Lord Ratner

Seriously one of the best. I really hope they can keep it strong to the finish

I suspect he's just drunk.

Awesome post. I'm not sensitive to the covid issues, because diseases happen and how we should respond is not at all consensus. Hell, I know *far* more young people who care than the old people who are actually at risk. Done care, some don't, and both sides are completely right in thinking the way they do. Which means there shouldn't be a national policy. Disagree with soft power. It's not a coincidence the strongest country has the most influence. Look how much influence China is gaining as their "hard power" increases. Agree with health care, but disagree that it will end there. Checkups and treatment for broken bones? Free. Birth control and IUDs, free. Under the age of 20? Free. But if you're 36 and get leukemia or you're 85 and your kidneys are failing, you better have insurance or you die. That's the gamble. The primary discriminator for if the government provides the coverage should be price and predictability. On social issues I'm 50/50. I don't agree with religious based edicts. However the "old knowledge" didn't come from God, it came from thousands of years of observation and adaptation resulting in the most successful societies. We have to understand why a social norm works before we tinker with it. The sexual revolution comes to mind. Income inequality is a pointless measure. But you're spot on with conflating the stock market and the economy. Because the boomers have their retirements in the stock market and real estate, that's exactly what the government has artificially inflated. And it's crushing entire generations. The boomers will go down as the most devastating generation in history. Some random caller on a podcast I heard (Femsplainers) nailed it on nasty politics. There are only two parties. If there's only two groups that are opposed to each other, there's no limit to how nasty the situation gets. He used his competition in business as an example. When there were just two of them, it was fierce and awful. Once there were a dozen competitors, it mellowed out. We might be programmed to recognize when there is an isolated threat and destroy it, who knows. But if we can't get some more diversity in the political arena, the nastiness will probably not abate.

Hardly. If they are opening back up and plan on no vaccine, what exactly do we think is going to happen? This isn't the Andromeda Strain, it's still contagious and still fatal to old people. What happened here when we did that in Texas. How about Germany? We can't effectively compare responses until the virus has run its course. Once it's like the flu, just a thing we live with and pops off 50-100k per year. That will be either summer of 2021 or 2022. We can make comparisons now, they just won't be useful.

Great post

3.2 people/km² - Australia 36 people/km² - USA Melbourne - 500 people/km² (20,700± in Inner Melbourne, 15km² of dense area) https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australia-population-density-fastest-growing-regions-2019-3 NYC - 10,600 people/km² (28,000-38,000 in Manhattan, 783 km² of dense area) We have about double the number of Chinese visitors as Australia. They are an island. We have 13 times the population. And it looks like their plan, as many do, on a vaccine that it looks like the US will be responsible for. Trump's failure was allowing doctors to act as policy makers. But the opposition has staked their entire argument on trusting the science and listening to the doctors, so by their own words they would have made that mistake in even more spectacular fashion. But the real point is, perhaps Australia will have done better, even if you control for the innumerable differences in demographics. Surely someone will emerge the winner. But we're not going to know that for at least a year, once the virus has had a chance to run its course.

She's not going to. She's the embodiment of a Useful Idiot.

Precisely. There is effectively no comparison between the two countries, yet somehow we think the leadership is the reason for the disparities? That's like comparing NYC to Catalina island.

Yeah, you just have to realize that he was also hitting a grand slam on conservative policy. History will tell which was more important. Agreed otherwise

Who did? To claim that anyone's response can be graded thus far is premature. Europe is falling apart again. His response can't be bad if none of them were good. As with most things, if he could just keep his mouth shut and act like a president, his response wouldn't be discernable from any other

She was wrong, as usual. Both Trump and Biden barely won their elections. Agreed.

You know, I think this was the best case scenario for a Trump loss. It might even be better than a Trump win, assuming the GOP can pick the right candidate for 2024. Trump loses, but the rest of the Republican political class wins, keeping the senate and gaining in the house, as well as picking up some state legislatures. That's a clear repudiation of the man, not the party. Keeping the senate means effectively zero progressive wishlist items will happen in the next two years. Biden, let's not forget, is a fool who was not-too-long-ago frustrating his party as VP for always trying to make deals with Mitch Mcconnell. I see that continuing. Biden's win was small, so not a mandate. And amazingly, Trump gained in all voter groups *except* white men. If you don't think there are some (D) strategists right now melting down over that, I've got something to sell you. A black Republican who speaks Spanish would obliterate what's left of the democratic coalition. Mail in balloting is here to stay, and even with the most mailed-in election in history, by far, Biden barely won. The previous (D) advantage in early and mail-in voting will evaporate once the (R) figure out they need to embrace it. No more crazy Trump tweets is a win for the country. I'm concerned about foreign relations, which was unfortunately Trump's strongest area, but at least the split government will temper any gross reversals. As stated, China is the threat. And some California and NY seats flipped, which should indicate restlessness amongst the victims of the high-tax low-freedom regimes that have controlled state policy for decades. Could have been a lot worse

She was also dead nuts on about Amazon. Conservatives really shit the bed on that one. If anybody thinks that the world's most powerful corporation running a beauty pageant for the cities of America, so they would turn over what is usually heavily guarded tax and policy information, so that company could pick the most tax advantaged location to open their next mega center, is somehow what capitalism is supposed to look like, then conservatives don't deserve to be the defenders of capitalism. She's just another liberal. Good at identifying problems, bad at identifying causes and solutions.

