Monday Open Thread

Comments

[Martinned2]

This reminds me, there's a fascinating issue about what to do with Russian state assets frozen because of sanctions. It's all well and good to say that money held by European (central) banks in accounts belonging to the Russian Central Bank are frozen, but what do you do with the interest on that money?

For now, the question of whether the principal can be handed to the Ukrainians as an advance on their post-war indemnity is undecided, because there are strong sovereign immunity reasons why that is legally dubious. But the interest on the accounts is being used to "guarantee" "loans" to Ukraine, to help them with the war effort.

As an economist, I'm not 100% convinced by the distinction between the principal and the interest, but I love the pragmatism.

For more, see this Council press release from last year May: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/05/21/extraordinary-revenues-generated-by-immobilised-russian-assets-council-greenlights-the-use-of-windfall-net-profits-to-support-ukraine-s-self-defence-and-reconstruction/

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Yes, let's give rich people a financial interest in prolonging the war until indemnities can be extracted.

There are anti-psychotic medicines, are these people taking *pro*-psychotic meds? Crazy pills?

[Martinned2]

WTF are you talking about?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"the question of whether the principal can be handed to the Ukrainians as an advance on their post-war indemnity is undecided"

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if they get an advance on their postwar indemnity, that would presuppose there's going to be an indemnity.

Imposing indemnities on the loser in a war has always gone well. Look at the Franco-Prussian War and World War One.

And it puts the pressure on the anti-Russian allies to push forward to "victory."

[Nelson]

Or, perhaps, they want to push forward to victory because Russia is an invader with no justification for that invasion.

Trump will cave to Putin because he’s Trump and Putin can outwit him with one brain lobe tied behind his back, so having another way to support the good guys against the bad guys is a very good thing.

[Martinned2]

In political news, here is CDU leader Friedrich Merz absolutely, positively, with bells on, ruling out any sort of collaboration with Musk's beloved AfD: https://bsky.app/profile/rikefranke.bsky.social/post/3lfkvtrcznk2e

[Bob from Ohio]

But not ruling out collaboration again with the socialist party.

No enemies to the left I guess, even for nominally "conservative" parties.

[Martinned2]

You mean the SPD? The CDU has worked with the SPD many times, going back to 1966–1969.

As for Die Linke and the Bündnis Sara Wagenknecht, on current polling neither one will make it into the Bundestag, and the fact that the CDU won't work with them is so obvious that nobody found it necessary to ask.

[Bob from Ohio]

"CDU has worked with the SPD many times"

Yes, its part of the problem with Germany. No conservative party at all. Repeated coalition with socialists!

[Frank Drackman]

Mitt Romeney is to the right of AfD

[Martinned2]

I see that you're confused about the concept of coalition government. (And, more generally, compromise.) Please see below for a discussion.

[Kazinski]

That could definitely backfire.

The people who might be AfD curious but would want a moderating center right partner now have no place to go, except AfD.

[Martinned2]

There are plenty of examples in recent years to show that nothing helps far right parties more than the centre right opening the door to them. Voters don't like to waste their vote on a party that will never have any power or influence anyway.

[Martinned2]

Big Tech companies, or at least Meta, is already trying to collect on their investment in Trump. #CronyCapitalism

Zuckerberg asks Trump to defend US tech from EU, foreign enforcers

Donald Trump’s administration should come to the defense of Meta Platforms and other tech companies as they face investigations and sanctions by the likes of the European Union, Mark Zuckerberg has urged. The Meta boss highlighted the vast fines imposed by the EU on the tech industry, saying the bloc-wide policy of cracking down on US companies with fines was akin to “tariffs.”

(Incidentally, this didn't stop Zuckerberg from complaining about the lack of innovation at Apple, and the ways they stopped his super-innovative company from offering new products to Apple users. Which is of course exactly the sort of thing that EU digital regulation is trying to fix.)

[Satchmo_Lives]

Yes, because private entities wanting the government to stop government meddling is the exact definition of crony capitalism.

[Martinned2]

No, but private entites giving government officials money and asking the government to do something in return is.

[Michael P]

Yes, exactly like Hunter Biden taking money from foreign "investors" and giving it to his father in exchange for access and the oft-denied meetings with Hunter's "business" partners. Capitalism, amirite?

[Martinned2]

It would have been if there was any evidence of Hunter Biden bribing his father, yes.

[Brett Bellmore]

You do know, your avoiding exposure to evidence isn't the same thing as it not existing.

Comer Releases Direct Monthly Payments to Joe Biden from Hunter Biden’s Business Entity

"WASHINGTON—Today, [Dec 4th, 2024] House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) released subpoenaed bank records revealing Hunter Biden’s business entity, Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden. Hunter Biden is currently under an investigation by the Department of Justice for using the Owasco PC corporate account for tax evasion and other serious crimes."

And now you know why Hunter got a complete pardon for all federal crimes whatsoever, rather than just for what he'd been charged with: Any investigation of Hunter's business dealings inevitably leads right to his father.

[Malika]

Anything other than a Comer press release?

[Satchmo_Lives]

...released subpoenaed bank records revealing Hunter Biden’s business entity, Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden.

Oversight Committee release of subpoenaed bank records isn't good enough for ya? I guess you need Hunter's username and password so you can personally check before you will believe it.

[Malika]

I doubt you'd rely on a report from Adam Schiff on a R.

[Brett Bellmore]

Anything other than a refusal to look at evidence?

[Malika]

Is this a transfer of a thousand bucks?

[Riva]

Let’s see. What was reported? The House Oversight Committee obtained access to over 150 suspicious activity reports generated by the Biden family and their associates’ foreign high-dollar transactions (flagged as noting they served no legitimate business purpose), uncovered 20 shell companies they set up to hide shady foreign payments they received, and deposed key Biden family members and business associates. Evidence revealed that then-VP Biden spoke, dined, or had coffee with nearly all of Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates, including Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, Kazakhstani oligarch Kenes Rakishev, and Burisma’s corporate secretary Vadym Pozharsky. Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, Kazakhstani oligarch Kenes Rakishev, and Burisma’s corporate secretary Vadym Pozharsky, Jonathan Li (a Chinese national, and other Chinese government-linked business partners of Hunter. After O’Joe left office, money from CCP linked entities flowed into Biden family accounts. In fact, the Biden family raked in over $27 million through shell companies from China, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Romania. In addition, Ol’ Joe emailed the Biden family and their businesses over 29,000 times (I guess Joe should have used BleachBit like Hillary) and two IRS whistleblowers testified that the DOJ prevented them from following evidence that would have led to Joe Biden.

So yeah, good point there Malika, absolutely nothing to show that the Big Guy knew, participated in, and profited from influence peddling.

[Malika]

Riva-bot not programed to link!

[David Nieporent]

But it is programmed to use "Biden family" to obscure the fact that it's not referring to Joe Biden.

[Riva]

Since you’re too phenomenally ignorant to specify what facts you’re challenging, all I can do is direct you to the House Oversight Committee site. All their reports are easily accessible, even to work class a-hole trolls. https://oversight.house.gov.

[David Nieporent]

No, Brett. You're lying about a long debunked story. That story is from December 4, 2023, not 2024 — for some reason, you inserted false info — and the "direct monthly payments" were the 3 installments that Hunter reimbursed Joe for a truck Joe paid for for Hunter, totaling $4,000. Not $4,000 per month, but $4,000 total. (To be precise, three payments of $1,380, for a total of $4,140.)

Setting aside the innocent explanation — confirmed by the NYP via emails from the laptop — the notion that Joe Biden was being bribed with a total of $4,000 (!!!!!) is loony tunes even for MAGA.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not wearing my readers, David. I misread the date.

[bernard11]

Ok. You misread the date.

The rest you deliberately misrepresented, just like Comer. Stop lying.

[Riva]

Is this the same laptop that contains emails naming Ol’Joe as the Big Guy in discussions of a joint venture with CEFC China Energy Co? The one that caused the Biden campaign to recruit 51 intel pukes to write a letter falsely claiming that it, the laptop (although verified as legitimate by the FBI), bore the hallmarks of Russian disinformation? Are we talking about emails from that laptop, crazy Dave?

[David Nieporent]

No; no such laptop or emails exist.

[Riva]

The laptop you refer to above doesn’t exist? Well you’ve sure convinced me crazy Dave. The Big Guy is innocent.

[Michael P]

The public has had evidence of that since October 2020.

"I hope you all can do what I did, and pay for everything for this entire family for 30 years and it has been tough. It’s really hard but don’t worry, unlike Pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary." - Hunter Biden in January 2019

https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/10/15/howie-carr-hunter-biden-scandal-too-hot-for-alt-left-media/

[Malika]

Paywalled, but the link itself seems to suggest this is what Howie Carr said Hunter Biden said.

[Michael P]

https://nypost.com/2022/04/09/hunter-biden-frequently-covered-family-expenses-texts-reveal/

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/22/us/politics/hunter-biden-texts-impeachment-republicans.html

Unless you are quibbling with corrections of typos, the content has long since been confirmed.

[Malika]

"Unless you are quibbling with corrections of typos"

Like incorrect usage of internet slang quotation marks?

More seriously, the Times one is paywalled. The Post article has
1. A text from notably reliable Hunter to his daughter complaining that "unlike pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary.”
2. An email from a business associate of Hunter to Hunter labelled "JRB bills" which the Post says "does not contain any direct evidence of such money transfers" but describe...about 5k in repairs on Biden Sr's house?
3. Another email from the same person suggesting he deposited money from Sr. to "pay" back to Jr.
4. Another email from the same person saying "“Your Dad just called me (about his mortgage) and mentioned he’d be out a lot soon and not really back until Labor Day … He could use some positive news about his future earnings potential.” (You have to love how the Post described this sentence: "Schwerin said he was in touch with the vice president about his personal financial matters and was eager to start discussions with him about how to cash in when he left office.")

That's some pretty thin gruel.

[Joe_dallas]

pretending evidence doesnt exist means evidence doesnt exists - right?
asking for a friend

[bernard11]

Omitting key parts of the "evidence" - and no statement by Comer is to be taken seriously - makes it meaningless at best, and more likely false.

[SRG2]

You lot are cripplingly unable to resist the false and malignant lure of the "whatabout".

[Riva]

Just curious, Martinned2, did Zuckerberg ever collect on the countless millions that helped elect Biden in 2020?

[Bob from Ohio]

"private entites giving government officials money"

The inaugural committee is not a "government official".

Facebook just wants US protection against jealous Europeans.

[Martinned2]

Sure it isn't. It's just Trump's vanity fund.

(Leaving to one side the countless other ways that Trump is already receiving money from all sides, which people pay in the expectation of future favours in return.)

[Bob from Ohio]

"money from all sides"

So it cancels out!

[Martinned2]

Only the people with money might cancel out. If you're not rich enough to bribe Trump, you're fucked.

[Malika]

If they are asking for government intervention to assist them in particular it can be crony capitalism, even if it's asking for a reduction in government (a tax cut for them particularly or a regulatory exception or such).

[Not a Conservative but a Biden LOATHER]

But I scratch my head. Are you denying there is government meddling?

[Martinned2]

For the record, in Ireland, where many of these companies have incorporated their European subsidiaries, they're paying attention.

For example, they're wondering why Meta decided now to appeal a fine they got as far back as 2018: https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/meta-launches-legal-action-against-irish-regulator-over-251m-fine/a755075821.html

And this headline from the opinion section of the Irish Times speaks for itself: Trump’s alt right edgelords will inevitably come for Ireland. We can’t take the bait

[Satchmo_Lives]

Thanks for the link!

You should try reading it yourself next time.

Last month it imposed a fine of €251m on Meta after finishing an investigation into a data breach in 2018 that exposed millions of user accounts.

(emphasis added)

[Martinned2]

Fair.

[Satchmo_Lives]

Author's definition of "alt-right" (scare quotes in original): memelords...“extremely online” JD Vance (again scare quotes in original)...provocateur Elon Musk [who] have demonstrated their ability to weaponize internet culture and humour to rally a younger, digitally engaged base, reshaping conservative politics.

I can't quite figure out if the author is terrified because Trump might make a joke about annexing Ireland, or if the author thinks because Trump jokes about Canada he might be serious if he were to mention (joke/not joke?) Ireland.

Either way, this particular Chicken Little is afraid memes, Trump, Musk, and internet humor is a threat to Ireland. You take his commentary seriously at your own peril.

[John F. Carr]

According to recent news reports Musk may be a "special" government employee. Special employees have reduced ethics rules. Special government employees can be paid or unpaid. They can not work more than 130 days per year.

[Longtobefree]

'recent news reports'?
What exactly are 'recent news reports'?
Left wing propaganda by unnamed, unverifiable "sources"?
Lies at best, more likely propaganda.
If he isn't getting a federal government paycheck, he is not a government employee, special or just regular.

[Michael P]

The big problem with recent EU laws is that they set grossly unreasonable maximum fines, for example up to X% annual of global revenue from the victim company (compounding at some period), and authorize EU bureaucrats to decide what is actually imposed. This privileges sclerotic, anemic EU companies relative to those companies that are successful outside the EU, and warrants a counterbalancing response by other governments.

Ideally, this response would be in a libertarian direction, to reduce the power and burden of those bureaucrats.

[Martinned2]

The fines, which are incidentally calculated based on the revenue of the company that violated the law, not the "victim", don't seem to have been high enough to have made an impact on anyone.

I'm all in favour of proportionate sentencing (unlike most Americans, as far as I can tell), but if someone keeps breaking the law despite the fines you impose, the only sensible thing to do is to keep setting them higher. That's basically the logic behind a three-strikes law.

[Michael P]

The point of these laws is to kneecap non-EU companies. I correctly identified the victims.

[Bob from Ohio]

"kneecap non-EU companies"

Exactly.

There are no EU social media companies and few successful tech companies at all. Best to hurt American companies rather than have EU innovation.

[Brett Bellmore]

"The fines, which are incidentally calculated based on the revenue of the company that violated the law, not the "victim", "

The company they're levied against IS the victim. They're the victim of the EU's regulators.

By having the potential liability be based on world revenues, not EU revenues, they can levy fines that make it economically irrational to risk continuing to do business in the EU, larger than your total EU revenues. Effectively it's a protectionist measure to shield EU companies against foreign competition.

[Commenter_XY]

This is the correct answer = By having the potential liability be based on world revenues, not EU revenues, they can levy fines that make it economically irrational to risk continuing to do business in the EU, larger than your total EU revenues. Effectively it's a protectionist measure to shield EU companies against foreign competition.

[Martinned2]

World revenue is the best metric of what it might take to deter law-breaking. If you think requiring foreign companies to comply with EU law if they want to do business in the EU is protectionism, I really don't know what to tell you.

[Martinned2]

If you think obeying the law makes someone a victim, you're just not being serious.

[TwelveInchPianist]

If you don't understand that people can be victimized by laws, you're not being serious.

[John F. Carr]

There is another thing to do. When the fine greatly exceeds the harm done, stop raising the fine.

[ducksalad]

1. Deterrence Formula

(Fine X Probability of Getting Caught) > Revenue Earned Through Misconduct

2. Retribution Formula

Fine > (3 X Harm Caused)

3. Revenue Generation (Laffer Curve)

Set d(Fine x Number of Violators) / dFine = 0

4. Socialist Formula

Fine > ((Wealth - Average) X Envy Coefficient)

[Malika]

Pretty good!

[Martinned2]

By that logic, why ever punish anyone for a DUI that doesn't result in an accident?

[John F. Carr]

You can look at expected harm. A one in one thousand chance of an accident times the harm caused by an accident.

There was an insurance case where the chance of getting into an accident came up. Insured died while driving drunk. The trial judge ruled it was a covered accident because the chance of death was so low. On appeal, applying ERISA's "the company always wins" rule, the insurer's finding that it was de facto suicide was upheld by the Fourth Circuit.

[Martinned2]

Yes, and that's different than what you said before, and arguably yet another option in addition to Ducksalad's four options.

[Longtobefree]

From time to time, usually when caffeine deprived, I think maybe we should just let Putin have all of Europe.
Really, how bad could it get?

[Martinned2]

For Putin? Very bad. So far he's having to borrow North Koreans to help him defend Kursk against the Ukrainians.

[tylertusta]

The US is going to have to rethink our trade treaties with the EU at some point, and I doubt that the EU will like what comes out of those negotiations.

[Martinned2]

High time that we tell the Americans where to shove their trade relations. If they want our help with their geopolitical games, complying with GATT seems like the least they should do in return.

[tylertusta]

Help? The EU doesn't help.

They leech off of US military protection. The EU can't even provide more than token support to Ukraine in their own backyard. Even with the Russians breathing down their neck they sit on their asses and cry for Uncle Sam to save them from their own poor choices.

The US has long ago accepted that EU countries' 'help' in geopolitics is nothing more than them scolding America while reaping the benefits of America's protection.

[Sarcastr0]

Are you conflating the EU with NATO?

[tylertusta]

No.

[David Nieporent]

The countries of the EU have given more aid to Ukraine than the U.S. To be sure, the U.S. aid is disproportionately in the form of military aid¹ and the EU aid is disproportionately in the form of money.
​
​
¹Every time you see "U.S. approves $X in aid to Ukraine" and then the pro-Putin MAGA right has a tantrum and pretends that they actually wanted the money spent on welfare in the U.S., the "$X" is almost entirely in the form of materiel, not cash.

[Brett Bellmore]

And the tantrum is, at least in my circles, more about hollowing out our military reserves, than about actually aiding Ukraine. The concern is that we're letting Ukraine burn through our munitions much faster than we're replacing them, and if we get ourselves in a real war, we'll run out really fast.

[Absaroka]

Are your circles properly accounting for the age of what we are sending, i.e. the M1 Abram's we sent were seriously unlikely to ever see service with the US (because it's hard to imagine a scenario in the next couple of decades that would see us needing so many tanks we'd dig down that deep in the stockpile. Our next war is likely to need ships, not tanks).

