How To Tax Wealth — Your Feedback July 31, 2021August 2, 2021 Before I get to your feedback (“silly, impractical, illegal, picayune”) . . . 1. You likely already agree with what Fareed Zakaria has to say. But he says it so well: . . . Despite having ample supplies of the vaccine, America is stuck with roughly 60 percent of the adult population fully vaccinated, ensuring that the pandemic will linger perhaps forever. Given the tools to end this tragedy, we are choosing to live with it. As “The Economist” points out, the anti-vax movement in America today is unprecedented. There have always been people who objected to vaccinations, but they were on the fringe, a smattering a naysayers. The price of these rejectionists was usually small, a few outbreaks of measles every now and then. This time it’s different. In the midst of a raging pandemic that has killed 600,000 Americans, we have seen the rise of a vast right-wing conspiracy theory about the vaccines. It has been stoked by influential figures in the conservative media and tolerated even encouraged by powerful Republican politicians. The results are damning. As of June, 86 percent of Democrats have received at least one dose compared with just 52 percent of Republicans. All the states with the lowest levels of vaccination — Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Wyoming and Louisiana — voted heavily for Donald Trump. Barely half of Republican House members report being vaccinated. . . . [France’s] new vaccine passport has drawn out protests but millions of French people have signed up for the vaccine since Macron announced these rules. Although France’s opposition leaders opposed the policy as heavy handed, they are not spreading misinformation. President Biden needs to get tough. He should explain that while we cherish freedom in America, you do not have the right to do anything and everything when it endangers the lives of others or places burdens on them. Here are some things that you are forced to do even in America: Go to school. Pay taxes. Register for the draft if you are male. Serve on a jury. There are also many things that you are not allowed to do that might be mistakenly seen as involving no one else. You may not buy or sell controlled substances, litter on public streets, make loud noise after certain hours, and so on. If you drive a car, you are required to get a license, buy insurance, wear a seat belt, obey street signs and speed limits, have the car inspected and not drink alcohol before driving. If you want your children to go to a public school in America, they must be vaccinated. These are all mandates because seemingly private actions actually impose public costs. You should not have the right to spread disease and occupy a precious hospital bed. Some Republican politicians and conservative media figures are finally urging people to get vaccinated, but they may be too late. As they did with the rise of Donald Trump, the allegations of voter fraud and the accusations of a stolen election, the Republican Party has indulged its crazies for too long, fanning the flames of falsehood and creating a miasma of misinformation. Even now, leading Republican governors like Ron DeSantis are pandering to their base by making it illegal to require proof of vaccination in Florida. Republicans say that they are for economic growth and against lockdowns, but it is the Republican Party and the conservative media, by their actions and negligence, that are endangering America’s economy, and far more importantly, the lives of its people. 2. Sam Altman is a Truly Amazing Person. Years ago, I got to pitch him WheelTug. He was too busy to look into it. Really? Who could be too busy for WheelTug?! (I trust you realize I am laughing as I type.) Now I guess I understand why. This Sam Altman interview with Ezra Klein is an eye-opener. With artificial intelligence becoming more capable at a rate of 10X per year (!!!!), the world is about to change. Much of it, I only barely understand, so — being viciously competitive — I trust you’ll barely understand it, too. But it’s fascinating. Even going as far afield as to worry not only about whether our artificially intelligent creations will wind up enslaving or eating us (an old concern I can readily understand), but whether we will wind up torturing them (a concept he concedes some people will find ridiculous, but that apparently quite a few people at his level are thinking about). Most importantly: how do you structure a society that broadly benefits from A.I., rather than one that puts dramatically more wealth and power in the hands of just a few? Yes, he thinks Universal Basic Income is coming; but he thinks there’s more we can do to give everyone a stake in the future, and dignity. The interview even touches on taxing wealth, so I excerpt a bit of that here as a lead-in to your feedback: EZRA KLEIN: I wouldn’t say that the people who run major technology companies are heavily anti-tax. . . . But there is a pretty heavy strain of the venture capitalists and others who . . . get real angry at the idea of taxes as a moral phenomenon. . . . Get real angry at the idea that being taxed might imply they don’t deserve what they have. There was a vote a couple of years ago where folks were comparing this to Naziism. . . . SAM ALTMAN: I actually think that most people in the industry are pretty happy to pay taxes. Sure they may advocate for less. There’s two comments that you hear a lot, one I agree with and one that I don’t. One is that I’m happy to pay taxes, I just wish they were better spent. And because they’re so badly spent, I don’t want to pay any. . . . I don’t agree with that. You hear it a lot. I do understand where people are coming from. . . . The one that I do agree with is I think there’s