look at all of the attention I got! It was like OJ takes NYC!

A: Is that a good thing? Are you really comfortable coming across as a white OJ?

T: Absolutely! DeSantis would kill for that kind of coverage! It reminds everyone that the Republican Party revolves around me. The base loves it, and it’s good for fundraising.

A: Whatever. I’ll leave the politics to you. We need to discuss what comes next, and what doesn’t.

T: OK.

A: First of all, I would advise any other client not to attack the DA, but I know you’re going to do it, so I won’t bother. It doesn’t make that much difference, anyway. That said, there are two things you absolutely cannot do.

T: They are?

A: Don’t attack the judge at your rallies and on social media, and don’t do anything to encourage violence. Both of those things will hurt you in the legal proceeding.

T: I’ll do my best, but I make no promises. The base likes it when I’m on the attack. What happens next?

A: We’ll go after the indictment. We’ll argue that it is legally flawed. That’s the best defense we have. It may or may not work.

T: What else?

A: We’ll ask for a change in venue, but I doubt we’ll get it. You’re the most famous man in the world, and everyone knows about the charges, so getting an impartial jury will be a challenge no matter where we go. Besides, you’re not entitled to a jury of Trump voters. You know that, don’t you?

T: That doesn’t seem fair to me.

A: We may dig into the grand jury proceedings and see if we find anything useful there.

T: OK. Just remember to be as aggressive as possible. That’s my brand.

A: One question we have for you–do you want this to move slowly or quickly? I know you usually do whatever you can to delay legal proceedings, but do you really want a trial during the middle of 2024, as opposed to sometime this year? It’s a political question, not a legal question, so it’s up to you.

T: I’ll think about it. (The attorney leaves)