I'm not trying to dunk on the notion we don't want to empty the larder, but to my casual eye:
A) we have mostly been sending stuff that is generally close to surplus (missile propellants age out, for one example) and
B)there is an IMHO valid argument that the choice may be sending an aged 155 shell to Ukraine today lowers the odds we have to send it to US troops in the trenches of Poland in 2031.

[tylertusta]

I see this concern a lot, and usually it comes up because people are unaware of what exactly is going to Ukraine.

Much of the equipment is old and on the verge of being scrapped. We're probably saving money by sending this gear to Ukraine instead of paying to have guys dismantle them in HAZMAT gear.

You can pick your weapon system that the US gifted to ukraine, and there is a 90% chance that it is expired, obsolete, or on the verge of being scrapped.

[tylertusta]

I said "token support." Providing money to a country that is facing down a current (and ongoing) conventional military invasion is nowhere near what is needed.

Euros don't stop Russian soldiers short of direct bribes, and the EU doesn't have that kind of cash.

[bernard11]

This privileges sclerotic, anemic EU companies relative to those companies that are successful outside the EU, and warrants a counterbalancing response by other governments.

Why does it warrant "a counterbalancing response by other governments?"

In fact, what happened? We know Meta was fined 251M euros over a data breach. Do we know why? Were they seriously negligent? How much damage resulted from the breach?

I'd like to know these things before I started to yelp about the injustice of it all.

[Don Nico]

EU digital regulation is a aged society's attempt to put a ball and chain on American innovation.

[Malika]

I think you're right but I'm not sure I can blame them. Ironically, it seems like a very conservative thing to try.

[Kazinski]

I too want the Trump administration to go to bat for social media companies championing free speech and free market competition.

And so do the EU's citizens.

[Martinned2]

Not EU, but the other day I saw a poll that showed that Elon Musk is literally more unpopular than any UK politician. He's even more unpopular than Tommy Robinson.

[tylertusta]

Nah. Zuckerberg understands what Musk already knows about Europe and their intentions towards American IT companies: they are jealous of American companies' success and are trying to make it impossible for them to remain in business.

'If you can't beat them, destroy them' seems to be the operating mantra for Europe these days.

[Martinned2]

Tell me again about that Tiktok law?

[Brett Bellmore]

You mean the one that allows Tiktok to remain in the US so long as US operations are disentangled completely from a hostile totalitarian state?

[Satchmo_Lives]

From the Board Of Water And Power Commissioners over the Los Angeles Power and Water Department (LAPWD). The organization Mayor Bass blames as they are responsible for delivery of power and water.

Enhancing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in our Workforce and in our Communities

Under the leadership of Mayor Eric Garcetti, Board President Cynthia McClain-Hill, the Board of Water and Power Commissioners, and General Manager and Chief Engineer Martin L. Adams, LADWP began the hard work of research, engagement, and documentation of the department’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) history, culture, and practices via the development of a Racial Equity Action Plan (REAP). Goals and recommendations were established for the Plan to ensure LADWP advances toward building an inclusive organization that employees, city officials, business leaders, community stakeholders, and residents can look upon with pride. The REAP was released summer 2021.

https://www.ladwpcommission.com/diversity-equity-and-inclusion

I get it. Agencies--in theory--can do the "hard work of research, engagement, and documentation of the department’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) history, culture, and practices" while also fulfilling the agency's core directives such as supplying water and power.

I just want to know how the water/power dept. intends on fostering diversity in the community. Do they look at a street and think "the neighborhood is too white and cisgendered? Let's see what we can do about it." Do they go into to Compton or Watts and think there are too many POC?

[Malika]

If you're actually curious the Racial Equity Action Plan can be found here:

https://www.ladwpcommission.com/diversity-equity-and-inclusion

[Satchmo_Lives]

I read the pertinent sections dealing with community and it says nothing about how they are going to diversify it. The statement is facially absurd. The zoning commission might be able to do something to diversify a community. Some small business commission might be able to diversify a community. What the hell is the agency tasked with delivering energy and power going to do to diversify the community? Are they going to give favored status groups cheaper utilities? Maybe, but they can't actually say that--and don't.

The Business Promotional Bill Credit Program, which provides a scaled three-year annual discount from 7.6% to 2% on energy for new commercial customers. There is one (1) customer to date for this program.

*snickers

Below are recommendations to assist in overhauling Economic Development & Community Engagement [ED].
• Reorganize ED in the new Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Office.
• The General Manager and the Board of Commissioners to prioritize ED at LADWP.
• ED Director should report to the Assistant DEI Officer.
• Assign leadership and staff that have experience in the ED arena.
• Understand current programming and determine what can be leveraged.
• Review previous:
1) ED policies to determine their processes
2) program activities to determine successes
3) comprehensive ED strategy reports that were developed by former Directors
etc

Really read the recommendations. They are on the level of instructions on a shampoo bottle. I mean, how much did they spend to learn they should put people in leadership that have experience?

[Michael P]

"ED Director should report to the Assistant DEI Officer."

That hierarchy makes it clear what their real priorities are.

[Malika]

It's not exactly a page turner but I think you missed some parts (diversifying suppliers/contractors, increasing access to services, etc.) that could easily be said to fall into promoting/supporting diversity in the community. Heck, just by promoting it in its workforce you'd likely get spillover into the community writ large.

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, and the point remains: None of this actually advances delivering water and/or power. To the extent they're actions you wouldn't have taken with that as your singular focus, they actually impede delivery of water and power.

[Malika]

That's certainly not a given (for example, a lot of that increasing diversity is talked about in the context of replacing nepotism or 'old boy' networks).

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, it's talked about in that context. Doesn't mean that's the context it's happening in. And even if it were, they're not proposing to replace nepotism with meritocracy, they're proposing to replace it with a different failure to deliver meritocracy.

Generally, when an institution adopts DEI, it's performance in delivering on its nominal purpose declines. We've seen that over and over. DEI displaces actually getting the job done, because it's a metric for success that isn't getting the job done.

[David Nieporent]

Generally, when an institution adopts DEI, it's performance in delivering on its nominal purpose declines.

[Citation needed], as the wikipedia editors say.

What you mean is, "Generally, when something bad happens, bad faith people dig up an anodyne DEI-type statement from an involved organization and insinuate without any evidence that there's a causal relationship. Since nobody does that when things are operating normally, it looks like DEI correlates with bad performance."

[TwelveInchPianist]

"That's certainly not a given (for example, a lot of that increasing diversity is talked about in the context of replacing nepotism or 'old boy' networks)"

Nobody has demonstrated that that's a problem, but if it is, couldn't they just focus on replacing nepotism or 'old boy' networks?

[David Nieporent]

couldn't they just focus on replacing nepotism or 'old boy' networks?

That's at least the theory behind many of these programs.

[TwelveInchPianist]

They why don't they say that?

You know, were becoming more efficient at hiring the best qualified people, instead of were hiring diverse lesbians?

[Malika]

They do, a lot, don't they? I mean, maybe the confusion here is that you don't think "look outside our usual" as a reasonable strategy to escape the old boy network/nepotism model"?

[Brett Bellmore]

We don't think replacing the "old boys'" network with a "slightly younger lesbian" network is a material improvement. Statistically, it's likely to be worse, because there are so many "old boys" compared to lesbians that you don't have to compromise meritocracy nearly as much for the former.

[Satchmo_Lives]

I guess, but it seems to me "enhancing*" means to augment--not simply use. They didn't create or add to the diversity of the community by hiring a POC welder or POC-owned construction company. The zoning commission can actually augment the diversity by adding different kinds of housing or businesses to an area.

And no, I don't have a clue as to how they can use access to water and power to diversify. What are they going to do? Tell residents "if you are white cisgendered you don't get access?"

Heck, just by promoting it in its workforce you'd likely get spillover into the community writ large.

You do know we are talking about Los Angeles, right? They have been doing this for decades. Culminating in the three top positions in the LAFD are held by lesbians and the CEO of the very group I quoted is also a lesbian. How much more diverse is LA supposed to get?

*They didn't say promote or support

[Malika]

1. You don't think giving jobs to diverse people could either attract or retain them in the community? That would be...augmenting, right?
2. Bettering service to underserved communities, who would have an incentive to leave otherwise, couldn't help maintain and promote the goal of diversify?

"Culminating in the three top positions in the LAFD are held by lesbians and the CEO of the very group I quoted is also a lesbian."

3. OK, that's where we are here...Whatever else you might think this proves about sexual orientation diversity, that's probably not the only kind they're thinking about.

[Satchmo_Lives]

1) As far as I have found two of the four lezbos came up in LA through the paramedic route. I guess hiring people from LA to run the LAFD who don't know about fire fighting is diversifying the LAFD, but not the community. And no, I don't think "retaining" people is diversifying. They could be replaced with little indigenous people dog catchers identifying as mollusks who also have no practical experience in fire fighting.

2) Cali is a dumpster fire ("no pun intended"--Biden) with rolling blackouts for years. Cali has been intentionally screwing up water resources for decades. The entire state is underserved, not just those who check more boxes. I am no lawyer, but something seems wrong about making public utilities available based on immutable, or made up characteristics. Hiring groupthink beholden people is the wrong kind of diversity. Not to mention NONE OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS ARE IN THE REPORT. Maybe actual solutions to accomplish their BS goals would make the report seem less like doublespeak spun through a Kafka machine.

Whatever else you might think this proves about sexual orientation diversity, that's probably not the only kind they're thinking about.

No, they are also women. The three most qualified people to run the FD in the second largest city in the U.S. just happen to be gay women. They are en fuego (no pu...).

[Longtobefree]

I'm pretty sure no member of that board goes into Compton or Watts.

[Don Nico]

The answer is simple: burn out the white supremacists in Palisades.

[hobie]

I thought the LA fires victim blaming was a little much even for the hillbillies. Karen Bass this. Karen Bass that. Finally saw my first picture of this Karen Bass a few minutes ago. I get it now.

[TwelveInchPianist]

On what planet is Karen Bass a victim of the LA fires?

[Martinned2]

This news made me very pleased, because it's my pension fund too:

Europe's Largest Pension Fund Sold Tesla Stake Because of Musk's Pay

Giving someone $56bn without him having to do anything in return is wildly stupid.

[Dr. Ed 2]

ROI...

[Commenter_XY]

Do you have the ability to create 1T in shareholder value?

Elon Musk does.

56B is cheap, compared to Musk's value add.

You're too much of a statist to understand that.

[Martinned2]

Then give him contingent remuneration on a forward-looking basis.

[Brett Bellmore]

This IS the future, relative to the actions that led to the payout.

[Commenter_XY]

I've wondered about the intersectionality of antisemitism and statism. Reading M2, I have my answer.

[Ed Grinberg]

Nazi Germany is the shining example of "the intersectionality of antisemitism and statism."

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/01/adolf-hitler-communist.php

[Martinned2]

Remind me, which one of us votes for authoritarian statists, and which one of us votes against them?

[Frank Drackman]

Martinned would have turned the Franks in for violating the HOA rules.

[Martinned2]

No. The payout is today/this year. The performance that allegedly justifies it is in the past, in 2018-2021 or thereabouts.

[Brett Bellmore]

That's what I said: That the payout today was contingent on actions that already happened, so this IS a future payout relative to the actions it was intended to motivate.

"Then give him contingent remuneration on a forward-looking basis."

I think maybe you're missing a point: The remuneration plan was approved by shareholders in 2018, the actions justifying the payout occurred after said approval, the payment was to come after the actions.

Then came a minority shareholder suit blocking Tesla from delivering his "contingent remuneration".

The recent vote just confirmed that Telsa stockholders actually wanted to uphold their end of the deal after all.

[Armchair]

Indeed... The details of Musk's "pay package" are important as well.

Musk didn't take any salary from Tesla. He didn't take any stock from Tesla. The entirety of his "pay package" are stock options. Which have a certain amount of risk associate with them. They may be worth a lot...but they also might be worth nothing.

Now, I don't know the details of the deal, but let's take a guess. Back in 2018, Tesla stock was trading at ~$21 a share. Let's say Elon gets a stock option for 1 million shares at $21 a share, to be exercised in 2023. If Tesla stock goes down...they're worth nothing. If Tesla stock goes up, Elon might get something. The last 5 year period saw Tesla stock go up from ~$6 to $21 a share...so, call it a $45 million payout, if things go as well as they did before.

Instead, Tesla stock shot up over $400 per share, so that would be a $380 Million payout.* (*Not accounting for stock splits, there was a 5:1 split and 3:1 split in 2020 and 2022 respectively. Accounting for that puts one at 5.7 Billion... )

So, you can see how if the company (Tesla) does extremely well, that can lead to Elon doing extremely well off the stock options. But it's very rare a company does THAT well...

[bernard11]

Why exactly does everyone blithely assume that the increase in Tesla's share price was all Musk's doing?

Is he the only one who works there? The only one who has an impact on the share price? I think in general the contribution of the CEO to company value tends to be overrated.

Two more things:

The options he was issued had significant value the day they were issued.

It is far from unheard of for companies to replace executives' options that are underwater with options carrying a lower strike price.

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't necessarily assume it was, but he had an agreement with Telsa stockholders to get remuneration if Tesla's stock went up, and it went up.

Is your conviction that the CEO had nothing to do with that reason enough to violate the agreement?

[bernard11]

Don't misstate what I said. It is absolutely not the case that I think,

"the CEO had nothing to do with [the share price rise]."

That 's a ridiculous characterization. There's a huge difference between, "The CEO is solely responsible for the gain," and "The CEO's contribution tends to be overrated."

I don't know what would justify reneging on the agreement, since I haven't read it. But I do agree it would (should) normally require extraordinary events.

Here, though, I wonder if it was really a good faith agreement at all, or if Musk was effectively negotiating with himself. He is the largest shareholder, and no doubt wields considerable influence.

Is dishonesty just a reflex for you?

[Brett Bellmore]

"Here, though, I wonder if it was really a good faith agreement at all, or if Musk was effectively negotiating with himself. He is the largest shareholder, and no doubt wields considerable influence. "

Let me quote from my above link about the 2018 deal:

"The new performance award was created by Tesla's Board of Directors (with Elon and Kimbal Musk having recused themselves) after more than six months of careful discussion and analysis and in consultation with Compensia, Inc., a third-party compensation consultant. Although the Board granted this award to Elon on January 21, 2018, its effectiveness is subject to the approval of Tesla's shareholders, who will be asked to approve it at a special shareholder meeting that will be held in late March. Elon and Kimbal Musk will recuse themselves from that vote so that Tesla's other shareholders have the opportunity to determine the outcome."

Does that answer your question for you?

[David Nieporent]

I don't know what would justify reneging on the agreement, since I haven't read it. But I do agree it would (should) normally require extraordinary events.

"Reneging" isn't really the right term. The court found that the agreement wasn't legitimate or valid in the first place, because it wasn't the result of arm's length bargaining and its acceptance was procured through misrepresentation of that fact.

[bernard11]

OK, David. I'm a card player, and definitely not a lawyer. That might lead me to use language that is incorrect from a legal POV.

[Brett Bellmore]

I suppose that, for legal purposes, a court "finding" something makes it 'true', but only for legal purposes.

None of this, of course, has anything to do with the weird claim that he's being given a fortune in return for nothing, when the deal was negotiated in advance, and he's already delivered on his end of it.

[Martinned2]

That's part of the problem too. The cost of Musk's pay package to Tesla at the time was, off the top of my head, $2bn or so. But to give him the same package again the company will have to incur a much greater cost, because now it's effectively giving him $56bn of stock instead of a bunch of options that may or may not turn out to be worth $56bn.

[Armchair]

" The cost of Musk's pay package to Tesla at the time was, off the top of my head, $2bn"

Looking into it further, the "cost" of Musk's pay package to Tesla, at the time...was zero. See, every one of Musk's options were contingent on meeting a performance based metric. The "easiest" metric to meet was increasing the company's valuation from ~$50 billion to $100 billion.

If Musk didn't double the company's valuation, he wouldn't get a single option, not a single penny in salary, and not a single piece of stock.

From Tesla's perspective, that's a "Heads I win, tails you lose" situation. If Musk double's the company's valuation...the stock options are a small % of the gains all the stock holders make. If Musk only manages to increase the company's value by 90%....Tesla doesn't owe him a red cent.

[Martinned2]

That's not how accounting rules for contingent remuneration work. Tesla does have to recognise a cost in its accounts if it awards options. The amount it has to recognise depends on how far the options are in or out of the money, but some kind of sum does need to go in there.

[Martinned2]

Last year Tesla shareholders were asked to approve a payout of $56bn which, at that point in time, had no requirement for Musk to do anything in return. The fact that there was also a vote in 2018 is irrelevant, because that vote is a legal nullity.

[Brett Bellmore]

That's just total bullshit.

I hire a plumber. The toilet gets fixed. I prepare to pay him as agreed before the work, and somebody butts in and puts a stop on the check.

So I write a new check, and you say that I'm writing it with no requirement for the plumber to do anything in return. That's right: Because he already did the work, and it's time for me to pay him for it.

[Martinned2]

In your case the agreement precedes the work. In the Musk case, there was, as a matter of law, no agreement whereby Tesla undertook to give him that money, and there still isn't.

[Brett Bellmore]

Good God, did you not follow my link? The agreement was made in 2018!!!

All that happened recently was that a minority stockholder sued to stop Musk from getting paid, ("somebody butts in and puts a stop on the check") and the stockholders voted all over again that, yes, they did want to uphold their end of the deal.

It was still payment pursuant to the preexisting agreement.

[Martinned2]

As a legal matter, it wasn't. Any agreement made in 2018 is legally null and void. This is a legal blog, why does this confuse you?

[Brett Bellmore]

"If the law says that, the law is an ass."

They made a deal in 2018, Musk upheld his end, the stockholders want to uphold their end of it even if a court for whatever reason wants them to cheat Musk.