a lot of people in the tech industry — founders, venture capitalists, whatever — that really object to messaging like billionaires should not exist. Which is very different from saying billionaires shouldn’t be taxed. I would love to have trillionaires in the world if they were paying a lot of tax. And I think everybody else should want that, too. . . . But on the whole, as long as people are paying taxes and creating economic value, I want more of that. And I think most members of society should want more of that, too, if we can figure out how to make sure that we have fair access to power and voice and governance. . . . EZRA KLEIN: . . . Is it such an accident that Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates live in Seattle, a state with no income tax? It’s all fine to be for taxes in some conceptual way. . . . Or that Elon Musk just re-domiciled himself in Texas to pay, at least in part, lower taxes. I mean, power speaks. . . . I don’t think there should be a trillionaire. Not because I don’t want somebody to invent the thing that would have made them a trillion dollars — I do. But one, the marginal utility of having a trillion dollars is crazy low for one person. That should just be distributed to people who then won’t die from malaria because they have some money. But two, that’s a lot of power for one person to have. And I think if I have one critique of your approach to politics on this stuff it’s that I think you take policy seriously and power less seriously. But one of my observations from covering policy for a long time is policy reflects power. It doesn’t precede it. SAM ALTMAN: I can totally believe that. Again, I think if there is a big bug in my thinking, this is likely it. I’m very sympathetic to the idea of being wrong here. I doubt that it’s an accident that those people all live in no income tax states. But I also think — I haven’t talked to Elon about this, but I know him well enough that I would bet that his bigger reason was just an increasing unfriendliness in California towards his businesses and a real disagreement with how they were handling his company’s ability to be successful. And that is, I think, a real shame for all of us. No one, as California residents, none of us benefit from having fantastic companies move out of the state. That is a real shame. And that was power that the California legislature had that I think they badly misused that preceded the politics. And I wish that didn’t happen. On the trillionaire question — we were talking earlier about health care. Let’s say someone invents — some scientist invents something that gives everybody on Earth 20 years of extra great health span. And they want to make it phenomenally expensive. But they create $100 trillion of value and become a one trillionaire in the process. I would cheer them on. . . . I think technology can make the world unimaginably great, but it needs a policy and power tweak to have that be distributed in a way where it can happen at all and in a way where it can happen justly. . . . I also agree that the heads of the biggest technology companies have too much power. In the Industrial Revolution, when the joint stock corporation was created as this second order sovereign entity, everyone was OK with that, because it was second order and the real sovereign had more power. But I think you can certainly make a case now that the giant tech companies are more powerful than many countries, certainly not the U.S. yet. But they don’t have any kind of democratically governed system. So yeah, I mean, that causes me deep discomfort. . . . There’s so much more to this interview — you may want to treat yourself to the whole thing. And now . . . Thanks to those of you who responded to my idea for how to tax wealth. Some of you offered kind words. (I have extended their subscriptions two years at no charge.) One called it “genius.” (She now has a lifetime subscription.) One of you, a gay not-rich Princeton grad turning 80 next year who voted to re-elect Trump (right? it takes all kinds!) wrote: “I am coming to agree with you, especially after reading an accounting that connects a lot of dots for me. This is an outrage! The rich are NOT, as the Dems say, paying ‘their fair share.’ Your floor of $100 million for a wealth tax is way too high. Lots of yachts would escape. Something like your idea probably should start at around $20-25 million. Time for a revolt of the masses! But of course the rich elite will fight and, as usual, likely win.” An eleven-figure friend I sent it to (to my knowledge, I have no regular readers with eleven-figure net worths) replied: “I think it’s not a great idea.” But didn’t say why. “I am leaving all my money to my foundation,” he continued, “so I am not personally concerned about any rise in taxes.” The only person who seemed really to hate it, and detailed his reasons, is a brilliant friend of long standing with merely a low-ten-figure net worth (low, but remember: this is before the decimal point). He’s no fan of either party, but considers Trump “an abomination.” He said my proposal was “silly, impractical, illegal, picayune, and it won’t work for various reasons,” the first of which is that it is unconstitutional. We had a good email back and forth, snippets of which include: HE: You cannot ‘take’ anything from a US citizen without just compensation. That was the basis of the Magna Carta, when the King regularly took lands from their vassals. It has been a bedrock of Anglo-Saxon Law for one thousand years, and is enshrined in our Constitution in the Takings Clause. So, your idea is null. “For your edification,” he added, “this is the Fifth Amendment” — which he duly cut and pasted. ME: What do you make of this from the American Bar Association? A Wealth Tax Is Constitutional. I’m by no means certain their view would prevail; but is it ‘silly’ even to imagine that it might? HE: The ABA article, which I read some time ago, is weak and stretched. No one serious pays any attention to the ABA, which was hijacked by Progressives years ago. A ‘taking’ is a ‘taking.’ It is possible that a packed Court could agree to this interpretation, but the current Court will respect the Constitution. It also violates the apportionment concept. See: Here’s Why Elizabeth Warren’s Wealth Tax Is Completely Unconstitutional. If we ever enacted a wealth tax and the Takings Clause were ‘repealed,’ the USA would decline in a straight line down. It would mean no assets are safe, and we would be a banana republic. Anyone with assets would immediately move to another country. Then you would really have a problem with tax collections. ME: Is an income tax confiscation? [He had previously called my wealth tax “confiscation.”] Is property tax confiscation? Is the estate tax confiscation? HE: Income tax and property tax are well settled law under the Constitution. Estate tax is still an outlier. There was a lot more. I naturally said I hoped that if the estate tax had somehow managed to be an outlier for more than a century, maybe my wealth tax idea could last 10 years before it sunset. He kept coming back to the “revenge” motivation behind any wealth tax ideas, and how those of us in favor were vilifying rich people. I asked him to re-read my post — in which I had called Jeff Bezos “an American hero” whose success should be “celebrated (and taxed)” — — a major theme of which was that any discussion of the wealth tax should be “non-pejorative.” He didn’t want to hear it. HE: History tells me that the Nazi’s were very good at taking assets from people they didn’t like. Perhaps you can study their methods? ME: I don’t think Eisenhower was a Nazi when he raised the top rate (too high) to 91% — he was actually using it to fight the Nazis. And I like my billionaire friends. I was a little surprised my friend was as annoyed by all this as he clearly was. He’s every bit as concerned about poverty, climate, infrastructure, and the rest as I am. (His good idea on infrastructure I will save for a future column.) And there of course lots of billionaires and aspiring billionaires who would be willing to chip in more if everybody else among the ultra-high-net-worth cohort had to, also. I certainly think “my” way of doing it would be a lot less disruptive and easier to administer than the wealth tax currently proposed. But maybe we should call this an “income tax surcharge” or “an estate tax down payment” and give people a choice — pay either in cash, the traditional way, or as a transfer of assets, as I have suggested. Listen: I may have invented the Forever Stamp, and definitely am the guy who got Tipper Gore to close the Millennium March concert at RFK Stadium when she came out at the end, as a total surprise, to play the drums. So maybe this idea will catch on, too. HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!
How To Tax Wealth July 28, 2021July 29, 2021 The first thing to say is: carefully. You don’t want to do something that sounds good, like raising the rate on wealth to equal the rate on work, but that winds up costing money (because to avoid tax, billionaires need only not sell, borrowing against their holdings instead). I recently suggested ways I particularly like to raise more revenue. (Raise the corporate rate partway back, add a surcharge where the boss makes hundreds of times more than the median worker, end 1031 exchanges, close the carried interest loophole, close estate tax loopholes, fund the IRS adequately.) If you missed that column and have an interest in this stuff, take a look? Today, though, I want to talk specifically about “the wealth tax.” I think there may be a way to enact one that even many ultra-high net worth individuals would accept. I’d like to know what you think. Begin, though, with this: Super Rich’s Wealth Concentration Surpasses Gilded Age Levels. The headline says it all. And extreme inequality rarely ends well. Seven years ago, billionaire Nick Hanauer wrote The Pitchforks Are Coming . . . For Us Plutocrats. Since then, it’s only gotten worse: “Over the last 16 months, since the formal beginning of the pandemic lockdown,” reports Inequality.org, “the combined wealth of 713 U.S. billionaires has surged by $1.8 trillion, a gain of almost 60 percent. U.S. Billionaire wealth increased 19-fold over the last 31 years, from an inflation adjusted $240 billion in 1990 to $4.7 trillion in 2021.” Palm Beach Real Estate Is So Hot, at Least 22 Homes Sold for $40M-Plus Since Covid. OK? Four Americans, combined, have more wealth than the bottom 165 million. And I say: good for them! Because the second thing to say is: the language we use in discussing a wealth tax should be “non-pejorative.” I bridled at all the flak Jeff Bezos took for his space flight — and for thanking his customers and employees for making it possible. To me, Bezos is a great American. I constantly use Amazon . . . no one forces me to . . . and am generally delighted that I can. Amazon-owned Audible? Ditto. Yes, of course there are trade-offs. Remember bookstores? Oh, how I miss going into one after another surreptitiously placing my book on top of Suze Orman’s. (Just kidding: Suze is a friend. She used to use my software!) I would not argue Jeff Bezos has balanced every trade-off perfectly. > Why, for example, did it take him until 2018 to raise Amazon’s minimum wage to $15? Why not 2017 or 2016? Why not $16 or $17? But in a world where the federal minimum wage in 2018 was $7.25 an hour (and remains there in 2021, thanks to the Republican Party) — and where Washington State’s minimum wage was set