You took them at their word? I remember making that mistake too.

She was also dead nuts on about Amazon. Conservatives really shit the bed on that one. If anybody thinks that the world's most powerful corporation running a beauty pageant for the cities of America, so they would turn over what is usually heavily guarded tax and policy information, so that company could pick the most tax advantaged location to open their next mega center, is somehow what capitalism is supposed to look like, then conservatives don't deserve to be the defenders of capitalism. She's just another liberal. Good at identifying problems, bad at identifying causes and solutions.

"They" didn't pick him, the democratic voters did. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were the undisputed chosen ones of the democratic complex. So much so that analysts and commentators on both sides believed Joe Biden didn't have a chance. But when the voters got their say, they overwhelmingly rejected the socialists. The Democratic machine, to include Joe biden, completely missed that message and gave him a hardcore progressive as a running mate. It looks like he's going to be president, but it would have been no contest if he had picked another moderate running mate, like klobuchar. This all goes to show that no one in Washington has learned anything. Hopefully the Republicans are a bit more studious, because they are poised for a huge victory in 2024 if they take the lessons of trump and apply them to someone who isn't a complete lunatic. And as for Texas turning blue, I talked to a lot of republicans, particularly women, who just couldn't bring themselves to vote for Trump no matter what. My wife is one of them. Put a sane conservative on the ballot and you'll see the Texas moderates hesitant to vote for someone who wants to take away their guns and raise taxes.

I had a captain who believes that. It was a wild conversation.

I think it's at least close. Policy, not philosophy. Regan spent a lot, like Trump, so that's a wash. Peace in the middle East and tough on China (compared to anyone else) is certainly a huge win. Tax reform. Massive deregulation, expansion of energy independence, reigning in title IX, moving the embassy to Jerusalem, three supreme court justices, all fairly strong conservatives, like 100 federal judges, enforcement of NATO contributions, the first real punches thrown at critical race theory, and at least the attempt at slowing illegal immigration. I think when you judge them as conservatives compared to their respective eras, Trump is up there. I credit his advisors, his son in law, Mitch Mcconnell, Stephen Miller, and many others, but it's still his administration, and he chose to empower those people.

Absolutely. The first pirate president, and someone who actually can explain their position. And a hero. Landslide victory.

I have to disagree with that one. Republicans have made winning elections the goal instead of conservative policy. They might get a big win in 2024 is Biden wins today, but for what? The hilarious irony is that Donald Trump, the great vulgarian, has accomplished more conservative policy goals than any Republican in the past 50 years. I really do wish there was a way to get that without the tweeting, the narcissism, or any of the other myriad character flaws he possesses. But there isn't. And Kamala, who has a decent chance at being president, publicly called for equality of outcome. No thanks.

Yes, though it's a bandaid on a compound fracture. We need to embrace forced treatment for those unable to maintain a household. This is a weak area for conservatives who have no concept of what a hardcore drug addiction does to your mind. We want people to pick themselves up by the bootstraps, great, we gotta get their mind clean enough to do so. For liberals this means they have to stop pretending like letting people "live themselves to death" on the streets is some sort of virtue. Homeless people go to jail, not because they are criminal (though many are), but because you have to confine the addict to treatment long enough for it to take effect. For conservatives, just locking people away won't work. It's going to take money to fix this; treatment is expensive. And providing the anti-addiction drugs for free (forever) will also sting. Tough.

Easy, dude. He's not Goldfein.

1-4) Yup. Though I'll add, we can't legalize all drugs. And we can't ignore the use of certain drugs, like meth. America's "homelessness" problem is actual a drug abuse problem, and we are seeing the effects of a laissez faire approach to drug use and addiction. For the best summation of the problem I recommend watching "Seattle is Dying" by KOMO on YouTube. Should be required viewing. 5) Agreed but with a caveat: the private interests, if they are permitted (most cities don't run their cameras) must have absolutely no compensation based on the volume of infractions. Secondly, cities must establish a formula for yellow-light duration that is applied to all intersections that matches or exceeds pre-camera duration. You commentary on police partners is pretty much inline with my point. More cops = less need for fatal force in a given interaction. One on one, the point-of-no-return for a fatal interaction is much sooner.

No rush. I know we're about 80%+ on the same page here.

I don't see how your view of systemic racism (which I disagree with as racism, but completely agree with IRT the societal trap that is keeping certain black communities stuck in a cycle of crime and violence) relates to the idea that police training is too quick to kill someone (regardless of skin color) who does not posses a firearm.