Possibly because they don't want him to go away and make OTHER people wealthier, instead?

[Armchair]

Martinned....

I'm going to offer you a deal. You need to work for ASML for 5 years as CEO. Full time. You won't get paid a salary. You won't get paid in stock. Instead, I offer you three options.

1. You have the right to buy 1000 shares of ASML holdings at $1,000 a share in 2030
2. You have the right to buy 1,000,000 shares of AMSL Holdings at $4,000 a share in 2030

Do you take the job? Which option do you pick?

[Martinned2]

Option valuation is not complicated, but I don't have the input data to hand. Would you mind saying what your point is? What does either of those things have to do with the question of whether my pension fund should chip in to give Elon Musk money without him having to do anything in return?

[Brett Bellmore]

What we're questioning is the "without him having to do anything in return" part.

He's being paid AFTER the doing, are you really having that much trouble accepting the order of events?

[Martinned2]

You don't seem to be confused about the order of events. He did something - though see bernard11's caveat above - and now the board of Tesla is trying to give him money. There's no quid pro quo, no consideration. There's just a free gift of a staggering sum of money.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, in 2018 the Tesla board made a deal, confirmed by the stockholders, with Musk recusing both times, to pay him. And one of the minority stockholders wanted to welsh on the deal, so they had to hold another vote to confirm that, yes, the stockholders wanted to uphold their end.

Musk had already upheld his end.

[Armchair]

Indeed.

Here's the deal.

Tesla in 2018: "Musk, if you agree to be our CEO, we'll give you a boatload of stock options if you manage to double the company's valuation. Otherwise you get nothing. Plus a bunch more stock options if you go above and beyond"
Musk in 2018: "Deal"
Musk in 2023: "Looks like I met all those performance based metrics, and now get the stock options"
Angry Lawyers in 2023: "That's a lot of money! We don't want to pay him!".

[bernard11]

Come on, Martinned.

You surely understand that the payout was the options award, not the stock he received from exercising them.

[Martinned2]

Yes, what does that have to do with anything?

[Armchair]

What do you think a stock option is?

[Stephen Lathrop]

XY — Brings to mind a much-needed investment innovation. A crony capitalism mechanism, to aggregate for the little guy investment opportunities Russia-style crony capitalists will reap from Trump coruption. Of course, getting any actual value out of it would imply the cronies give up some loot, which is not realistic. But maybe something like a crypto coin linked to reported wealth increases for Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Kushner, and Trump himself.

[Bob from Ohio]

"very pleased"

Tesla stock had a 62.5% gain last year. You are pleased they abandoned this kind of asset appreciation?

[Martinned2]

Yes. Stock investing is easier with 20:20 hindsight. On a forward-looking basis, there's no way of knowing how long Musk companies will continue to attract a premium above their rational valuation. I prefer my pension money to be invested in things that are not bubbles. Bitcoin went up by 125% last year, but I sure hope my pension fund doesn't own any of those.

[Don Nico]

"do anything in return"
Martin, take off your blinders. Musk will built and see 50 M 55" and larger OLED TVs in 2025. That is hardly nothing.

[Martinned2]

So give him a bonus that's linked to something he might do in 2025. But that's not what we were talking about.

[Don Nico]

Sure it is, Martin. What has been done is scaling up the megafactories, increasing the size of the giant metal presses to be able to form steel, inventing and patenting a new, highstrength alloy of aluminum, developing a new solid state battery with a life capacity of ~1m miles and a one fill capacity of between 600 and 1000 miles and all without government subsidies. These batteries are Al-graphene and use NO scarce materials (from China). They are available on Teslas in 2025. On the battery front he has done far more than the US DOE or EU government programs

[Stephen Lathrop]

Nico — Metal presses big enough to form steel for locomotive bodies were old technology in the 1970s.

[Absaroka]

Aluminum die casting, not steel:

"The Giga Press program is a series of aluminium die casting machines manufactured for Tesla, initially by Idra Group in Italy. Idra presses were the largest high-pressure die casting machines in production as of 2020..."

I believe they have a bigger one now.

More big press porn. Lots bigger, and forging and extruding, not die casting.

I bet SpaceX has some pretty big tooling for the Starship.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Absaroka — Very cool second link. Massive titanium—almost a contradiction in terms.

[Kazinski]

If you were to list the top three states where the governors and legislatures of are leading the way in "Trump proofing" their states with allocating money for litigation, passing laws, and by executive action, the top three would be New York, California, and Illinois.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/20/democrats-trump-foes-governors-attorneys-general-interest-groups-00190177

And also if you were going to list the top 3 states by population loss the answer would be New York (-101,984), California (-75,423), Illinois (-32,826),
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023/population-trends-return-to-pre-pandemic-norms.html

Total coincidence I am sure.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Trump isn't even President yet and California is demanding he help them.

WHY???

[Martinned2]

Because he'll be the president a week from now, and that's kind of the president's job?

[Frank Drackman]

Who's been the President for the last 4 years? No Seriously, who's been the President?

[Joe_dallas]

legitimate question!

[Mr. Bumble]

...and the answer is not Joe Biden. So who has been the President for the last four years?

[Malika]

"If you were to list the top three states where the governors and legislatures of are leading the way in "Trump proofing" their states with allocating money for litigation, passing laws, and by executive action, the top three would be New York, California, and Illinois."

Lol! Your source doesn't mention any "top three states where the governors and legislatures of are leading the way in 'Trump proofing." It mentions Minnesota and Colorado as much or more than it does Illinois, but of course you don't because your second source does not indicate Colorado as losing population and indeed lists Minnesota as one of the top *gainers.*

[CountmontyC]

May Trump give California the same care as the Biden Maladministration gave North Carolina.

[Brett Bellmore]

"Is giving", you mean? They're kicking people out of hotel rooms into a cold wave, and not even handing them tents.

After, you know, stopping private efforts to build emergency housing. Because it wasn't up to code for permanent residences.

[CountmontyC]

I stand corrected.

[Commenter_XY]

It was outrageous, Brett. It is a symptom of a sclerotic republic.

In just one week, change is coming. Maybe we'll have an epidemic of common sense break out.

[apedad]

And what signs are you looking at that lend you to believe an epidemic of common sense will break out?

The backtracks on Trump's nominees?

The more-debt vs less-debt Republicans?

The razor-slim margin in the House?

[Commenter_XY]

One common sense measure: Increase debt limit, promptly. Give yourself breathing room. How fast can DOGE deliver a product that Congress can work with is the key question to me?
Another common sense measure: a temporary hold on regulations going into effect in next 6 weeks (figure out what is there)
Another common sense measure: increase military readiness across the board; esp drone + AI technology
Another common sense measure: deport illegal aliens who have committed a crime of violence summarily

There are many areas where Team R and Team D can work constructively together. But given the bitterness and acrimony in DC, very unlikely to happen.

Much more likely is a Team R Congress passing legislation without any input from Team D whatsoever.

[SRG2]

There are many areas where Team R and Team D can work constructively together. But given the bitterness and acrimony in DC, very unlikely to happen.

The Bulwark rrecently argued if shouldn't happen. The Democrats should flatly refuse to go along, and should just bring pain.

From a political perspective that makes sense. It's worked well for the GOP since the days of Newt Gingrich. And the GOP can't demand of the Democrats more than they provided themselves.

[bernard11]

One common sense measure: Increase debt limit, promptly.

Is this the same debt limit Republicans have strongly opposed increasing in the past. But now Trump is in, so...

Another common sense measure: deport illegal aliens who have committed a crime of violence summarily.

Should they not even get a trial? If convicted are they not deported when they complete their sentence? Maybe it makes more sense to deport them upon conviction, or loss of appeals, but it hardly looks like a major issue.

[Joe_dallas]

Commenter_XY 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
"In just one week, change is coming. Maybe we'll have an epidemic of common sense break out."

Judging from the comments here, that wont happen with many of the leftists

[DixieTune]

Unless the Republicans have a plan to make drastic changes to the franchise, no real problems will be fixed, except at the margins.

[Malika]

Cite?

[Michael P]

Well, FEMA did delay kicking people out of hotels by a few days after they got enough bad press about the winter storm:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2025/01/10/fema-to-evict-3500-nc-households-from-helene-hotel-voucher-program/77483037007/

But that is a very sharp contrast from Biden promising to pay 100% of costs for the Francis Scott Key Bridge replacement, or six months of disaster response in California: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-wildfires-biden-los-angeles/

[Malika]

"President Joe Biden announced the federal government will cover 100% of emergency response costs in Florida, Georgia and North Carolina in the wake of Hurricane Helene."

https://www.wlwt.com/article/biden-ups-federal-cost-share-support-for-hurricane-helene-recovery/62496439

[Brett Bellmore]

A pity people can't live in announcements.

[Michael P]

Maybe his point is that you can tell a Biden is lying because his lips are moving?

[Malika]

"that is a very sharp contrast from Biden promising to pay 100% of costs for the Francis Scott Key Bridge replacement, or six months of disaster response in California"

"President Joe Biden announced the federal government will cover 100% of emergency response costs in Florida, Georgia and North Carolina in the wake of Hurricane Helene."

Sharp contrast indeed Mike! Lol.

[Malika]

A pity what Mike P. pointed to was a sharp contrast in announcements...

"But that is a very sharp contrast from Biden promising to pay 100% of costs for the Francis Scott Key Bridge replacement, or six months of disaster response in California"

Did you not have your reading glasses on for that?

[Dr. Ed 2]

An interesting LA fire movie -- 60+ years ago, the 1961 Bel Air fire a smaller version of what happened last week. Why allow flammable roofs? There were warnings about that way back in 1959.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxnC1WW95XE

Apparently they didn't have turnout gear back then. And much of the stuff that is burning now wasn't there then.

What I don't understand is why the people on the beach or with a swimming pool didn't spend the $500-$1000 to buy a gasoline powered pump and a couple hundred feet of 2" hose. Even if you are only using the water in your swimming pool, you've got 10,000-20,000 gallons in a swimming pool -- a neighborhood could soak itself down and do a lot with everyone's pools.

It would take 5 fire trucks (pumpers) to move water a mile, and to pump out of the ocean, the first truck would have to be within 20 feet of it, but you could run a 5" or 6" hose to a deck gun or ladder truck. Or you can go quite a ways with only one truck and reducing the size of the hose.

I don't think the professionals were prepared and the volunteers were nonexistent. Sometimes you have to look out for yourself.

[Satchmo_Lives]

Disappointing.

Maybe I missed it, but where was

duuuuum duh-duh dum
duuuuum duh-duh dum duuuuuum

"Ladies and gentlemen, the story you are about to see is true. only the names have been changed to protect the innocent."

Disappointing indeed.

[Michael P]

You don't want to pump salt water onto land where you would like to grow normal (non-oceanfront) plants in the future.

[Frank Drackman]

In Boy Scouts we had our own way of putting out campfires.

[Bwaaah]

This one was so good you ran it again? It was worth a chuckle for me the first time, but you're looking a little too wanting on the reprise. People could think you're running out of material, and I know it ain't so.

[Frank Drackman]

So did Nolan Ryan only pitch one No-hitter? Beethoven Write 1 symphony? Even the 3 Stooges did a few reruns

[Joe_dallas]

there are reports of using helicopters scooping ocean water to drop on the areas of fire. Its a common wildfire fighting process, just not using ocean salt water. LA has limited fresh water available. Average rainfall is only 18-20 inches per year

[Krayt]

Salt washes away pretty quickly. Northern states put tons of salt on roads, in summer the grass goes right up to the road. I am not talking about curbed roads.

Also, how dead are the plants after hurricane storm surges? I'm not even sure meanly "salting the earth" to stop farming is a real thing, at least outide desert regions, and even then only briefly.

[Brett Bellmore]

Salt washes away pretty quickly in areas that get a lot of rainfall. Average annual rainfall in LA is about 14", it IS a desert region.

[Joe_dallas]

But But But - the activists are calling it a severe drought caused by global warming!

Not withstanding that modern day records show long term low rain fall since the mid 1800's and paleo records show long term droughts for the last 1000-1500 years

[Malika]

More likely they say it is exacerbated, a bit of nuance lost on someone who, say, might claim that the Vegas carbomber was an Islamic extremist.

[Don Nico]

You likely missed the story in which the detailed high resolution climate models were run for the LA basin and surroundings. Risingg mean deviation actually reduced Santa Ana events. But don't let politics interfere with your idea of science.

[Malika]

What are you talking about?

[Joe_dallas]

Science - something most leftists are not familiar with

[Malika]

Explain it's application here.

[Joe_dallas]

Malika 1 hour ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
"Explain it's application here."

Don did explain it - you just didnt grasp it

[Dr. Ed 2]

There's not that much salt in salt water, the fire does more damage, and what do you think the helos are dropping?

[SRG2]

Why allow flammable roofs?

Pity the Reason website was not around then to explain why regulating roof materials was wrong and hindered a fix of the housing crisis.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Pity the insurance companies couldn't refuse to insure houses with flammable roofs.

[Don Nico]

SRG,
A colleague of mine with 40 years of fire management experience told me that while ceramic tile roofs can help (they did in the Oakland fire) they also offer no help in areas like Palisades which have considerable large ornamental shrubs immediately next to the house.
In addition the title roofs are heavy which is a negative in earthquake country.
Your point is well take in that shake roofs out to be forbidden in fire zones.

[Joe_dallas]

almost all municipal building codes have banned cedar shake shingles starting since the early to mid 1970's. I would suspect there are very few, if any, municipalities that still allow cedar shake roofs.

[Malika]

Amateur expert climatologist, economist, epidemiologist, bookeeper, etc., now claims building codes expertise!

[Brett Bellmore]

It's actually still legal, for the moment, to use cedar shake roofs in California, so long as they're treated to class C fire retardation, which makes them roughly as fire resistant as regular asphalt shingles.

[Frank Drackman]

Preach it! Dr Ed’s our resident Expert in subjects he has no experience with!

[Joe_dallas]

Milaka - any leftist proudly announcing his ignorance

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I do admire your tenacity in pretending like you know anything at all before opening your mouth and demonstrating that you don't.

Of course, being a lying shit nullifies that and then some.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Don, I was thinking of steel roofs. See: https://www.statefarm.com/simple-insights/residence/metal-roof-pros-and-cons

While Massachusetts does get earthquakes, our building code is based on hurricane threat, which place similar stresses on buildings -- or at least engineers say they do.

[A Japanese Student]

As I was preparing court cases to post on January 14, I realized something that would be unbelievable to Americans: that people have sought to nullify all national elections in Japan for decades through litigation, and had one precedent of SCOTUS been adopted here, they could have won in most of those cases. Can anyone guess why?

[John F. Carr]

Was the missing case Baker v. Carr?

[A Japanese Student]

More like Wesberry/Reynolds.

As I'll explain tomorrow, the only way to bring a malapportionment claim is to dispute the results of an election that already occurred. Courts are statutorily authorized to void elections; there is a precedent where officials censored candidate's posters in a mayoral election and it got voided. Injunctions against statutes are generally unfavored. (Instead you either sue for nominal damages, or for local ordinances file a taxpayer's suit.)

[Dr. Ed 2]

US doesn't allow taxpayer suits.

[Martinned2]

Today in "Trumpism isn't conservatism":

Senator Josh Hawley is working with the Teamsters to promote unions, including "prohibit unsafe speed quotas"; limits on anti-union captive audience meetings; requiring first contracts get negotiated within months after unionizing; "real penalties" for union-busting.

https://punchbowl.news/01-08-25-pro-labor-framework-2/

[John F. Carr]

The politicial coalitions are shuffling. Because we are only allowed two parties the politicial situation is a bit of a mess now. Please check back in ten years. We appreciate your patience.

[Commenter_XY]

John F Carr, consider the alternative: Coalition governments comprised of political parties that have temporarily aligned interests. Look at Germany and Israel as to what that might look like, in practice.

A mixed bag.

Our system is horrible! But it is still better than all the others. 😉

[Martinned2]

It seems odd that everyone from Steve Bannon to many VC bloggers is forced to vote for Trump even though they don't agree with him on many (or even most) issues. Personally I prefer a system that allows voters more than two options.

[apedad]

What's the difference between an individual voting for someone who doesn't fully align with their principles and a party joining a coalition with another party that doesn't fully align with their principles?

I don't see any difference - besides if it's one person or a political party.

[Martinned2]

The difference is that the latter allows for the views of voters to be mapped, and translated into the relative influence of different parties within the coalition.

In the US nobody knows how many actual Trumpists there are among the people who voter for him in November, and how many people voted for Trump even though they would have preferred to vote for another sort of Republican. So Trump can claim that all 77,303,573 people who voted for him support him on everything, even though that plainly can't be right.

In Israel, to take another example, the power balance between Likud and the other coalition parties (and indeed the power balance between the coalition and the opposition) reflects the relative popularity of different parties. By voting for, say, Mafdal rather than Likud, a voter can push the government further in the pro-settler direction.

In the US the only equivalent of that is the primary for each election, but turnout for primaries is much lower than for the election proper, and there are different rules for who is even allowed to vote in each primary.

[Brett Bellmore]

I generally would prefer a PR system with lots of parties and governing coalitions, (Though I prefer regularly scheduled elections to confidence votes.) but Trump actually does have the evidence you are asking for, in the form of the 2024 Presidential primary votes. Which he got over 76% of.

[Martinned2]

Trump got 17,015,756 primary votes, out of a total of 22,264,875 votes cast. What does that tell me about the 77,303,573 people who voted for Trump in November?

[Frank Drackman]

I know you don't live here, but in Amurica we vote for what we call "Electors" who then cast votes for President and Vice President. Trump got 312 of the 538.

[Brett Bellmore]

My point was that we have a good sample of Republican voters, to tell us that most Republicans didn't want somebody else. (Who was on offer, anyway.)

Sure, turnout is lower in primaries than the general election, but it's the best evidence we have, and it's evidence that Republican voters are not unhappy with Trump.