to rise to only $12 a few months later — maybe $15 wasn’t so bad? > Why, to take another example, did he pledge only $10 billion to the Bezos Earth Fund? Why not $20 billion or $30 billion? And why isn’t he deploying it faster? But isn’t this a pretty good voluntary first step? > Why is this effort to squeeze waste out of Amazon’s packaging not further along? But isn’t it good that they’re trying? And so on. There are doubtless grounds on which fairly to criticize Amazon and Bezos — his critics serve a valuable function in pushing him to do better, faster. But isn’t that true of all of us? In a world where “Democracy Dies In Darkness,” aren’t we glad Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post and not Rupert Murdoch? So now let’s talk taxes. Rather than vilify the ultra-rich for legally avoiding them, why not levy one they’d have to pay? And — as I say — in a non-pejorative way, because it costs us nothing to applaud the ultra-wealthy for their success and thank them for sharing it, via taxes, with everyone else. What if you . . . 1. Exempt the first $100 million. So barely one taxpayer in ten thousand would ever even have to think about it. By one estimate, it takes $4.4 million, including your home, to be in the top 1%. To make the top tenth of one percent, estimate range from $25 million to $40 million. Exempting the first $100 million should exempt all but about the top hundredth of a percent. (This calculator will show you where you stand — but gives up after $18 million. Whether you enter $18 million or $18 billion, it puts you in the top half of one percent.) Fine with me to index that $100 million to inflation — and maybe throw in an extra $25 million exemption for personal effects like art and jewelry and anything else. Odds and ends. The goal here is not to nickel and dime anyone, or subject them to elaborate, soul-crushing audits. Just to get the broad strokes right. 2. Collect 2% of the excess each year for 10 years — but only 10 years — and none of it in cash. Imagine someone whose entire net worth, apart from a couple of nice homes, a modest yacht, and a Picasso, were his shares in some public — or private — company. Plus 20,000 acres of farmland in Virginia and a 40-storey office tower in Dallas. Everything else she or he owned would be a rounding error, falling easily within the $100 million exemption (and that extra little $25 million exemption for non-financial assets). In all, say, $1 billion in taxable wealth — though there’d be no need to value it to the penny, because no pennies would change hands. Instead, 2% of those shares, and a 2% interest in those acres and that office tower, would be transferred to the United States Treasury and held in a special U.S. Patriots Infrastructure Account. After 10 years of this, when much of our infrastructure and economy had been revitalized and the law had sunset, she or he would have just 81.7% as large a stake in the shares, farmland, and tower (not 80%, because after the first year, you’re grabbing 2% of the remaining 98%, etc.) . . . but the shares, farmland, and tower might have doubled in value by then (at 7%, compounded) — or at least grown by more than had been taxed-away — so the taxpayer’s 81.7% would be worth more than the 100% she or he started with, even as she or he had chipped in mightily to help America meet its challenges. > Any dividends or distributions along the way would have gone 98% to the ultra-high net worth individual (in the first year, falling a bit each year) and 2% to the U.S. Patriots Infrastructure Account (rising to 18.3% in the 10th year) . > The Treasury would be a passive holder — it would not vote or sell its shares; it would not sell its share of the Virginia farmland or the Dallas office tower . . . though if the company were acquired, Treasury would get its share of the proceeds like any anyone else. (As it would if the taxpayer ever sold the farm or the tower.) Doing it this way would raise more than $1 trillion over 10 years. Which isn’t all we need, but is sure a good start. (I’m one of those who believes it’s okay to borrow to fund infrastructure that will last 50 and 100 years — that it will pay for itself through economic growth and increased efficiency.) If instead of 2% you set the rate at 3% or 4% — perhaps after the first $1 billion — you’d raise that much more. The “money” raised wouldn’t be in cash, but that’s fine: the Treasury doesn’t literally sit on hundred-dollar bills; its balance sheet is assets and liabilities. Adding $1 trillion in assets strengthens the balance sheet. Not forcing the taxpayers to pay cash avoids all manner of otherwise-deal-breaking problems. E.g.: How do you value private company stock? Or the Van Gogh? Or the equity in a heavily mortgaged office tower? How do you sell just 2% of an office tower each year to raise cash to pay the tax? What would it do to the value of a thinly traded stock if its major shareholder has to sell a chunk each year to raise cash to pay the tax? What do you do if someone paid $20 million tax on $1 billion worth of shares that collapsed the following month — could he get a refund? All those problems and more go away if you simply receive the 2% of the assets themselves. Municipal bonds? Transfer 2% of them to the U.S. Patriots Infrastructure Account. A $300 million art collection? Sweep all the minor pieces under the umbrella of the $100 million and $25 million exemptions but sign over a 2% interest in each of the major pieces each year for ten years. If that Van Gogh is ever sold, the U.S. Patriots Infrastructure Account would get its proportionate share of the proceeds. Some billionaires might renounce their citizenship to avoid this tax, but because it would sunset after 10 years — and because taxpayers would be lauded