We have even less evidence that Democrats really wanted Harris, you might notice.

Twice now VPs have gotten the nomination without having to win any primaries themselves. (Ford, and now Harris.) In both cases they lost. Think either party will learn that lesson?

[David Nieporent]

Twice now VPs have gotten the nomination without having to win any primaries themselves. (Ford, and now Harris.) In both cases they lost. Think either party will learn that lesson?

I don't know what you think you are referring to, but as stated, it's completely wrong, as I have told you before. It's not just wrong; it's 180° opposite from correct. To be sure, Ford actually became president without winning any primaries — just like most of the other vice presidents who were promoted to the presidency in mid-term.

But Ford did not get the presidential nomination in 1976 without winning primaries. In fact, he faced very tough primaries, and as such was the last nominee to go into a convention without having already secured his party's nomination.

So, basically, your "lesson" is based on an n=1. It would be dumb even if your facts were correct, but they're not.

[not guilty]

Gerald Ford got the nomination without having to win any primaries??

Is that as true as everything else you have said, Brett?

[Martinned2]

Primary voters are not a random sample of GOP voters, or of anything else.

[ducksalad]

Brett, I think that 17M is made up of two groups:

A. Likes Trump and what he stands for.

B. Republicans whose top priority was winning the election and understood that if Trump was the nominee, other Rs would fall in line and likely win the general; conversely if anyone besides Trump was the nominee, Trump would put in a massive effort to undermine the Republicans, group A would stay home, and everything would generally blow up.

[Brett Bellmore]

I was C: "Best of the lot after my favorite candidate dropped out."

But, my point is, such evidence as we have does not suggest the vote for Trump was all that reluctant.

[Brett Bellmore]

"But Ford did not get the presidential nomination in 1976 without winning primaries."

I'm having trouble remembering that I should no longer rely on my memory.

[Dr. Ed 2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries

Gerald Ford did not run in 1972.
Lyndon Johnson HAD run in 1960.

[not guilty]

Lyndon Johnson did not run in primaries during 1960. He did seek the nomination after the primaries and before the convention.

[David Nieporent]

Gerald Ford did not run in 1972.

Neither did Geraldine Ferraro. Why are you bringing up random points of trivia that have nothing to do with the discussion?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Brett -- don't forget how Hitler rose to power...

[Don Nico]

I agree with you. But then I was never a 1 issue voter

[Bob from Ohio]

"Personally I prefer a system that allows voters more than two options."

The two most stable democracies in the last 200 years have had 2 major political parties at any one time. Our coalitions are intra-party.

You are citing "Israel" as an example to follow?

[Martinned2]

You realise that the US literally had a civil war because the two parties couldn't agree, right? And then there's whatever the civil rights era was. If that's stability, you can keep it.

[Bob from Ohio]

Our Civil War happened in the brief period when one of our parties broke into separte north and south parties. No country in Europe has had a civil war in the last 200 years, right?

Only a handful of countries on the continent has the same form of government it had 200 years ago. Multiple revolutions in most countries. Dictatorships in most as well.

So, yes, 2 party first past the post is the way to stability and prosperity.

[not guilty]

"No country in Europe has had a civil war in the last 200 years, right?"

Bob, I can't tell whether you are asking that question sarcastically of whether you believe that Spain was not in Europe during the 1930s, nor Greece in the 1940s, nor Finland in 1918, nor Russia following World War I, nor Ireland in the 1920s, nor Poland in the 1980s, nor Northern Ireland for most of the twentieth century.

[Bob from Ohio]

Not sure I'd call Poland in the 1980s a civil war but, ease your mine, I was teasing our Dutch friend.

[ducksalad]

If you're referring to the UK, I'd argue they've really had a 2.5 party system, and the 0.5 has a non-negligible influence in how the 2.0 behave themselves.

[John F. Carr]

In another world the election results would be

20% Silly party
25% Sensible party
20% Beam Me Up party
35% MAGA party

Trump would have to compromise to get a majority. He could ally with the traditionally pro-labor Sensible party. He could ally with the Beam Me Up party which has little use for unions. Both of them would help cut down on immigration. Either would make him give up extreme tariffs.

[Dr. Ed 2]

look at the 1933 German elections...

[Frank Drackman]

Germany needed a 22d Amendment, Hitlers first 2 terms worked out pretty well (for Germany)

[John F. Carr]

In the past few years Florida Governor DeSantis removed from office two progressive prosecutors who promised not to enforce some laws that progressives didn't like. One of them sued. He lost in the trial court. He seemed to be winning in on appeal but the case dragged on until he lost reelection. Last week the 11th Circuit ordered the case dismissed as moot. No precedent has been set. DeSantis ran out the clock.

Distilled to a sound bite: Is "I won't enforce abortion laws" protected speech or unprotected conduct?

https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202310459.op3.pdf

[Commenter_XY]

Ouch, and out the money, too.

[Brett Bellmore]

In this case, it was a statement of intent to engage in unprotected conduct.

[Martinned2]

Agreed. It would be better if the governor wasn't involved in the running of the office of the prosecutor, or whatever it is called in Florida, but obviously individual prosecutors shouldn't get to have their own policies on what to prosecute or not to.

[Krayt]

What's the point of The People creating an elected position for them?

Presumably so The People could judge the quality and type of prosecutions. We don't like what you're doing. Cya. (I was opposed to the curious sight of one elected official "firing" other elected officials. There are two ways to deal with that: imprachmrnt, or The People taking care of business at the next election.

I didn't create the sophistry that "there's not enough resources to prosecute everything, therefore we have some leeway on what to prosecute", which then brazenly turned into wholesale ignoring of chunks of law for political reasons, e.g. marijuana, DACA, other immjgration issues.

Oh, and don't forget to go to court to force the government to enforce certain environmental laws. Can't let them be lax on that.

Before deciding on looking glowingly on ignoring certain laws, first we need to see what the laws are, and only then trumpet the principles of rule of law, or kind heartedness, or ignoring laws getting long in the tooth.

Only then can we stomp around, faceting holy principles.

[Martinned2]

Prosecutors shouldn't be elected, and this case shows why.

[Bob from Ohio]

All government officials should be elected. Including judges.

[Martinned2]

Sure, if you don't like the rule of law that's a great idea. But then you don't get to complain if each of these prosecutors or "judges" decides for themselves how they feel like interpreting the law that day.

[Bob from Ohio]

We have as much "rule of law" as the EU yet half our states elect judges and I think all states have elected prosecutors.

The people should have some direct control over those who wield such power.

[Frank Drackman]

Because he lost? I think I was 25 or 26 before I realized we didn’t get to vote for Surpremes,

[John F. Carr]

In some states the Attorney General can intervene. This cuts both ways. The Attorney General of Oklahoma recently dismissed a police brutality case brought by the Oklahoma County DA. If you could find a way to make the case proceed if either prosecutor wanted it, that would work better. One way to get just laws is to convince state politicians that their kids will go to prison too if they smoke pot.

[Frank Drackman]

Andrew Warren, wonder if he's related to Poke-a-hontas?

[Bored Lawyer]

Is "I won't do the job I'm paid to do" a basis to fire the person? Can he invoke the 1st Amendment as a defense?

Answers: Yes, and no.

[Michael P]

Minnesota Democrats seem to be staying a bit of an insurrection in order to avoid being dragged to the Capitol by their Republican colleagues:

https://twitter.com/andrewwagner/status/1878584584964841789

On top of this, the Secretary of State (also from the DFL) is threatening not to recognize the quorum of Republicans because, contrary to precedent and evidence from the state's constitutional convention, he claims quorum should be a majority of seats rather than a majority of current members.

I look forward to all right-thinking Democrats decrying this assault on the peaceful transfer of power.

[Malika]

If they are staying it then it's all good, right?

[Drewski]

An increasingly common thing. Oregon passed a law making legislators ineligible for reelection if they pull this, because Republicans kept doing it. Texas issued arrest warrants last time it happened there. I don't know what checks Minnesota has, if any, but in most states arrest is on the table.

I find it childish. I can't imagine there's any real advantage to be had by staging this stuff; it's just pageantry that impresses only the most rabid politicos.

[Brett Bellmore]

This is such an old abuse that virtually all constitutions authorize legislatures to force attendance by absent members. Which is why state legislators pulling it typically hide out in a different state, to stay out of the jurisdiction of their own states' police.

[John F. Carr]

In some governments the decision to recognize a quorum is up to the legislative body. In Massachusetts we have "informal" sessions where only 10% of the members show up. With unanimous consent legislation can advance. If anybody objects to lack of a quorum the bill waits for a majority.

Oregon voters tried to solve this problem by disqualifying members with ten unexecused absences. If you walk out of the 2025 session you won't be in the 2027 session.

[Brett Bellmore]

"In some governments the decision to recognize a quorum is up to the legislative body. "

The reason you seldom see that, is that it's functionally equivalent to not requiring a quorum at all.

[Commenter_XY]

The Tik Tok case. The clock is ticking, and a deal has to be done within 6 days, or the app is just shut off(?) [BTW, how does that shut off work?]

Legal questions.

During oral argument, Justice Alito asked if SCOTUS had the authority for an administrative stay. Do they?

Suppose Tik Tok is shut off. I then use a VPN and get Tik Tok via a sever hosted in another country. Can I be arrested? My phone confiscated?

When have we ever just 'turned off' an app with 20MM+ American users, before? Can you name one?

[Michael P]

A stay normally pauses judicial proceedings, not the implementation of a law, so Supreme Court intervention would be more like an injunction.

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-tiktok-china-speech-security-72fa68dd677df96a3b3526a1bddb0aa8 outlines what implementation would look like:

If TikTok isn’t sold to an approved buyer, the federal law would prohibit app stores, such as those operated by Apple and Google, from offering the popular app. It would also bar internet hosting services from hosting TikTok.

TikTok users who already have the app on their phones will continue to have access to it. But new users won’t be able to download the app, and existing ones will no longer be able to receive updates. That will eventually render the app unworkable, the Justice Department has said in court filings.

[Frank Drackman]

So like with "Assault Weapons" where by constantly threatening to ban them, peoples who couldn't tell a Disconnector from an Extractor went out and bought one, now I need to get the TikTok App!
Actually I already have it,
That Charli Damelio is easy on the eye.....(I miss Larry King's USA Today column)

Frank

[John F. Carr]

The All Writs Act allows court to issue injunctions in the name of justice, consistently with the way their fathers before then issued injunctions in the name of justice. More specifically, a temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo is a familiar remedy.

[defaultdotxbe]

Tik Tok would likely shut down US-based servers and block access from US IP addresses.

You would be able to use a VPN, and I don't believe there is any liability for end-users, although there may be some liability for Tik Tok for allowing continued access if its a significant number of people. Tik Tok may also block US-based accounts, since I think part of an earlier deal is that US users have their data stored on US servers, if those servers are shut down your data will be inaccessible.

Drifting away from the legal angle, you probably wouldn't want to bother using a VPN to log in, as I assume most US users consume content from US creators, who will likely not go through the trouble of continuing on Tik Tok, as they would not be able to be monetized going forward even if they retained access to their accounts or made a new one.

[Satchmo_Lives]

When have we ever just 'turned off' an app with 20MM+ American users, before? Can you name one?

Does MySpace count?

Suppose Tik Tok is shut off. I then use a VPN and get Tik Tok via a sever hosted in another country. Can I be arrested? My phone confiscated?

I certainly wouldn't think so. There is no law pending making the use of TikTok a crime. The law directs TikTok to cease operations in the U.S.

[Brett Bellmore]

I assume it would work something like in Free Guy, where somebody would just start taking a fire ax to the servers. Isn't that how it's normally done?

[John F. Carr]

The law does not impose penalties on users.

If Tik Tok can't do business in America it will cease targeting Americans. There's no money to be made. If you connect to a server in Spain or China you can't pay a subscription fee and you can't be served profitable ads. You are not interesting. Going through a VPN with an exit node overseas you might look interesting.

[John F. Carr]

The TikTok law is Division H of Public Law 118-50.

The prohibited acts are, within U.S. territory, distributing an application through an app store ("marketplace") to U.S. users, or providing hosting services for distribution of apps. As I read the law it does not affect web-based interfaces because they do not go through a marketplace. I could imagine TikTok continuing to operate until the law is amended.

[apedad]

Irving Man Pleads Guilty to Bankruptcy Fraud After Filing 10 Times

According to court documents, (Michael) Shaub and his spouse purchased a house in Irving, Texas, incurring a mortgage loan secured by their ownership interest in the property.

In January 2012, he filed a Chapter 13 voluntary bankruptcy petition, which was dismissed without prejudice for failing to timely pay the Bankruptcy Trustee as specified in the Debtor’s Plan.

Over the ensuing seven years, he filed five additional bankruptcy petitions, the last of which was dismissed with prejudice, barring him from filing any more bankruptcies for two years, through May 2021.

Less than five months after the dismissal, however, Mr. Shaub filed a seventh bankruptcy petition under his wife’s name without her knowledge or consent.

Roughly two months after that dismissal, Mr. Shaub filed an eighth bankruptcy petition in contravention of the order barring him from filing through May 2021.

In February 2020, a month after the eighth petition was filed, the Bankruptcy Court dismissed it with prejudice and barred Mr. Shaub from filing any more bankruptcies for a period of five years, through February 2025.

Roughly two years after that dismissal, Mr. Shaub filed a ninth bankruptcy, which was also dismissed with prejudice. This time, the Court barred Mr. Shaub from filing any bankruptcies for a period of ten years, through June 2032.

And yet just 14 months later, in August 2023, Mr. Shaub filed his tenth bankruptcy petition, which was dismissed with prejudice the same day.

Michael Shaub, 62, was charged via felony information and pleaded guilty Tuesday to one count of bankruptcy fraud.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/irving-man-pleads-guilty-bankruptcy-fraud-after-filing-10-times

Will someone go knock their cousin upside the head and tell him to cut it out?

[Satchmo_Lives]

Will someone go knock their cousin upside the head and tell him to cut it out?

Certainly not me. Sounds like the sort that would take me to court for doing so.

[Frank Drackman]

I know the 2028 Iowa DemoKKKrat Cock-Us's aren't for 3 years, but that Gavin New-Scum is on fire!

[Commenter_XY]

Bring them home, POTUS Biden.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/biden-stresses-immediate-need-for-hostage-truce-deal-in-call-with-netanyahu/

From the article....Trump’s special envoy to the region Steve Witkoff told Netanyahu...that Trump expects a deal to be in place by his inauguration, and was said to stress that both sides must show flexibility to get an agreement across the finish line.

This is an unusual situation where the Pres-elect and POTUS are working toward the same objective.

[Martinned2]

I thought the only non-antisemitic thing to say was that Israel should kill all Palestinians? Since when is calling for a truce allowed?

[Brett Bellmore]

It's allowed, it's just stupid, since Hamas doesn't actually observe truces even if they agree to them.

[Commenter_XY]

That is correct, Brett; hamas has violated and broken every ceasefire agreement they have made. I do not expect for this to be any different.

[Martinned2]

So you're saying that Trump is stupid?

[Brett Bellmore]

Is Trump urging Israel to negotiate a truce with Hamas? All I've heard are threats against Hamas if they don't release the hostages.

But I will confidently predict that, if Israel negotiates a ceasefire with Hamas, Hamas will violate it.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Did you try reading the linked article?

[Malika]

Didn't have his reading glasses.

[Martinned2]

According to Commenter_XY he is, yes.

[Don Nico]

Martin,
It is not usual for you to be so dishonest. WHy the change on this matter?

[Bob from Ohio]

"I thought the only non-antisemitic thing to say was that Israel should kill all Palestinians? "

You are just being an idiot today.

[Commenter_XY]

Why is this day different than any other day for M2, lol.

[Frank Drackman]

From Redfin "The Pacific Palisades housing market is somewhat competitive. In November 2024 the median sale price of a home in Pacific Palisades was $3.3M last month, down 16.0% since last year. The median sale price per square foot in Pacific Palisades is $1.2K, up 2.9% since last year."
I think they'll do OK, you gotta have insurance on a 3 million dollar house, don't you?

Frank

[Michael P]

Fact check: Online claims that the Los Angeles Fire Department is run by three lesbians named Kirsten are FALSE. Those three lesbians are ackchually named Kristin, Kristina and Kristine. Jamie Brown, while being another lesbian in charge of the LAFD, is not named anything like "Kirsten".

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-lafd-is-run-by-three-lesbians-named-kirsten/

[Satchmo_Lives]

Fact Check: Possibly true*

*Well, it has got to be true somewhere. Right?

[Malika]

Lol, you can't make this stuff up"

"Daniel Greenfield, a *Shillman* Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism." ** mine

I guess Hacky would have been too on the nose.

[Michael P]

Indeed, I would not have made up "Internet rando makes no stronger argument than hand-waving an argument somewhere between 'look at this fucking guy' and 'joooos control the media'."

I think this is the Shillman in question:

Starting in 2006, [Robert J.] Shillman has waived his annual salary and bonus at Cognex and has requested that those amounts be donated each year to charity.

[Malika]

Whoosh!

[Frank Drackman]

So sort of like all the "In" girls in "Heathers" were named "Heather" except for Winona Ryder, who was a Veronica

[MoreCurious]

And for your next brilliant comment, I'm sure you'll explain to us why the gender and sexual orientation of the people running the fire department matters.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Let's hear best estimates on changes in the rate of inflation during the first year of the Trump administration. My guess, the inflation rate increases, by 18%.

[Martinned2]

It can literally go in all sorts of directions. If he actually imposes high tariffs, he may well end up in that sort of direction. But crashing the economy typically brings inflation down, so he might end up near 0% too. The most likely scenario, I think, is some sort of stagflation scenario inbetween, with high-single digit inflation and unemployment.

[Commenter_XY]

So lathrop, math wasn't your strong suit in life, was it?