for paying it — most might not. There might be financial disincentives to leaving, also, like some sort of “exit tax” — as already exists. Perhaps Secretary Yellen could persuade other countries to adopt a similar program, as she has persuaded a growing number to adopt a 15% minimum corporate income tax, so there’d be less financial advantage to emigrating. In drafting the details, Treasury should hire top-level tax pros (pro-bono or, if necessary, at top dollar) to anticipate the loopholes and close them in advance. E.g., splitting your $500 million net worth into five $100-million-exempt trusts for each of your grandchildren. There could be penalties for knowingly and purposefully violating the intent of the law. I’d staff an elite corps at the I.R.S to administer this program — and give them discretion to award taxpayers up to a 5% discount for being forthright and cooperative and making the process go quickly and amicably each year. Why not? We’re all in this together. Two percent a year for 10 years — while not nothing — sure beats having to storm the beaches of Normandy or slog through the jungles of Vietnam. Or fly commercial. Taxes are the price we pay for civilization. It would be great if the nation’s few thousand most successful citizens chose to embrace this chance to step up in service of a grateful nation. I think many would. The rest would have to pay anyway . . . but perhaps not get the 5% discount. What do you think?
Newsweek: Teachers Union Has Become A Public Menace July 27, 2021July 26, 2021 But first . . . CORRECTION Of the late Robert Moses, I wrote yesterday, “It was only from reading the Chicago Tribune that I learned he had been a Rhodes Scholar (not that it would have meant much to an 8th grader).” Thanks to those of you who wrote in to say the Tribune (via the Associated Press) had it wrong. Bob was many remarkable things — a “MacArthur genius” among them — but not a Rhodes Scholar. HO-HUM-IZATION In the 1998 sequel to a 1973 book I had written under a pen-name (because who in 1973 was brave enough to use his own name in writing about such things?), I devoted Chapter 16 to what I called the “ho-hum-ization” of being gay. (As in: Who cares?) We had come so far in those intervening 25 years! And in the 23 years since the sequel — with the tre-quel due out in two years, as I seem to write these things every 25 years — we have come so much further still. (Marriage . . . gays in the military . . . Pete Buttigieg . . .) One obvious example: the world’s most highly valued company ($2.5 trillion at last night’s close) is run by an openly gay man. Who cares? But here’s a less obvious example I just learned about over the weekend. Which surprised me, because how could I not know this? But that’s the point: it’s almost ho-hum by now that for the past decade the President and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers — not exactly a radical left-wing group — has been an openly gay man. Only at the end of his official bio does it refer to “his husband,” because, well, ho-hum, why wouldn’t it? (It then goes on to summarize the pro-equality law he and his husband fought to pass in Virginia.) We’re not there yet; and when Republicans are in power, things slip backward. But on everything from homophobia and xenophobia (“Irish need not apply!”) to anti-Semitism and racism, equal rights for women — and more — the long trend has been toward a more nearly perfect union. Special thanks to all the straight white Protestant men, and there are many, who are okay with that. And now . . . EDUCATION Nelson Mandela’s quote at the entrance of the University of South Africa: “Destroying any nation does not require the use of atomic bombs or the use of long range missiles. It only requires lowering the quality of education and allowing cheating in the examinations by the students. . . .” Patients die at the hands of such doctors. Buildings collapse at the hands of such engineers. Money is lost at the hands of such economists & accountants. Humanity dies at the hands of such religious scholars. Justice is lost at the hands of such judges. ” . . . The collapse of education is the collapse of the nation.” A year ago, I posted The Sacrifice We’re (Needlessly?) Asking Kids To Make for Us. David Wallace-Wells argues The Kids Have Been Safe All Along. But, boy, have they ever suffered. Especially those nearest the bottom of the economic ladder. The teachers had a fierce and powerful advocate in the teachers unions — who, being human, put the teachers’ interests ahead of the interests of the kids (while persuading themselves otherwise). But who was the fierce and powerful advocate for the kids? If, like me, you love teachers and love unions but fear things may have gotten a little out of balance, consider, from Newsweek: Teachers Union Has Become A Public Menace. Everybody needs to get vaccinated; kids and teachers need to get back into school. (With exceptions, of course, for anyone seriously at risk.) We can do this, people.