What is 18% of 2.7%? Answer: about 0.5% (.486, to be exact)

If inflation rate increases to 3.2% this year, it isn't earth shattering.

Lowering energy cost will be key to lowering inflation rate.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd assumed he meant from 3% to 21%, since the alternative interpretation was so silly. (21% being silly in a different way, of course.)

[Commenter_XY]

In that case, his grammar sucks. Scary, since he was an editor before being cashiered out.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bellmore — If you assume stuff about my commentary, you are even more at risk of looking stupid than you are with your usual practice to assume stuff about other people's commentary. I am more careful than the average VC commenter to double check my factual assertions—a habit which my history of journalistic practice tended to inculcate.

What is your estimate of Trump's first year inflation performance? Will the rate go up or down, and by how much?

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd not be shocked to see it go up a bit, actually, because the Fed began lowering interest rates back in Sept. 24, and there's quite a bit of deficit spending still in the pipeline.

Maybe 3.5%?

So, just to clarify, did you mean that the inflation rate would increase by 18%, from 2.7% to 3.2%? Or did you mean, from 2.7% to 20.7%? Because it was the latter that I dismissed as silly.

Anyway, I would not care to guess what inflation will be several years out, because I've yet to see if the new Congress has any will at all to reduce deficit spending, (If it does, I shall be pleasantly shocked.) or whether Trump will have the political leverage or will to undertake the sort of actions necessary to reform things.

I suspect he may be up for it, but really doubt Congress is.

[Joe_dallas]

Commenter_XY 5 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
So lathrop, math wasn't your strong suit in life, was it?

C - he is a leftist - what would expect!

[Joe_dallas]

Higher Inflation and recession are likely in the next 4 years of a Trump administration. The deficit spending and nations debt has gotten too large to remain viable. The chickens eventually come home to roost and the day of reckoning will shortly be upon us. keysian economics / krugman's version of economics only lasts so long.

[Martinned2]

Large deficit spending while the economy is tight is not what Keynes or Krugman suggested.

[Joe_dallas]

A) You need to go back and re-read krugman

Krugman was notorious for taking opposite positions on the same subject solely based on whether it was a republican or democrat administration.

B) its not what keynes advocated - its what democrats advocated when they invoked keynes

[bernard11]

You need to go back and re-read krugman

Here's one thing you might go back and read. You should also read Krugman, and not some RW distortion of his writings.

Krugman was notorious for taking opposite positions on the same subject solely based on whether it was a republican or democrat administration.

Maybe you could give some examples. And don't forget to include a description of the economic situation at the time he switched. There are things other than which party holds the White House that might cause someone to recommend different policies at different times.

I think the 5-minute hates that the name "Krugman" brings forth on the right is an indicator of just how often he is right.

[Joe_dallas]

Examples - Try to read his history of weekly commentary. unfortunately , his hisotrical commentary is not well archived.
Though there used to be a regular weekly column exposing Krugmans back flips on economic policy

[David Nieporent]

Examples - Try to read his history of weekly commentary.

I admire the fact that rather than trying to rely on anecdotes, bookkeeper_Joe doesn't bother, and just alludes to a vague body of someone's writing over decades without any examples after writing "Examples"

[bernard11]

Actually, I've been a pretty regular reader of Krugman for many years.

I can assure you that he does a better job of backing up his positions with actual data, not to mention solid economic theory, than any other economic commentator. Further, he is willing to discuss errors, and inaccurate predictions, in a way that few are.

The so-called "weekly column exposing Krugmans back flips on economic policy" was written by the idiot Stephen Moore, who wouldn't know a back flip if he saw an acrobat at the circus do one.

[Malika]

Economics expert Joe_dallas can't spell Keynes!

[Martinned2]

Since you mention energy costs, you'd think that you would have realised that a price shock in one area cascades through into other areas of the economy. So it's not just the direct effect of tariffs on the prices of imported goods that matters.

[Stephen Lathrop]

XY — If I recall correctly, my 1963 math SAT put me in the 98th percentile, so not great. But good enough to have meant exactly what you thought you needed to explain.

Whether that result has any political valence remains the question. I asked it to find out whether MAGAs blaming inflation on Democrats would hold Trump responsible if he reversed the direction on inflation.

What is your estimate? Inflation rate up or down under Trump during his first year, and by how much?

[Commenter_XY]

I have no idea = direction of inflation and amount, direction of interest rates and amount, direction of stock market and amount.

Nobody knows, lathrop.

[bernard11]

All unknowable, so don't blame Trump if it happens, right? Sharp contrast to your attitude towards Biden and inflation. You seem to be preparing the ground for defenses of Trump' economic promises.

In fact if Trump follows through on his tariff promises and tax cuts and deportations we will see substantial inflation.

[Commenter_XY]

No one knows, bernard11.

You were completely wrong about tariffs in 2018. Why are you right now?

[Frank Drackman]

Man, you mathematic Illiterates get on my last good nerve, the CPI went up 2.8% in 2024, so do you mean you think it's going to go up to 20.8% ("Increases by 18%"), or to 3.3% (18% of 2.8)?? It's like when Barry Osama was going to let the "Bush Tax Cuts" Expire in 2013 which would have resulted in the lowest bracket going from 10% to 15%, a 50% increase, not 5% as the Marxist Stream Media endlessly reported.
BTW the lowest tax bracket is still 10%

[bernard11]

If Trump does what he says then inflation will surely increase, but 18% is, IMO, a wild overestimate.

In fact, I'm willing to give you odds if you'd like to back your opinion financially.

[Stephen Lathrop]

bernard11 — Your habit to condescend on economic topics has caused you repeatedly to misread what I write about them. You seem to assume that when anyone says something which appears on superficial inspection to be in the region of a common error, the common error must be what was actually intended. I expect that kind of critique all the time, but you seem smart enough to avoid it. Please try to read me carefully and literally, and assume I mean what I actually say.

I meant exactly what the math I literally described implied, a mere 18% increase in the now-existing rate of inflation, so far less than a full percentage point increase in the published rate. So let's have that bet, on condition that I win if there is an increase, and it amounts to anything as great or greater than I actually said. What odds are you willing to offer? Not so much?

[Life of Brian]

Of course, a super smart cookie like you must know that after a rather violent ratcheting down this past summer the CPI is already back on a significant upward trend (~12% up across October and November from its low point in September, with PolyMarket currently showing 98% odds of another bump upward in December).

Given that, I don't know that another 40-50bp regression to the mean over the course of 2025 would be particularly shocking, even in the absence of any major policy changes.

[Absaroka]

What you wrote was ambiguous; it can equally be parsed either way. It's a shame you can't run your stuff past a good editor to sharpen things up.

[David Nieporent]

I meant exactly what the math I literally described implied, a mere 18% increase in the now-existing rate of inflation, so far less than a full percentage point increase in the published rate.

So you basically asked about a change small enough to be a random fluctuation?

[Brett Bellmore]

Apparently he was actually that silly.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Nieporent, do you think when it is on the cusp of a close decision about interest rates, the Federal Reserve disregards as insignificant an inflation rate increase of nearly half a percentage point?

I thought otherwise. I was trying to posit exactly that kind of value, one which might change the outcome of a close decision.

I see that I could have put it more clearly.

[TwelveInchPianist]

I know the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a good friend of mine...

[bernard11]

Stephen,

I would expect a former journalist to make a strong effort to write unambiguously.

In fact, your comment was ambiguous, as it could be read either way. You could have written, "My guess, the inflation rate rises to about 3.2%." Clarity is important.

As to my habit of "condescending" on economic matters, I confess to trying to correct errors, because they are often the basis of poor arguments. Should I not try to challenge those arguments? You, ISTM, are not shy about criticizing bad history, even possibly "condescending" to those advancing it.

Do we not have equal rights?

[Stephen Lathrop]

bernard11 — If you decide to offer a polite critique of my comments about methods and standards to do academic historical research, you can count on me not to get prickly about it. I might learn something. Or you might, if I know of a well-founded rejoinder.

Please remember though, I have never been a professional historian, although a long time ago I did get graduate training in historical research methods. I had excellent teachers.

Since then, I have made continued reading on the subject a bit of an avocation. I would be delighted if anyone else turned up on this blog to take some of the load. Seems like with notions of originalism and textualism so often bruited, the "How do I know that," question ought to get more interest than it seems to attract.

[Martinned2]

In case you were wondering what reactionaries mean when they say that the US is a Judeo-Christian Nation:

On 3 January 2025, the Indonesian Constitutional Court issued a judgment concerning the rights of non-believers in Indonesia, which clearly reflects the thinking of the traditionalist-nationalist former Chief Justice Arief Hidayat, who sat on the bench. The Court essentially ruled that there is ‘no room’ for the freedom to be irreligious in Indonesia. Most notably, the Court has declared that the 1945 Indonesian Constitution is a ‘Godly Constitution’, and therefore all laws must always be ‘illuminated by divine enlightenment’ (sinar ketuhanan). (...) This judgment may even open the door for a ‘Godly values repugnancy test’, where laws may be declared unconstitutional if they are contrary to pan-religious values.

https://verfassungsblog.de/godly-constitution-and-divine-enlightenment/

[Michael P]

In case you wonder what Martinned means about being an economist:

If Earth stood still, it would have mid-day, mid-night, sun-up and sun-down as 4 corners. Each rotation of earth has 4 mid-days, 4 mid-nights, 4 sun-ups and 4 sun-downs.
The sixteen (16) space times demonstrates cube proof of 4 full days simultaneously on earth within one (1) rotation. The academia created 1 day greenwich time is bastardly queer and dooms future youth and nature to a hell.
Ignorance of 4 day harmonic cubic nature indicts humans as unfit to live on earth.

Otis Eugene Ray, timecube.com (sadly deceased)

[bernard11]

WTF is this?

[apedad]

Ground a bunch of meat yesterday and grilled burgers.

5 lbs meat to make 80/20: 3 lbs chuck (removed some of the hard fat), 1 lb+ sirloin steak, 12 oz pork salt (removed the rind)

Cut everything into strips and put in the freezer for about 20 minutes.

Then sent everything twice through the grinder.

It makes about 20 patties and I froze about half.

Yum.

[Brett Bellmore]

This was the starting point for my own hamburger recipe: The Best Burger Loaded with Umami

The usual modifications are substituting oyster sauce for fish sauce, using Lipton's onion soup mix in place of salt, and adding shredded cheddar directly to the meat.

Diced home cured bacon sometimes gets added, if I use a leaner cut of meat for the burger.

[Brett Bellmore]

I love oyster sauce, it goes in everything but deserts in our house. Actually, it's pretty good as a condiment, too...

We by it by the quart at an Oriential grocery run by an elderly Chinese gentleman who probably has a mogwai hidden in the back room.

[Jmaie]

Problem with adding raw bacon is that it then requires cooking to a higher temp than I prefer.

I've not tried oyster flavored sauce, but definitely will.

[ducksalad]

Congratulations on grinding your own. For me a grinder is too hard to clean and sooner or later someone's going to lose a finger tip.

But on the ratio we go in the other direction. Ground beef + ground lamb and fat content high enough that some people will get a broken patty.

[Brett Bellmore]

I've got a meat grinder Kitchenaid attachment, and you'd really have to work at it to lose a finger; The blade is way down at the bottom of a feed hole. And it actually cleans up quite easily.

I've also got a meat slicer, and for THAT, you'd have a valid complaint: I usually spend more time cleaning it than using it, and the cleaning process is unavoidably done really close to a razor sharp blade. Which reminds me, we need to put that thing on craigslist; Even making my own bacon, we just didn't end up using it often enough to justify the expense.

[apedad]

Agree on the safety.

I have this type and the only way you could cut a finger is if you vigorously tried; the cutting pieces aren't really that sharp either.

https://www.cabelas.com/shop/en/cabelas-deluxe-meat-grinder

And clean up is easy too.

[Brett Bellmore]

Oh, the sharpness of the screw hardly matters, it's just there to drive the meat into the screen. But I expect it's got enough torque to take a finger off, if you could reach it with a finger.

Most people probably couldn't.

Anyway, all this reminds me that my Kitchenaid is due to have its grease replaced. I've got the grease, I just need to set aside the time to do it.

[bernard11]

Kitchenaid mixers are a great product.

Mine is about 35 years old and just keeps working.

[Brett Bellmore]

I could wish that the accessory mount were just a smidge better designed. But aside from that, yeah, it's a rock solid product. Mine's going on 30 years now.

[Mr. Bumble]

Not so sure that applies to the newer ones.
Kitchenaid was originally Hobart which built their products like they did their commercial machines. I'm still running a 42 year old Kitchenaid dishwasher but I doubt any of their newer products would last as long.

[Brett Bellmore]

The only Kitchenaid product I've any experience with is the stand mixer, which I got as a wedding gift.

[Stephen Lathrop]

That thing is an obvious update of a now-antique tool I grew up with, which you can find pictures of if you google, "Vintage Meat Grinder." Wish I still had it. Worked great. Easy to use, easy to clean, sturdy as all get-out, made to last forever, not dangerous at all. Hand cranked.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, my mom had one, wish I still had it.

[Mr. Bumble]

You never had to grind poppy seed in one of them.

[Brett Bellmore]

That's a job for a bur grinder, not a meat grinder.

[hobie]

Looks like despite all his efforts and the vast MAGA support networks, Rudy may end up being the only coup conspirator to end up in prison.

Rudy should give you hayseeds pause because he is the perfect mirror to all you MAGA. A smart, accomplished lawyer who now lies as he breathes, continues to believe every lie fed to him and cannot distinguish the truth from fantasy.

I don't necessarily blame him, though. Somehow, the daily drip-drip conversion therapy of conservative thought has proven very powerful. You hillbillies are constantly being lied to, they admit they are lying to you, you know you are being lied to, but you believe regardless

Fox News: ““We acknowledge the Court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false.” 
Newsmax [settling with Smartmatic]: ““no evidence has been offered that Dominion or Smartmatic used software or reprogrammed software that manipulated votes in the 2020 election.”
Sydney Powell: “...no reasonable person would conclude that the [my] statements were truly statements of fact”
Alex Jones: The Sandy Hook massacre was “100% real” but “They [the media] won't let me take it back."
Rudy Giulliani: "to the extent the statements were statements of fact and otherwise actionable, such actionable factual statements were false."
Wisconsin fake electors: our actions were “part of an attempt to improperly overturn the 2020 presidential election results.”
Rush Limbaugh: 'I'm just a harmless little fuzzball'
Tucker: 'Just asking questions'

[Frank Drackman]

Seriously Hobie-stank, don't you have a butthole to be penetrating? Rush Limbo's been dead 5 years, Tucker's in Hungary, and you're fixated on Rudy the G? Not to long ago you were all excited that "45/47" was going to jail, how'd that work out for ya?
Yes, I'm "Amurica's neediest Veteran" I can read you like a Book, a dirty pornographic one.

Frank

[Malika]

You can read?
I assumed from How You Write that
you could not(!

[Bwaaah]

That was such a great insult! And at Frank Drackman!

You should tell your friends about this one. They'll be all WOW! You said *that*?

[Swede425]

Scared of what the results will probably be?
Just cancel the election!
The Russians are interfering!
Romania looks like a test case for the rest of Europe when the powers that be fear the results.
Look for Great Britain and others (Hi, Germany!) to use Elon Musk as an excuse to cancel/indefinitely postpone elections that actual democracy would result in change the statists don't like.

[Martinned2]

O wow, that's a whole new level of ignorance. What's that old saw again? "The internet doesn't make people stupider, it just makes their stupidity more visible to others." I don't know that that's quite right, but this comment is certainly an example of that effect in action.

[Frank Drackman]

Don't be so hard on yourself, we love watching your visible stupidity.

[Swede425]

Thank you for addressing what was incorrect in my post.
While you're not doing that, perhaps you could also ignore Spain and France both accusing Musk of election interference.
You know, because he said things that are true.

[Martinned2]

Elon Musk mostly says things are not true, which is indeed a widely established form of election interference. The common term is "misinformation campaign", and Musk has bought himself a $44bn bullhorn that he uses for exactly that.

[Swede425]

Musk is roundly reviled by the European left for challenging their bullshit. Pointing out Muslim rape gangs in the UK and supporting Germany's AfD make him a target for European weaklings.
Dutch van der Stupid is the living embodiment of the "This is fine" meme.

[Swede425]

Everybody's favorite European scoldy grandma, Thierry Breton, was also all "We don't like an election result? Fuck it, we'll just nullify it".

“The dark night of fascism is always descending in the United States and yet lands only in Europe.”
― Tom Wolfe

[Martinned2]

What did Breton do that you don't like?

[Martinned2]

I just saw a reference on Marginal Revolution to a tweet with an unsourced quote attributed to Breton about Romania. Must be a coincidence.

[Malika]

"Just cancel the election!"
This is a Trump supporter. lol

[Swede425]

Oh, no!
Was there a canceled election somewhere that I should be aware of?
I mean, other than in Romania?

[Ska]

Well, there is Ukr... oh.

[Malika]

This poor idiot! lol

"Trump and his allies encouraged state officials to throw out ballots they thought were not legally cast, challenge vote-certification processes, and overturn certified election results.[104][105][106]"

[Swede425]

Oh.
So they challenged some votes?
That they thought were not legally cast?
In an election?
That wasn't canceled?
There's an idiot here, alright, and he's standing in your mirror.

[not guilty]

In the Eleventh Circuit appeal of Judge Aileen Cannon's batshit crazy injunction regarding release of the Special Counsel report, the government on Saturday filed an emergency motion for summary reversal. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25484949/4-usa-emergency-for-summary-reversal.pdf

Given that Donald Trump will never permit Waltine Nauta and Carlos DeOliveira to stand trial no matter what the outcome of the appeal, perhaps President Biden should pardon the two shlubs so that Merrick Garland can release both volumes of the Special Counsel report.