Moses . . . R.I.P. July 26, 2021July 26, 2021 Bob Moses was my 8th grade algebra teacher, which is why I can do math in base 8 or base 12. When he died yesterday, at 86, major newspapers took note. It was only from reading the Chicago Tribune that I learned he had been a Rhodes Scholar (not that it would have meant much to an 8th grader).* . . . only from reading the Washington Post that I learned his dad was a janitor; that he had gotten a master’s degree in philosophy from Harvard the year before he entered our classroom; that the writings of Albert Camus had been his guide; that the man acquitted by an all-white jury of assaulting him on the steps of the Liberty, Mississippi courthouse was the sheriff’s cousin. . . . only from reading the New York Times that I learned that, soon after he spoke out against the Vietnam War, he received a draft notice — five years past the age limit for the draft. He taught us Boolean algebra, which is why I know what a Venn diagram is. And would later use his MacArthur genius award money to found The Algebra Project. “In my lifetime I have known no greater voice for justice,” former Miami Herald publisher David Lawrence told the Herald. Taylor Branch, one of the nation’s leading civil rights historians, told NPR in 2013 that despite his lower national profile, Moses’ success in pushing voting registration to the forefront of the civil rights movement made him almost as influential as Martin Luther King. R.I.P. *And only from a couple of you did I realize the Tribune, via the Associated Press, had it wrong. He was many things, but not a Rhodes Scholar.
PRKR, COVID, CLIMATE, AND MORE! July 23, 2021 I’ll get to our PRKR shares, our EVLO and RFL puts, but first: COVID ‘I’m sorry, but it’s too late’: Alabama doctor on treating unvaccinated, dying COVID patients. What vaccinated people should really know about the Delta variant’s threat to them. “The vaccines are working—but that might not mean what you think it does.” CLIMATE Climate Change Drove Western Heat Wave’s Extreme Records, Analysis Finds — but that’s just data. This is climate change in an eminently relatable way. And this — this is the great sweep of the whole thing, tectonic plates and all. Wow. Wow. Wow. From the Atlantic. It’s getting later and later in the day. I doubt you need any persuading . . . but do you turn the lights off when you leave the room? Rinse and reuse the red cups rather than toss them? Many of my friends are wonderfully bought in to the need to fight climate change — but have not developed habits that cost nothing (actually save money) but would have us living at least a tiny bit lighter on the land. (And, yes, I could do better, too.) EVLO PUTS Suggested two weeks go at 45 cents and 85 cents, when the underlying stock was $13.49 — it closed just now at $9.37 — these August puts allow us to “put” the stock to some anonymous counterparty at $7.50 and $10. In anticipation of the stock’s possibly falling further, they’ve doubled. Guru says to sit tight; the results of the trial have not yet been released. If failure is announced, as he expects, he sees the stock heading sharply lower, eventually to $2. So — only with money I can truly afford to lose — I’m holding on for a sextuple. The main risk he sees is that the announcement will be delayed past our August 20 expiration, though he thinks that’s unlikely. RFL PUTS Suggested the next day (along with some further EVLO thoughts), this $60 stock is now $52 — but, again, the “event” that could make it a $30 stock or a $20 stock is not expected until September. Our November $40 puts, for which we paid $3.50, closed the week at $6 bid, $6.70 asked. PRKR Here is an update from the firm following it all most closely, now suggesting $11.35 per share as the “probability-adjusted value” of all its lawsuits. We just got another favorable set of Markman rulings in the Texas case against Intel. ParkerVision has now had 39 of its 44 patent definitions accepted by the court, when in fact even just one would (at least in theory) be sufficient for a jury to find our way. Grains of salt: (1) Unless it’s been corrected, Intro-Act still shows May 3, 2021, as the “trial timing” on the giant Qualcomm case. May 3 has obviously passed. The judge most recently said “November or December, if then.” (2) The report seems to assume 80 million shares will be outstanding if/when the money starts pouring in. But 120 million might be more realistic, which would knock that $11.35 a share down to $7.60. On the other hand: (1) If PRKR does win its lawsuits, the “probability” goes up from 62% to 100%, which puts us back to an upside of $12.25. (2) If the judge decides Qualcomm willfully abused PRKR’s patents and multiplies the damages, the upside would be much higher (even just awarding interest and legal fees would be a boost). (3) No value is ascribed to PRKR’s additional technology, as described here. On the third hand (if you’ve got the time, I’ve got the hands): (1) There’s no allowance for taxes on these settlements — I don’t know how that would work. (2) There’s no allowance for the appeals Qualcomm would doubtless make, facing the prospect of which PRKR might well accept just a fraction of whatever it might be awarded. So who knows? I can see the stock tripling in the next year . . . and eventually becoming a $15 stock, as its new technology is licensed. But, as always: only with money you can truly afford to lose. Because if Intro-Act is right about the “62%” probability of success, that means 38% probability of a wipe-out. Full disclosure: I own a ton of shares, acquired mostly around a dime and at 35 cents. But in my IRA, with no tax consequences, I’ve been buying and selling around the edges . . . e.g., I bought shares at $1.01 last month that I sold today at $1.55. If it goes back down, I’d likely “rinse and repeat.” (Or hope to repeat, anyway.) But all this, as I say, just around the edges. Most of my shares just sit and wait in nervous anticipation. BONUS: TEXAS Trey Beck: I love my native Texas, and I am also desperately trying to preserve American democracy. This note is about the intersection of those two interests. Gotta be straight with you: there is nothing so exceptional about our country that we can’t slip into a Viktor Orban-style autocracy. And that is what might happen if there is not a federal response to the state-level rollback of voting rights so visibly underway. Not only are Republicans looking to make it harder to vote, they are drafting laws that would allow them to interfere with or just ignore the actual