As Louis Brandeis said, sunlight is the best of disinfectants.

[Mr. Bumble]

What's the "emergency"?

[John F. Carr]

Defendants declared an emergency first:

On January 6, defendants Nauta and De Oliveira filed an emergency motion in the district court seeking to enjoin the Special Counsel from transmitting the Final Report to the Attorney General and the Attorney General from releasing any portion of the Final Report. Dkt. 679. President-elect Trump filed a motion to intervene in the proceeding to support the remaining defendants’ emergency motion. Dkt. 681. The morning of January 7, defendants Nauta and De Oliveira sought similar emergency relief from this Court by filing a motion on the docket for the United States’ appeal from the dismissal order, Case No. 24-12311.

[Riva]

If sunlight is the best of disinfectants, then you’ll really love the Trump administration’s investigations into Biden’s lawfare abuses.

[Zarniwoop]

I'm sure Trump will pursue Biden with the same tenacity, zeal, effectiveness, and degree of ultimate success that we saw in the prosecution of Hillary Clinton.

[Riva]

If you say so, but I referred to an investigation, not a prosecution. First and foremost, the corrupt weaponization of the law needs to be fully exposed, then reforms and accountability.

[Zarniwoop]

So? I'm sure we'll see the exact same tenacity, zeal, etc. to "investigate Biden's lawfare" that he showed in prosecuting HRC, if that makes it clearer for you.

Trump is a salesman. For all his faults, no one denies that he's skilled in that department. He sold the rubes a bill of goods in 2016 with "Lock her up!" and he sold the rubes a bill of goods in 2024 with claims of lawfare and investigating Biden.

And here you are in 2025, fapping away to revenge fantasies Trump has already forgotten about. The salesman made the sale, and now he doesn't have to care about the promises you think he made.

[Riva]

Rant all you want. Exposing the lawfare abuses and holding responsible parties accountable is not revenge, it’s justice.

[Zarniwoop]

Do you still think Trump is going to "lock her up", too? Or are you just fapping hard to your hopes about his most recent sales pitch?

I'm putting down a marker that Trump will drop attention to Biden, exactly the same way that he let "lock her up" drop.

He sold the deal, you slurped it up, and he's not gonna deliver. This isn't a rant, it's a prediction.

But tell us your prediction, bookmark this, and we'll see who's right in a few years.

[not guilty]

Judge Cannon continues to act in a lawless manner. Today she entered another purported order regarding disclosure of the Special Counsel report in United States v. Waltine Nauta and Carlos DeOliveira, https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.697.0_2.pdf , despite the pendency of that case before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals since filing of the notice of appeal on July 17, 2024. She appears to be just making up shit as she goes along.

"[A] federal district court and a federal court of appeals should not attempt to assert jurisdiction over a case simultaneously. The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance — it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal." Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982). As the Eleventh Circuit has long recognized, "a district court generally is without jurisdiction to rule in a case that is on appeal"—even after the court has rendered a decision—"until the mandate has issued." Zaklama v. Mt. Sinai Medical Center, 906 F.2d 645, 649 (1990).

[Michael P]

Anakin: Under the leadership of Karen Bass, you will no longer read that the LAFD looks like it did in the 1960s.
Padme: That's a good thing, right?
Anakin:
Padme: That's a good thing, right?

https://freebeacon.com/california/two-months-before-deadly-blazes-la-fire-chief-said-she-needed-more-firefighters-then-karen-basss-admin-scrubbed-the-memo/

[Malika]

But she's an unreliable DEI hire, right?

[Michael P]

Whoosh! https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/for-the-better-right

Next time, you might want to read the link, which points out that ... you won't read that the LAFD looks the same as in the 1960s because Karen Bass (or someone in her office) deleted the report that says it does.

[Malika]

You poor goof, you said the LA fire chief was an incompetent DEI hire! Now you're relying on her memo.

[hobie]

They never know what they believe in...just whatever can antagonize in a comment thread

[Michael P]

I don't know what you have been smoking, but you should stop. You are hallucinating.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Again, Whoosh!

[MoreCurious]

Hey Michael! Earlier you remarked that three lesbians run the L.A. Fire Department. Would now be a convenient time for you to explain why you think it matters what the genders and sexual orientation of the leaders of the department are?

[DixieTune]

Biden is going out of his way to alienate everyone who is not far-left.

Why? What's in it for him?

[Frank Drackman]

A State Funeral like Jimmuh Cartuh just had

[Brett Bellmore]

Song At Funeral Comforts Everyone By Telling Them There's No Heaven, Religion Is A Lie, And Everything Is Ultimately Meaningless

"WASHINGTON, D.C. — Mourners who had gathered at the National Cathedral on Thursday to say goodbye to former President Jimmy Carter came away comforted after Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood sang a song about how there's no heaven, religion is a lie, and everything is ultimately meaningless.

The song, "Imagine" by John Lennon, known for its pleasant melody and nihilistic lyrics, is routinely played in Times Square on New Year's Eve as an appeal to world peace in a time of crisis, or to celebrate another year of debauchery, one of the two. Experts described the song as most suitable for use at a funeral, however, because the comforting lyrics remind people what really matters: absolutely nothing.

"I guess nothing matters and Jimmy Carter is gone forever," said one attendee. "Such a comforting thought.""

[Malika]

Lol. This is especially idiotic with, say, Reagan playing "Born in the USA."

[Noscitur a sociis]

I mean, it is a terrible song, and it does seem like a bit of an odd choice for a religious service.

[Drewski]

It's only an odd decision if you don't know it was Carter's favorite song by a long stretch. He went out of his way to see it performed in different countries. It's okay for a funeral to be about the dead guy!

[not guilty]

I recall reading decades ago that Jimmy Carter was also fond of "Up Against the Wall Redneck Mother," written by Jerry Jeff Walker and performed by the Charlie Daniels Band.

[David Nieporent]

Lots of people (reportedly) play "Every Breath You Take" at weddings, apparently having listened to none of the lyrics.

[Brett Bellmore]

The Macarena, too.

[Zarniwoop]

A bit weird, but it's still funny all these years later. At one point circa 1996-97 I was dating one of triplets, and one of the other triplets got married to her guy. The 3 of them did a pretty-decently choreographed Macarena dance during the after-wedding party, in pretty slinky matching sequin dresses.

In retrospect, they may not have been thinking about the lyrical content.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Overall, he seems to be only alienating those far right and far left (on a few issues). BTW, "On Wednesday, January 15 at 8:00 PM, the President will deliver a Farewell Address to the nation from the Oval Office."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2025/01/10/president-joe-biden-to-deliver-farewell-address-to-the-nation/

[DixieTune]

No. He extended tons of migrants for another 18 months, he's canceling more student debt, his commutation of 37 death sentences was very unpopular.

Again, why is he doing this?

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Unpopular to members of the right, perhaps, but the general public did not find canceling student debt problematic.

The general public is supportive but very wary of the death penalty. He didn't even commute all the sentences. To life without parole. Not something that causes that much attention generally.

He also supported a strict border bill & so forth. The "tons" bit is spin. As a whole, a short-term extension on the way out with Trump coming in is only going to especially upset people on the right.

[Absaroka]

"Unpopular to members of the right, perhaps, but the general public did not find canceling student debt problematic."

I think 'popular on the left' might be more accurate. 'All adults' disapprove 40 to 30%. Independents 28:18.

[Bwaaah]

You should try to see "general public" sentiment as it really is (outside whatever subpopulation you may be imagining) and not as you wish it were. Your deafness to the sentiments of the general public does not help your policy analysis, and it certainly won't help your preferred candidates to win elections.

[ThePublius]

Elon Musk is restoring communications to the Pacific Palisades and other areas via Starlink, and also delivering food and water. It seems officials in CA had no plan regarding emergency communications or restoring communications.

"NOW: MASSIVE convoy of Tesla Cybertrucks rolling down Pacific Coast Highway as
@ElonMusk
meets with Los Angeles firefighters

From speaking with these first responders, it’s clear morale is MUCH higher now that they’re being reconnected with Starlink

Practically all cell networks are still out all around the Pacific Palisades area."

https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1878672162770608617?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1878673908976820523%7Ctwgr%5Ea37b2a9b541a662516d8c0df6c921860677cf228%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Finstapundit.com%2F695835%2F

[Absaroka]

Good for him.

ISTM that FEMA, or the phone companies, or Waffle House ought to have some portable cell towers - a mast you can raise, a generator, and a fuel tank on a flatbed, so you could roll it to a convenient high spot and be on the air. Kinda surprised they don't, for e.g. big sporting events or other random outages??

[ThePublius]

Well, if they do they apparently haven't deployed them, and they wouldn't be 1/100th as effective as Starlink. FEMA and other emergency response organizations should have Starlink terminals!

[Martinned2]

I'm sure they will by the end of the year. But whether the taxpayer is going to get good value for money is another question, and one that Trumpists will suddenly no longer care about, I'd wager.

[ThePublius]

You know Martin, your constant negativity and this "Trumpist" stuff is tiring.

[Martinned2]

I refer you to the discussion upthread. In the absence of another term, "Trumpist" is my term for the faction within the GOP/GOP electorate who positively support Donald Trump, as opposed to voting for him as the lesser evil compared to the Democratic candidate. Trumpists are a group that, in a different electoral system, would form a distinct party similar to Le Pen's party in France or Reform in the UK. It's not meant pejoratively, it's just meant to recognise that equating Trump with the GOP would be a mistake.

[David Nieporent]

In the absence of another term,

"MAGA"

[Don Nico]

I think that explanation is fair, just like Peronista.

[Zarniwoop]

I concur, at least if it's used clearly and consistently.

[Michael P]

Let's compare that prediction to past behavior. Is Starlink overcharging the US, Ukraine or others for service in Ukraine?

[Absaroka]

Indeed they should. But cell towers would have the advantage of letting people use cell phones. Starlink doesn't do that unless you are within wifi range.

(n.b. there are plans afoot to have starlink sats do direct-to-phone cell service, which might be a game changer, at least in rural areas. Dunno about bandwidth in densely populated areas, relative to actual towers)

[ThePublius]

Direct to cell text is here, voice is coming:

https://api.starlink.com/public-files/DIRECT_TO_CELL_FIRST_TEXT_UPDATE.pdf

[Absaroka]

It's kind of here; they opened a beta test a few weeks ago. It won't be a direct replacement for towers until supported by more carriers, and out of beta.

We hope to get on board, we spend a lot of time in the backcountry without cell service, and the little satellite messenger dohickeys are a poor substitute for a real cell signal. I dunno, though, if it is going to replace towers in a metro area. If there are X satellites visible and each can support Y calls, X*Y might be a lot less than the typical number of calls in a metro area served by numerous towers. Or not, just don't know.

[Brett Bellmore]

It cannot, in fact, replace cell towers in metro areas. The required bandwidth per square kilometer is far too high.

In principle they could pile on enough satellites to do it, but that would be terribly inefficient. It just doesn't make technical sense to supply dense areas with service from orbit.

[Dr. Ed 2]

my cellphone is VOip with a noticeable delay.

[ThePublius]

"Starlink doesn't do that unless you are within wifi range."

Just so I understand this, within WiFi range of the Starlink terminal? That would actually serve firefighting crews well, it seems to me. In any event it''s better than the nothing Newsom and Bass, et.al., are doing in this regard.

[Commenter_XY]

I would not hold my breath waiting for CA officials to thank Elon Musk for actually doing something useful, to help CA first responders when they need it the most.

[Frank Drackman]

So Parkinsonian Joe's going to do one last address from the Oval Orifice,
have to be pretty good to top
“Lincoln Riley, an innocent young woman who was killed by an illegal – that’s right. But how many of thousands of people are being killed by legals?"
and that was back when Joe was "The best he's ever been" unfortunately, that was accurate.

Frank

[Martinned2]

I think this sort of research is interesting, but I accept that that might be a minority opinion:

The Reasons Highest Courts Give: England vs. Germany, 1880-1889 vs. 2007-2016

Abstract: We quantitatively analyze the use of legal authorities (cases, statutes, legal literature) in eighty representative opinions of the English and German apex courts in contract cases in the years 1880-1889 and 2007-2016. We find differences only in degree not kind even in the 1880s, yet no subsequent convergence. Most opinions of the Reichsgericht already cited precedent in the 1880s, albeit less than the House of Lords, which in turn cited fewer statutes. By the 2000s, the German judges cited precedent as frequently as the English. However, the Germans did and do engage less closely with precedent than the English. Moreover, a new gap has developed with respect to the use of scholarly literature, which only the Bundesgerichtshof engages extensively.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5001305

[Moderation4ever]

I have a question for some of those versed in financial law. I have been doing some work with rollover of tax-free accounts and have noticed that when transferring between different institutions and different financial account types, the transaction is made by check. The institution or account is closed a check cut, you take the check to a new institution or new account type. In an age when so many of my financial transactions are made by direct electronic transfer, this seems inefficient. Does anyone know the reason why?

[Commenter_XY]

Rollover execution varies by plan. You need to talk to your plan administrator. Some plans allow for a trustee to trustee transfer (much preferred).

[Jerry B.]

“It’s the way we’ve always done it “?

[Ska]

That seems like a choice by the bank for whatever reason. I did a bunch myself this year and it was all done by electronic transfers - and that's excluding assets which were directly transferred in-kind.

[bernard11]

I don't know, and agree it's annoying.

I made some Qualified Charitable Distributions from an IRA last year, and my broker - a major firm - insisted on sending me a check and having me mail it on to the recipient, rather than doing a direct transfer out of my account. Why do they do that? PITA.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Good to see there was at least one NFL playoff game that was competitive on both sides until the end. Some games had that for a half or so.

Commanders are a fun team to root for especially now that the team does not have a racist name, and the Giants are so horrible that it's okay another team in that division wins.

[Riva]

So, you would object if I hummed a few bars of "Hail to the Redskins"?

[Malika]

Would have liked to see Baker get that win, he really wanted it.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I suppose people on the Commanders also really wanted the win.

I wouldn't have minded if Tampa won. I like Baker too. I found those "At Home With Baker Mayfield" ads he used to do amusing.

[Riva]

If a dickwad like you supported Tampa Bay, how could they not lose?

[David Nieporent]

"Dickwad"? Not only is it a bot, but it's a bot programmed with input from eighth graders.

[Riva]

Writes the infantile troll inserting himself into a comment thread with yet another insulting childish insult. Some irony that I’m sure escapes you crazy Dave. Are you this inept in all aspects of your crazy life?

[Mr. Bumble]

That should have been "pompous dickwad".

[ThePublius]

Liawatha speaks with fork-ed tongue.

Despite saying in solicitations for funds to help victims of the California wildfires, Warren and other dems are linking to ActBlue, who skim 4% for supposed administrative costs and also insist on you providing your email address when you donate.

Democratic grifters and liars using this channel include Liz Warren, Gov. Newsom via Pod Save America, and others.

"When both [charitable] organizations [Los Angeles County Fire Department Foundation and United Way of Greater Los Angeles] have their own independent donation portals, there’s no reason to give ActBlue, Democrat politicians, or left-wing organizations the benefit of the doubt that everything is kosher."

What a bunch of cynical, opportunistic grifters!

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/01/12/it-looks-like-democrats-and-left-wing-groups-profiting-from-wildfire-donations-via-actblue-n4935905

[Malika]

Wow, I haven't seen a pjmedia source here since Bumble used them to "show" there was no underage Indiana rape victim who had to travel outside the state for an abortion.

[Mr. Bumble]

Sorry bto disappoint. Try this one on for size:
https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/01/12/newsom-slashed-100m-in-fire-prevention-funds-ahead-of-deadly-wildfires-n4935902

" An analysis of California's 2024 Budget Bill, which covers its budget for the 2024-25 fiscal year, by the state's Legislative Analyst's Office concluded it slashed $101 million from seven "wildfire and forest resilience" programs."

[apedad]

You mean after the CAL FIRE budget doubled from $2 billion in 2018-19 to $3.8 billion in 2024-25, whilst the department's personnel went from 5,829 to 10,741 over the same period, right?

[Mr. Bumble]

When is a cut not a cut?
In light of what is currently occurring does this ("...it slashed $101 million from seven "wildfire and forest resilience" programs.") make sense?

[Frank Drackman]

They’re obviously not spending enough!

[David Nieporent]

I assume the phrase "cynical, opportunistic grifters" was intended to refer to PJ Media, since they're lying for no real reason at all except attention for themselves. (Also, are you people completely unaware of how credit cards work? If you donate money directly to a charity, the credit card companies charge a processing fee; all the money doesn't go to the charity.)

[ThePublius]

That's so stupid, David. ActBlue is not a credit card processing bureau, they are taking 4% and adding your email to their database IN ADDITION to any card processing fees you encounter.

Why are Warren, Pod Save America, et.al., directing charitable donations through a political action committee when one can contribute directly to the charity?

Get a brain, or a conscience.

[David Nieporent]

That's so stupid, David. ActBlue is not a credit card processing bureau, they are taking 4% and adding your email to their database IN ADDITION to any card processing fees you encounter.

Um, no. You don't pay card processing fees in the first place; the 'merchant' does. Have you ever used a credit card?

Why are Warren, Pod Save America, et.al., directing charitable donations through a political action committee when one can contribute directly to the charity?

ActBlue — that is, Acblue Civics Inc. — is a PAC. ActBlue Charities Inc. is not. ActBlue Charities is a 501(c)(3) that facilitates giving to charitable organizations.

I have never used either flavor of ActBlue, but for my own year-end charitable contributions, I make all of mine through a charitable aggregator. (I can't remember the name off the top of my head, because my wife usually does it for us, but it's one with no political valence of any sort.) It's true that we could make the same gifts to individual charities, but it's much easier and more convenient to use one website and do it in one fell swoop, leaving the website to actually distribute the funds separately to each charity.

[Mr. Bumble]

"Um, no. You don't pay card processing fees in the first place; the 'merchant' does. Have you ever used a credit card? "
That's one of the dumber things you've said.