outcome of any election (including for president) by state legislative fiat. This is why it is essential that Congress pass federal voting law–the bulk of S.1 (the For the People Act) and H.R. 4 (the John Lewis Voting Rights Act)–to preempt these attacks. Unfortunately, while the White House is substantively in favor of these reforms, it has not pushed to get the Senate over the procedural hurdles blocking passage of a bill. And time is running out because many of the provisions of a federal law would need to be enacted in the next several weeks in order to be implemented in time for redistricting and 2022 elections. Headwinds are strong given Republican intransigence, an important infrastructure package hogging up Senate bandwidth, and traditionalist holdouts like Manchin, Sinema, and, above all, President Biden, who just yesterday paradoxically declared that, while, sure, the filibuster gets abused all the time, it would throw Congress into “chaos” if we fought over its removal. This is where the fifty or so Texas Democratic state legislators who have temporarily moved to D.C. come in. First, they are denying a quorum for a Texas legislative agenda that has locked them out of deliberations and is aimed squarely at suppressing the vote of the Texas urban populations that lean Democratic. The legislative chronology is a little meandering, but the overall effect of the various Republican bills would be to ban the drive-thru voting that was so popular in greater Houston (10% of Harris County’s 2020 general election votes were cast by car), ban 24-hour voting (again done successfully in Houston), ban proactive dispatch of vote-by-mail applications (which Houston was blocked from doing by the Texas supreme court), and grant “free access” to any “poll watcher” while criminalizing any attempt to interfere with them. And this is the bill that was watered down after Democrats were successful in denying a quorum back in May. Republicans are trying to make it harder to vote in a state that is already among the most restrictive and that sent a woman to prison for a five-year term for casting a provisional ballot in the mistaken belief she was legally registered. Most of the TX GOP package is offensive on its face and polls terribly with even conservative voters, and it should be opposed for Texas voters alone. But this fight has national importance, too. It was a stroke of genius for the fugitive Dem delegation to decamp to D.C. because it brightens the spotlight already on the hatchet state Republicans are taking to voting rights and election integrity, and does it in our nation’s capital, where reforms that would address vast swathes of these abuses are stopped up by a parliamentary maneuver that allows one man, Mitch McConnell, to block any bill that isn’t budget-related. What we need, then, is for the Texas Dems to be able to stay in DC long enough to do two things. > First, they have enough leverage that they have already been able to block one special session and force substantive changes to the (still terrible) bills. The hope is that they can wage a canny enough messaging program that Texas voters better understand what is in the Republicans’ proposals, most of which is very unpopular when described in neutral terms. (One thing that is not unpopular is voter ID, and I’ve come around to the view that Dems should own this issue by proposing a federal standard that allows voters a comfortable array of options for proving they’re who they say they are.) A successful outcome would be a negotiated package that removes the worst voting stuff and very publicly forces Republicans to address areas of real need, like the comically screwy power infrastructure that left thousands freezing this winter. > Second, the Texas Ds need to stick around to keep the heat on the Senate and the White House to get federal legislation done. These few dozen men and women have in left behind children, partners, and professional obligations (the TX legislature is part-time and pays about $40k a year). Most of them are far from affluent. And, as has been widely reported, Gov. Abbott has threatened to take away their pay and to have them arrested upon re-entry to the state. This latter threat is on dubious authority but menacing all the same. Words like “brave” and “courageous” have been cheapened through overuse, but they truly apply here. These are people with the absolute moral standing to make the case for action directly to federal Democrats, especially two guys named Joe who are often moved by heart as much as head. Here’s what you can do if you’d like to join me in helping out: Beto O’Rourke’s Powered by People has focused on raising the dough for the basic functioning in D.C. of around 50 lawmakers and another 20 or so staff: lodging, telecomms, transport, etc. Beto has good marketing muscle (including Annie and Willie), but the need is between $1.2-1.5m for enough runway to be effective. As of yesterday, they’d gathered about $650k of this. This money goes straight to the TX Dem house caucus. Second, Future Now Fund has created a Texas rapid response fund that operates on three fronts. First, they have committed money towards the same basic Dem house caucus needs as above. Second, their financial support of the caucus will bolster the most vulnerable (electorally and in terms of D.C. staying power) legislators as they prepare for 2022. This includes money and guidance for critical constituent outreach (town halls and the like) so that, right now, legislators can directly speak to the odiousness of the Republicans’ proposals and counter ridiculous but damaging GOP attacks on their motivations. Last, FNF is making grants to the caucus’ leadership to stiffen backbones and help coordinate strategy. Have a great weekend!