[Zarniwoop]

And this is a typical sealion response from Mr. Bumble. Weak.

[Bwaaah]

Bumble's point must've gone over your head.

[Bwaaah]

Thank god we don't have to pay for the costs of doing business. Businesses pay for that.

Behold the head-in-the-sand view of economics.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"ActBlue — that is, Acblue Civics Inc. — is a PAC. ActBlue Charities Inc. is not."

That's not what ActBlue's website says.

[David Nieporent]

? Yes it is.

[TwelveInchPianist]

?
"ActBlue is a nonprofit political action committee..."
"ActBlue Civics is the arm of the ActBlue family that helps left/liberal 501(c)(4)s build grassroots movements..."
"AB Charities, the newest arm of the ActBlue family, helps 501(c)(3) charities"

It says that ActBlue is a PAC, and ActBlue Civics and ActBlue Charities are arms of ActBlue.

[David Nieporent]

I don't know how you think that's inconsistent with what i said.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Sigh. You said: "ActBlue — that is, Acblue Civics Inc. — is a PAC. ActBlue Charities Inc. is not."

But according to the website, ActBlue is a PAC, and ActBlue Civics and ActBlue Charities are both arms of ActBlue. It doesn't say ActBlue Charities is more or less of a PAC than ActBlue Civics, it implies they are both under the unbrella of ActBlue, the PAC.

[David Nieporent]

1) "Arm" is not a legal term, and it doesn't say what you claim anyway. What it says is that those things are "arms of the ActBlue family." You're trying to read it as "subsidiary," but that's not the same thing.

2) And we know that because it says that ActBlue Charities is "a registered 501(c)(3)". 501(c)(3)s, by definition, are not PACs.

[Bwaaah]

Phew! For a second there, I though ActBlue Charities' purpose was to support the Democratic party.

You always inform, David, often in the most uselessly pedantic of ways.

[ThePublius]

Tell me how PJ Media is lying here. Just one concrete example.

[Malika]

I was pointing out a past incident of their lying. It's funny you can't see that, and undermines your "point."

[Mr. Bumble]

...and the reason for pointing that out was?

[ThePublius]

That's pretty stupid.

[Commenter_XY]

I hope Team Libertarian never, ever raises money in this fashion. It is unseemly.

[Mr. Bumble]

Tick-tock, tick-tock; six days until the Tic Tok deadline. Any predictions?

[apedad]

The ban goes in effect.

Tic-Tockers move to a different social media.

Life goes on.

[ducksalad]

Another likely possibility: Ban goes into effect but Tik Tok and the network providers say they are working on technical issues and it will take some time to implement geographical limits in a safe and orderly fashion. That's mostly BS but it eats up time (like months) before judges put people in jail or issue warrants to seize this and that server. Meanwhile, no impact on users.

Meanwhile DJT takes office and negotiations begin. A deal is struck where DJT can claim we "won bigly from the Chinese", they still own it, Americans still use it, and everybody is just fine.

[apedad]

Justices Cement Biden's $15 Federal Contractor Wage Rule for Now

Supreme Court Rejects New Bid to Let President Fire Agency Heads

High Court Passes on Challenge to Maryland Handgun License Law

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/

What's going on at the Supreme Court?!?

[Brett Bellmore]

The Court is typically going to pass on any gun case they can easily avoid; You don't have 5 Justices who actually care about gun rights. You have 6 justices who are willing to uphold them to a limited extent if they can't wriggle out of having to take the case.

And after Rahimi, I doubt you'll get cert on any gun case where the decision isn't open and shut; If you WERE a pro-gun Justice, you'd want to keep marginal cases from the Court, where they'd establish bad precedents.

[not guilty]

"The Court is typically going to pass on any gun case they can easily avoid; You don't have 5 Justices who actually care about gun rights. You have 6 justices who are willing to uphold them to a limited extent if they can't wriggle out of having to take the case."

Uh, Brett, six justices can defeat any cert petition until the cows come home.

[Brett Bellmore]

While in theory the Court can refuse any case it wants, even on its mandatory docket, in practice some cases are harder to refuse than others.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

They refuse a lot of cases but as a recent post there suggested the conservatives as a whole do not seem to want to upend independent agencies quite yet.

As to guns, they have ignored a range of gun cases, though 3-4 are more interested than the others to take them. They are okay with the situation right now where the lower courts regularly strike down gun regulation laws but only so much.

[David Nieporent]

Um, nothing is "going on" other than that the Supreme Court is managing its docket as it always does. SCOTUS gets roughly 10,000 cert petitions every year, and grants roughly 100. It does not generally grant petitions based on "What bug does MAGA have up its ass today?"

If you wander around saying, "I don't like the outcome in this particular case; there must be something nefarious going on if SCOTUS didn't take it up," you're going to be confused and sorely disappointed quite frequently.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd be a lot more impressed with the "just managing their docket as it always does" argument if they weren't managing their docket to decide ever fewer cases while circuit splits fester.

Looking Back to Make Sense of the Court’s (Relatively) Light Workload

[JoeFromtheBronx]

President Biden Awards Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction to His Holiness Pope Francis

The criteria are:

The Medal may be awarded by the President as provided in this order to any person who has made an especially meritorious contribution to (1) the security or national interests of the United States, or (2) world peace, or (3) cultural or other significant public or private endeavors.

He is not the first pope to receive the award. LBJ granted it to Pope John XXIII. George W. Bush granted it to Pope John Paul II with distinction.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2025/01/11/president-biden-awards-presidential-medal-of-freedom-with-distinction-to-his-holiness-pope-francis/

[Mr. Bumble]

What? No complaints about 1st Amendment violation?

[ducksalad]

If I thought Biden took his Catholicism seriously, then yes. But he doesn't, so no.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

There is no "First Amendment violation" here.

The First Amendment does not require skipping over religious figures when recognizing meritorious people in this fashion.

If anything, it might be problematic to single out religious persons by not recognizing them. So, e.g., it is not a problem to give the award to a clergyman such as Martin Luther King Jr.

The unfair potshot at Biden's faith doesn't add much.

[ThePublius]

"The unfair potshot at Biden's faith doesn't add much."

I don't think it's unfair. Biden brings it up all the time, flouts his supposed Catholic faith, yet says and does things that are decidedly un-Catholic.

[apedad]

Apparently the Pope (you know, the head of the Roman Catholic Church), doesn't see a problem with Biden.

[Bob from Ohio]

He doesn't se a problem with Hamas either.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Some people say that this Pope is actually Catholic.

[TwelveInchPianist]

But does he smell a problem?

[Malika]

See, death penalty, immigration, etc.,

TDS exhibited in Pubes.

[ThePublius]

How on earth is that TDS?

Anyway, for what it's worth, I'm not a big fan of Pope Francis, nor are many of my fellow Catholics. He has done and said some decidedly un-Catholic things, 'though I'm sure many will argue that if he does or says things they are, by definition Catholic acts and speech.

[Sarcastr0]

'many fellow Catholics' are pretty much a rump minority.

A new Pew Research Center survey finds that 75% of U.S. Catholics view Pope Francis favorably, down 8 percentage points since we last asked this question in 2021 and 15 points below his peak favorability rating, which was 90% in early 2015.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/04/12/majority-of-u-s-catholics-express-favorable-view-of-pope-francis/

[ThePublius]

Maybe it's a regional thing. Or a conservative/liberal thing. Or a political thing. But, it's a thing.

[Sarcastr0]

It is a political thing.

The Catholics in America that are caught on worldly things and party first are all no fans of Francis, if not outright sedevacantists.

[Brett Bellmore]

Enough liberals are Catholics that his actions wash out in the US. Not so much in the 2nd and 3rd world, of course.

[Sarcastr0]

I couldn't find any comparative worldwide stats on the Pope's popularity, Brett.

Any sources, or just vibing yet again?

[ThePublius]

Thinking about this, if 75% view him positively, that leaves 25% who don't; that's not insignificant.

What's a "rump minority?"

[Bob from Ohio]

"75% of U.S. Catholics "

Did he limit "many of my fellow Catholics" to Americans?

Why are you Catholic-splaining him anyways, Mr. Unitarian?

[Sarcastr0]

He sure seems to be reacting like he did, Bob.

Non-Catholics are allowed to have an opinion about Catholics.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I don't know what these "decidingly un-Catholic" things* are especially when a comment below argued Pope Francis himself often doesn't make the grade.

Biden taking his Catholicism seriously is somewhat subjective and involves things in "his heart" and other private stuff people around here cannot truly know. But, the comment was additionally gratuitous as a statement on the First Amendment.

==

* I'm sure people can cite certain things but "un-Catholic" is such an open-ended thing that it is hard to say.

[M L]

Are you concerned about how DEI hiring practices may impact fire departments? For example, whether discriminating based on sex to hire more women affects the ability to carry and rescue people?

Easy solution, according to LAFD's deputy chief - Just don't get yourself trapped in a fire.

https://nypost.com/2025/01/12/us-news/lafds-diversity-chief-sparks-fury-for-defending-dei-by-blaming-the-victim/

She earns $300K per year.

[Mr. Bumble]

Attention ng:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/breaking-judge-cannon-allows-release-jack-smiths-final/
Also:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/fani-willis-asks-georgia-supreme-court-put-her/

[not guilty]

Yes, I just addressed Judge Cannon's purported order upthread. A pdf of the order is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.697.0_2.pdf

Judge Loose Cannon was divested of jurisdiction in that case when the United States filed its notice of appeal on July 17, 2024. As I wrote last Wednesday, a purported order issued by a court with no jurisdiction is void and binds no one.

A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication, but may be entirely disregarded, or declared inoperative by any tribunal in which effect is sought to be given to it. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. 30A Am.Jur. Judgments '' 44, 45.

"A judgment which is void upon its face, and which requires only an inspection of the judgment roll to demonstrate its want of vitality, is a dead limb upon the judicial tree, which should be lopped off, if the power so to do exists." People v. Greene, 74 Cal. 400, 408 (Cal. 1887).

[Mr. Bumble]

So in English. Will the report be released or not?

[not guilty]

Volume 1, relative to the D.C. prosecution, will be released.

Volume 2 will likely depend on how quickly the Eleventh Circuit acts.

[David Nieporent]

I reiterate that the government has already said that it will not release Volume 2 (except to the chair/ranking member of the judiciary committees, who will only be able to review it in camera).

[Commenter_XY]

Not to worry, Rep Raskin's office will find a way to leak it.

[Sarcastr0]

Getting preemptively mad sure is convenient!

[RedheadedPharoh]

There wasn't any anger in that comment, you bootlicking buffoon.

[John F. Carr]

The Freedom of Information Act may get some of it out. The substance of the classified documents will remain secret.

[David Nieporent]

I doubt much, if any, of a Special Counsel's report would be subject to FOIA.

[not guilty]

Thank you for the link in the Fulton County matter. A pdf of the cert petition is here: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/2025-01-08-Petition-for-writ-of-certiori-WM.pdf

I may have more comment once I have read the petition.

[not guilty]

The petition for certiorari is quite a tour de force. It helps the State's position that there is a strong dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals.

[Bob from Ohio]

Keep hope alive!

[Frank Drackman]

In some random Googling “Immaculate Reception, 99 Luft Baloons, Columbo episode on cruise ship”, I happened upon some photos of Lizzie Warren in her early 20’s
Almost could be a 1974 Stevie Nicks, and probably just as annoying in person,

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Dumb" is only half a word...

[ThePublius]

I never do this, but I thought I'd share this fundraising appeal with you. It's charity. If you find this inappropriate here, or are offended in any way, please excuse me, and just skip this post.

I found this guy on Youtube due to my newfound interest in blacksmithing. He's an engaging guy, seems really nice, and he's certainly talented. His name is John Norwood and he operated the Old Hickory Forge in Marion, NC. Here's his youtube channel:

(link in reply)

Well, I was trying to communicate with him and then learned that his home and shop in Marion, NC were washed away in Hurricane Helene, which also took his fiancé. He was badly injured. He has no other source of income. He's an Army veteran.

Here's the Gofundme page:

https://www.gofundme.com/f/aid-trey-in-overcoming-hurricane-helenes-impact

Reading it brought tears to my eyes. I didn't donate a lot, but I gave what I could. I may donate more in the future.

I encourage all of you to consider donating, even just a token, if you are so moved.

Thank you.

[ThePublius]

Old Hickory Forge and John Norwood on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/@OldHickoryForge

[ThePublius]

Here's John on Season 6, Episode 17 of Forged in Fire:

https://play.history.com/shows/forged-in-fire/season-6/episode-17

[Don Nico]

It is disgraceful that pro-Hamas protesters in the US are applauding the destruction in the LA fires. But I did not expect any better from them.

[Commenter_XY]

They are cultural vandals and nihilists = pro-hamas protesters

[Dr. Ed 2]

I wouldn't be surprised to learn they lit them.

[hobie]

HAYSEED BLAME FOR NATURAL DISASTERS

Blue States
Maui fire - Local Democrat Obama appointee M. Kaleo Manuel (brown)
LA Fires - Local Democrat Karen Bass (black)

Red States
Texas Ice Storm Power Outage - Biden (white) plus Wind (green)
Ian - Biden
Helene - Biden

[hands clasped behind back while addressing jury in southern drawl] 'So ladies and gentlemen of the jurah. What we have hee-ah is that whenev-ah we have a natural disaster in a blue state, the local liberals ah to blame. But whenev-ah ina red state, them god-ferran guvn-ahs and may-ahs is blameless! I'm tellin' y'all, they is as innocent as a tarbaby in mammie's arms

[ThePublius]

What are you talking about? Democrats and liberals and progressives all over the place are blaming Trump for the California wildfires, including my esteemed Massachusetts Senator Markey, a.k.a., Mr. Frosty.

[hobie]

Oh really?! I'd like to read more about that

[ThePublius]

Start here:
https://nypost.com/2025/01/11/us-news/democrat-sen-ed-markey-warns-la-fires-are-preview-of-coming-atrocities-claims-trump-bought-off-by-big-oil/

[ThePublius]

And this:
https://ktla.com/news/washington-dc-bureau/political-leaders-point-blame-over-california-wildfires/

[hobie]

uh, Bro, this made my point. Thank you. The article just has Trump/Vance and republicans blaming California libs (always classy when people are suffering). Are you like Michael P? He slings reference articles which are always the opposite of his own assertions or are irrelevant. Perhaps you made a mistake and would like to retract your bullshit...because you look foolish here

[Jason Cavanaugh]

No, he's still doubling, or tripling, or something-down on his same bullshit from Friday.

Publius has no ability to critically think or comprehend basic sentences. It was explained very thoroughly that Trump is making a bad situation worse (because that's all that piece of shit ever does), but Publius' comprehension on the matter is approximately that of a retarded dog.

[RedheadedPharoh]

First of all, only idiot liberals blame man for weather. In fact they have a whole cult dedicated to it.

Secondly, people are rightly blaming Democrat governance and beliefs for the classic government response to a tragedy.

[John F. Carr]

A federal judge in Boston has ordered the white nationalist group Patriot Front to pay $2.7 million after its members attacked a black man in Boston. The case is in federal court because they forced plaintiff off the sidewalk on account of his race, which is legally equivalent to slavery. 42 USC 1985. The basis for the seven figure award is they then beat him up. It was a default judgment so plaintiff gets whatever he asks for that has a plausible basis in fact. There was evidence of $255,000 personal injury and lost income. The rest is emotional distress and punitive damages.

There are a couple unusual legal twists.

First, defendant Patriot Front was served by email and Telegram. The judge thought that fair under the circumstances. Whoever ran the group's social media account posted about the lawsuit. Somebody with the group had actual knowledge even if a paper summons was missing.

Second, Patriot Front is not a legal person. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b)(3)(A) allows a civil rights case to be brought against an unincorporated association that could not be sued in its own name in an ordinary case. So there is a large judgment against whatever "Patriot Front" is. Does Patriot Front have any money?

Plaintiff is represented by a team from Foley Hoag. I don't know if they are working for money or for justice. Plaintiffs' lawyers are entitled to attorney's fees if defendants have money.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67673346/murrell-v-patriot-front/

(There was also an individual defendant who was served in jail in Texas and did not respond. The judgment is against him too.)

[hobie]

Ah the leader of Patriot Front, Thomas Rousseau. In 2021 found civilly liable for defacing a statue of Arthur Ashe. Also said:

"[White people are] being relentlessly erased on all sides, by the Jew, by non-whites who hate us." Yeah...he's also Republican...as if that wasn't obvious

[Bwaaah]

You and Mr. Rousseau could live under the same bridge, on either side of the river. It'd be a shit bridge to cross, for everybody.

[David Nieporent]

Plaintiff is represented by a team from Foley Hoag. I don't know if they are working for money or for justice.

I have no firsthand knowledge of the specific situation, but that fact pattern screams pro bono. (But yes, if they can collect attorneys' fees, they'll get them.)

[RedheadedPharoh]

The FBI has plenty of secret budget dollars to pay any fines.

Don't worry about your govie boys, they'll still be able to get their $70,000 conference tables.

[Dr. Ed 2]

How can someone in jail appear in Boston?
Isn't there a "force majore" or something?

[John F. Carr]

If you are in jail you have a hard time participating a lawsuit. If you think you might be sued don't go to jail.

The summons served in jail did not have the address of plaintiff's counsel filled out in the space provided. I don't know if this omission would allow the defendant to set aside the default.

[Commenter_XY]

Does Mark Judge have a case?
https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/should-i-sue-the-washington-post/

[David Nieporent]

He might have a case against Ford, but i seems very unlikely based on that whiny column that he would have a case against the media. But… he doesn't have a case against anyone, because the statute of limitations has long expired.

[not guilty]

In the linked article Mr. Judge does not specify what factual statements he regards as false and defamatory. (The two are separate inquiries.) He doesn't provide enough information about himself to know whether he is or is not a public figure, which makes a huge difference in libel law. There is nothing to suggest that any reporter must have made the false publication with a "high degree of awareness of probable falsity," or must have "entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication." Harte-Hanks Communications v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657, 667 (1989).

He does not identify what he claims a reasonable reporter would have done that the WaPo reporters failed to do.

Any action based on publication in 2018 would now be time barred. Mr. Judge complains (again without specifying particular content) of something that Marty Baron wrote in 2023, after he was no longer affiliated with the Post. It is difficult to see how the Post could be vicariously liable for that.

Mr. Judge does not describe any items of economic or noneconomic damages. He does not explain how his personal or professional reputation has been harmed.

The tone of his kvetchfest suggests that Mr. Judge would not be a sympathetic plaintiff.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Meanwhile, the world's most fragile ego again displays his contempt for anyone who isn't himself.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-carter-flag-half-staff-mar-a-lago-c90e341b89615aef8817c6fc021a93b7

The bootlicking assclowns aren't far behind:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5082505-texas-governor-flags-raised-full-staff-trump-inauguration/

[Paladin_44]

I dunno - somehow this seem inevitable. Comes noon on the 20th the flag lowering edict will be rescinded (or so I think)...

[Jason Cavanaugh]

The sycophants continue to fall into line, openly defying Presidential authority.

https://apnews.com/article/flags-half-staff-trump-inauguration-johnson-a0c99a017e74b880df1c2eadfce25c28

[Dr. Ed 2]

See: https://theamericantribune.com/lawyer-up-trump-readies-another-major-legal-manuever-against-judge-merchan-on-january-20th-at-noon-theyre-going-to-become-the-hunted-watch/

Now if Merchan's daughter was using court information to help the Dems, this could get very interesting....

[not guilty]

It is amazing that that fool Mike Davis ever passed a bar exam. He blathers about prosecuting Justice Juan Merchan 18 U.S.C. § 241, which prohibits conspiring to violate federal constitutional or statutory rights. A few questions, if I may.

Who are the conspirators? What was/is the object of conspiracy? When was the conspiracy formed? Whose federal rights did the conspirators propose to violate? As to each such person, what federal rights were at issue? What was the manner and means of the conspiracy?

For purposes of United States v. Lanier, 520 U.S. 259 (1997), what precedent(s) would have given Justice Lanier and any co-conspirators fair warning that their conduct violated "clearly established" federal law?

[David Nieporent]

It is amazing that that fool Mike Davis ever passed a bar exam.

Many lawyers in MAGA's orbit are deeply stupid. But others are just viciously mendacious grifters. Davis is in the latter category. He knows that what he's saying is bullshit, but he doesn't care. His goal is to get attention for himself, either to win himself a job in Trumpland or just to entice gullible people to send money to his organizations that he uses to pay his salary.

[Mr. Bumble]

Now do Marc Elias.

[Commenter_XY]

Marc Elias handed PA (and the election) to Pres Trump. He successfully argued for a change in statutory interpretation, and Team Trump promptly took advantage.

[David Nieporent]

Marc Elias is an actual practicing lawyer, who makes money through representing actual clients in actual litigation.

[Mr. Bumble]

Marc Elias' only client is the Democrat party and their dodgy candidates. Even Perkins Cole cut him loose because of the shit law he practices.

[not guilty]

It seems no one is willing to tackle my questions about Justice Merchan and § 241.

Why am I unsurprised?

[RedheadedPharoh]

LA Fires were the DEI & Marxists time to shine and showcase what Democrat governance is all about!

lmao

[Kazinski]

Well I suppose this is slightly better than grooming and raping adolescent girls:

"England: Violent Muslim robbery gang who targeted victims on Grindr sentenced
Five Muslim men who targeted victims on Grindr to gay bash and rob them have been sentenced to between 12–17 years in prison at Birmingham Crown Court today.

Abubaker Alezawy, Demalji Hadza, Mohammed Sharif, Ali Hassan and Wasim Omar conspired and violently stole around £100,000 ($122,000 USD) from their gay victims in the Birmingham and Derby area in 2023 and 2024."

https://ngo.locals.com/post/6553644/england-violent-muslim-robbery-gang-who-targeted-victims-on-grindr-sentenced

[Sarcastr0]

So is your thing that Muslims are, writ large, rapists and gay bashers?

And your method is generalizing based on anecdotes?

If not, I'd be interested in what you're trying to do here.

[Kazinski]

Muslims are gay bashers.

Iran hangs homosexuals.

Isis threw them off buildings.

Here are the 71 countries Homosexuality is illegal:

Afghanistan*
Algeria*
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda

Bangladesh*
Barbados
Brunei*
Burundi

Cameroon+
Comoros*

Dominica

Egypt*
Eritrea+
Ethiopia+

Gambia+
Ghana+
Grenada
Guinea*
Guyana+
Indonesia*
Iran*
Jamaica
Malaysia*
Maldives*
Myanmar
Kenya+
Kiribati
Kuwait*
Liberia
Libya*
Lebanon*

Malawi
Mauritania*
Mauritius
Morocco*

Namibia
Nigeria+

Oman*

Pakistan*
Palestine*
Papua New Guinea

Qatar

Samoa
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Solomon Islands

Somalia*
South Sudan*
Sudan*
Sri Lanka
St Kitts and Nevis
St Lucia
St Vincent and the Grenadines
Syria*
Swaziland

Tanzania+
Togo
Tonga
Tunisia*
Turkmenistan*
Tuvalu
Uganda+
United Arab Emirates*
Uzbekistan*
Yemen*
Zambia
Zimbabwe

* Predominantly Islam
+ significant muslim population

You think as soon as someone immigrates all their values change, or their parents or Imams forget their values?

That's not how multiculturalism works.

[Sarcastr0]

I think Muslims are not a single group to be so generalized.

We went through all this bigoted nonsense after 9-11.

Are you bringing back that old canard that it's a Clash of Civilizations and The West needs to expel them before they reach critical mass?

[Kazinski]

There are only a handful of predominantly Muslim countries not on that list Turkey, Albania, and Bosnia, Iraq come to mind, no doubt you can name 2-3 others.

And I forgot the asterisk for Qatar, Senegal, and Saudi Arabia.

Its just absolutely ridiculous to deny clear facts, but certainly not unexpected. Its typical progressive mindset to ignore or deny inconvenient facts, maybe they will go away.

[Sarcastr0]

Clear facts.

Again, are you advocating the west expel all their Muslims?

[Brett Bellmore]

If we stop deliberately swelling their numbers, we might hope that they'll eventually adopt American values.

Let me ask you a hypothetical: Suppose there were a restoration of Thugee, that it became a major world religion. Or maybe Baal worship.

Publicly, adherents claimed that all that talk about human sacrifice was metaphor. But everybody who bothered looking noticed that every country that had a significant number of adherents in it suffered from a major rise in strangling, and those countries that were majority Thugee legalized human sacrifice. The Baal majority countries had furnaces going 24/7.

Is this something we'd be obligated to legally ignore? "Nothing to see here, move along!"?

We can care if somebody's a member of MS-13, because that's not a religion, but if they join Thugee, caring about that is off limits? Kind of like the way our government pretends that Scientology isn't a criminal conspiracy, because it calls itself a religion?

[Sarcastr0]

Look at the narrow things you are trying to analogize to a diverse and massive religion.

[Brett Bellmore]

Diverse and massive and practically every country they're a majority in is an awful place in ways that directly relate to their religious doctrine, because one of those doctrines is rejecting separation of church and state.

What do you want me to say? That there are sects of Islam that aren't as problematic? Sure, there are.

And there are sects of Islam that ARE problematic. And we're apparently constitutionally required to ignore that.

I'm asking: Just how bad does it have to get before we stop ignoring it? As a practical matter, can a doctrine of religious liberty be applied to a religion that genuinely preaches murder?

[Mr. Bumble]

Taken as a whole it is a murderous theocracy with world domination as it's goal.

[Sarcastr0]

You assert that Islam requires no separation between church and state. That’s absolutely not true. Some sects, sure. Not all.

And your correlation has plenty of historical conflating factors making your causal case unestablished.

And your pivot to acknowledging that Islam is not a monolith already shreds your thesis which is about Islam generally.

[Brett Bellmore]

And YOU assert that we should simply ignore that practically every majority Muslim country is a terrible place, and pretend that it's got nothing to do with the beliefs of the people who are in the majority.

[Sarcastr0]

You keep changing your scope of 'the people' so you can condemn all of Islam, but also acknowledge it's a sect-specific issue. You need to choose - blanked negative generalization about a religion [ie bigotry] or you can't sustain your thesis about Muslims. Or just be inconsistent; wouldn't be the first time!

And what is your goal with this outcome-oriented push? Is your desired upshot to ban the immigration of people from Islamic countries?

[ThePublius]

"Is your desired upshot to ban the immigration of people from Islamic countries?"

Well, given what's going on in England, France, Sweden...maybe that's a good idea until we figure out what's going on here.

Sure, it sounds bad, it's not a good look, but maybe it's the only practical step.

[Sarcastr0]

Nothing Muslim-wide is going on in any of those countries.

White nationalist pushed some confirmation bias and you got caught hook line and sinker.

[Absaroka]

"Nothing Muslim-wide is going on in any of those countries."

'Any' is such a strong word. What's your view of Afghanistan? Not really Muslim?

They seem to be banning windows, lest someone look in and see a woman. I mean, you can assert they aren't really true Muslims, but I wouldn't recommend saying that to their face in Kabul.

[Sarcastr0]

Absaroka, ThePublius said 'England, France, Sweden.'

[Absaroka]

"ThePublius said 'England, France, Sweden."

Ah...at this depth of threading, it's hard to tell who is responding to what, unless people quote what they are responding to. I thought you were referring to the giant list of countries above.

[Commenter_XY]

Kaz, it IS Sarcastr0. What did you reasonably expect?

[Sarcastr0]

Oh hey another empty insult from you.

[Bwaaah]

Stupid returns. Incessant compulsive counter positioning.

[Jmaie]

Washington State is facing a budget deficit of between $7B-$16B, depending on who you ask. There are plans to increase revenue but it is widely understood by the Democratic majorities in both houses that painful cuts in services will need to be made. Bucking the trend, one legislator is planning to introduce legislation providing unemployment benefits to those not otherwise eligible due to their immigration status.

Reasonable?

[Kazinski]

I've seen a lot of comments and blaming government for the LA fires, both for allowing them to happen, and not being able to rapidly put them out.

But I have to say as a California native that has lived in both Northern and Southern California from Eureka to Santa Barbara that they are likely inevitable.

California has a climate that generally only rains between October and May, with a fairly mild winter.

And the hills on the coastal ranges are generally pretty steep, which makes access difficult even where there are roads.

So its a simple fact if you allow building on the hills, when its dry and especially when there are high winds fires are difficult if not impossible to fight, even with water in the hydrants.

When the wind is blowing 50 miles an hour whatever you are spraying water on you maybe able to keep from burning but the fire will just skip over that structure and set fire to the tree or building on the other side at set that on fire. Not to mention its almost impossible to get within 50 yards of a wild fire before getting overwhelmed by the heat and smoke, and even with protecive clothing it may allow you closer for up to 10 minutes, but no more.

As for clearing out the brush and dry grass, thats a natural part of the environment, and its what keeps mud slides and floods from happening when there are heavy rains which may only happen only 5-10 years in SoCal but can also cause significant devastation on bare hillsides.

Sure clearing out the undergrowth in forests can help, but Pacific Palisades is not in a forest, the trees don't really get higher than 20', and dry grass is as much of the problem as the trees are.

And it has nothing to do with climate change, as this graph of LA rainfall shows.

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1877508376621457651?t=AD3OkW0520BYC8FOv7X2Ig&s=19

[santamonica811]

Probably the most concise and accurate summary of the situation/problem LA is facing.

[BrotherMovesOn]

Yes. Very well said. While not a native or long time resident like you, I enjoyed living there for a short but very enjoyable time.
Beautiful and extreme environments always come with risks.

[Commenter_XY]

Hope you are doing Ok, sm811.

[dwb68]

"China considering proposal to sell tiktok to X"

[Sarcastr0]

No surer way to kill it with the Zoomers.

[dwb68]

Nah. They are on it because of dance videos and content.

[Kazinski]

Twitter was dead within days of Elon taking over, or it was so asserted.

[Sarcastr0]

Incredible life in the the kiss Musk's ass or get banned app.

[Bwaaah]

It was more pleasant around here with you gone. And less stupid, too.

[Brett Bellmore]

Probably because you don't have to kiss his ass to avoid getting banned...

[Sarcastr0]

Brett, I sometimes wonder if you read the news.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2024/01/09/elon-musk-silencing-his-critics-as-journalists-are-suspended-by-x/

https://observer.com/2022/12/elon-musk-suspend-twitter-account-list/

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/27/tech/maga-musk-x-visas/index.html

[Bwaaah]

Millions of people were censored and shut down under your affiliated political regime. Did you protest? Not at all.

But a few of your pet influencers are told to go someplace else and it suddenly matters to you?

You're such a lame being.

[Sarcastr0]

Sorry you don't understand how elementary rhetorical devices work, Bwaah.

I'm not on twitter, so you're yet again wrong about me.

I have you generally on mute because you make things unpleasantly personal every single time we interact. Often at length.

[Bwaaah]

"Sorry you don't understand how elementary rhetorical devices work, Bwaah."

What "rhetorical device" is that?

"I'm not on twitter, so you're yet again wrong about me."

Whuh? Did you infer something I neither implied nor inferred?

"I have you generally on mute because you make things unpleasantly personal every single time we interact. Often at length."

Never "at length" anymore. But quite consistently with disdain now, and in my opinion, deservedly so. You're about as close as it gets to an arbitrary drone of the Democrat status quo. (And I don't dispute that you "believe" in all of it.)

[Brett Bellmore]

Sarcastr0, I think you actually DO understand the difference between kissing ass, and simply refraining from virulent attacks. 99 and 44/100ths percent of X users don't kiss Musk's ass, and manage to not be banned.

[Sarcastr0]

1)
Virulent attacks are kind of twitter's bread and butter these days. It's the act of a child to use their company to retaliate.

2)
The journalists wrote stories, not virulent attacks.

3)
Another one who takes a stupidly literal approach to who kisses Musks' ass.
Musk pushes his posts to twitter users across the board. If you disagree, he bans you. What does that look like to you?

[Bwaaah]

MUSK [blah] [blah] ASS [blah] [blah] BAN [blah] [blah] STUPID [blah] [blah].

Amiright?

[Bwaaah]

Your comments could be called nothing but "rhetorical device" if that didn't imply wholesale dismissal of the value of rhetorical device. Your comments are essentially non-substantive, except in your own mind.

[RedheadedPharoh]

>Virulent attacks are kind of twitter's bread and butter these days.

I'd like to see what data you're using to make that claim.

>It's the act of a child to use their company to retaliate.

It's just enforcing policies. Enforcing policies is not retaliation. Being a journalist doesn't grant you the right to ignore company policies.

>The journalists wrote stories, not virulent attacks.

A journalist's story can't be a virulent attack? Surely you jest.

>Musk pushes his posts to twitter users across the board. If you disagree, he bans you. What does that look like to you?

Another made up lie by you.

[Bwaaah]

I, too, can be a blight upon this blog. But instead, I typically STFU. You can't hear my silence because you're too enthralled by the echo of your vacuous retorts.

[dwb68]

People not on twitter complaining about twitter is down there on my credibility gauge with people who complain about books without reading said books (zero)

Twitter is mostly people sharing memes, same as any other platform.

[Sarcastr0]

No one not in twitter can talk about how things are going in twitter?

[Bwaaah]

Of course, nobody said that. He intimated that people like you are down low on his credibility gauge.

If you speed up, you might get to zero.

[Absaroka]

"No one not in twitter can talk about how things are going in twitter?"

Well, presumably they can't give reliable first hand opinions on what's going on on twitter.

(I'm not, and don't)

[Bwaaah]

Hey, Sarc...take a look at Absaroka's tone and comments. In particular, consider each statement he makes and whether it passes the "sniff test" of being consistent with (or contradicting) your personal observations (which you should try to separate from your beliefs).

Consider that prudential reasonableness is itself a "rhetorical device" (your parlance) that intuitively feels like a leaning toward truthfulness and correctness. He may not say as much as you try to say, but what he says is pretty unmistakably sensible.

Your bobbin' and weavin' feels very different from that. That has little to do with politics or rhetoric. It's a personal integrity issue. Don't feel bad. You're not the worst. You're just the most prolific, and that ain't good. You should try to dial back your hubris. It's unbecoming of a thoughtful person.

[Sarcastr0]

Indeed, Absaroka! That's why I linked sources.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bwaaah — Except with people who annoy him (me, for instance), Absaroka is one of this blog's more polite commenters. And he mostly avoids being wildly unreasonable. He shows an interesting store of actual knowledge to draw upon, and research capacity to fill in a bit when he would not otherwise know what he is talking about. He demonstrates a useful habit to reason mathematically. For all those characteristics, I commend his commentary. I am glad he comments here. But he remains one of this blog's most persistent and accomplished subject changers.

Make it a point to notice. When Absaroka encounters an argument he can't refute, but does not want to look like he is trying to dodge, he either sidetracks by opening a collateral discussion, or makes up a hypothetical structured to look like it applies, but which actually fails to address the point he hopes to leave behind.

It can be a convincing-looking style of argument, but it is actually weaker than a more direct approach. To be substantive, you need forthright willingness to engage using assertions which apply directly to points raised by others, and to do so in ways subject to potential disproof.

[dwb68]

The rumors of twitters death are greatly exaggerated, lol. Its the only place I sell books. Instagram and Facebook are full of pornbots and scams. Blue sky is tiny. Threads is like a bunch of library karens telling you to keep it down. In fairness, I do have a handful of readers on Facebook.