Macron and Maddow July 22, 2021July 22, 2021 MACRON “I no longer have any intention of sacrificing my life, my time, my freedom and the adolescence of my daughters, as well as their right to study properly, for those who refuse to be vaccinated. This time you stay at home, not us.” In France, those who do not get vaccinated will no longer be able to go to restaurants, cafés, cinemas and museums and get on airplanes or trains. Alternatively, they will have to submit a negative test, which will no longer be free (€49 for the PCR, €29 for the antigen). “We cannot make those who have the civic sense to get vaccinated bear the burden of inconvenience. The restrictions will weigh on others, those who for reasons incomprehensible in the country of Louis Pasteur, science and the Enlightenment still hesitate to use the only weapon available against the pandemic, the vaccine.” Mais oui! D’accord! Vive Macron! (And I don’t even speak French.) Before you forward this to someone else as it was forwarded to me, please note that Macron apparently never said any of that (and has no daughters). Perhaps he — and governors in our least-vaccinated states — should? MADDOW Condensed from the first minutes of Tuesday’s show: In what universe is it possible that an American president has his campaign chairman arrested — that`s Paul Manafort — and his deputy campaign manager arrested — that`s Rick Gates — and his campaign manager arrested — Steve Bannon — and his national security advisor arrested — that`s Mike Flynn — and his personal lawyer arrested — that`s Mike Cohen — and his long-time political adviser arrested — that`s Roger Stone — and his campaign foreign adviser arrested — that`s George Papadopoulos — and his inaugural chairman arrested — that`s Tom Barrack, just arrested today — his inaugural vice chairman arrested — Elliott Broidy. His private company indicted, the Trump Organization. The chief financial officer of his private company arrested, Allen Weiselberg. His foundation/charity shut down as a fraud, that`s the Trump Foundation. His “school” shut down after a fraud suit settlement, Trump University. Not to mention during his one single term as president, not one, not two, not three, not four, but five of his cabinet secretaries were referred for federal criminal prosecution. In all five of those cases, the Trump Justice Department that refused to bring criminal charges despite those criminal referrals. Meanwhile, the lawyers who brought the lawsuits to try to get the courts to somehow overthrow the election results are all facing court sanctions and potential disbarment in at least four different jurisdictions. His other personal lawyer, not the one who already went to prison, the other one, has just had his law license suspended in both New York and in Washington, D.C. for his role in making those same false claims before the court. Oh, and he himself was impeached twice. That`s a record. And he`s personally facing a criminal investigation under Georgia state law for interfering with elections officials in that state. We`re also awaiting a potential second round of indictments derived from these allegations of a years-long, multi-million dollar tax fraud scheme, that`s already led to the indictment of his company that bears his name and its long-time CFO. I mean, not only is that not normal for an American presidency, like in what country IS that normal? Right? And in what universe is that the person who you pick to be the prohibitive front-runner for the next Republican presidential nomination? There’s lots more, in case you want to watch. BONUS Looks like New Yorkers may have selected the right guy: Eric Adams Is Going to Save New York.
Field Of Dreams July 21, 2021 From WheelTug yesterday: WheelTug Initiates Manufacturing Process WheelTug is excited to announce that it has secured a 37,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in Baltimore, Maryland. The facility will serve as the nexus of assembly, test and logistics operations for global WheelTug deliveries. The fit-out of the facility and the design of the assembly line is being managed by WheelTug’s new Director of Manufacturing, Jack France. Mr. France brings significant experience to the role. He previously held senior manager positions at Honda North America, and GE/Honda Aero. In those roles, he was responsible for the quality of every Honda part and vehicle made in North America. He was also responsible for coordinating with certificating and regulatory authorities, including the FAA and numerous civil aviation authorities worldwide. The new facility and production management expertise enables WheelTug to meet existing and future demand for WheelTug systems. So far, 25 airlines on five continents have reserved more than 2,000 WheelTug systems. The on-board electric WheelTug systems enable airline operators to cut between 5 and 20 minutes from every turnaround operation by taxiing on the ground without engines or tugs. WheelTug will be available for the Boeing 737NG family in 2022. An A320 version will follow. To learn more about WheelTug visit www.wheeltug.com. I wouldn’t go crazy buying more BOREF on this news (Borealis owns 58% of WheelTug) — and no one did. Volume in the stock was 682 shares yesterday, closing at $6.98, a market cap (with 5 million shares outstanding) of $35 million. A single Boeing 737 costs way more than that. Yet, if successful, WheelTug could make the 737’s 10% more efficient — the equivalent of adding 700 planes to the 7,000-plane fleet. (Less time at the gate allows each plane to complete more flights.) What’s that worth? And what’s saving 10 or 20 minutes per trip worth to the millions of passengers who fly? And what’s it worth to airports to be able to handle more passengers without building more gates? I don’t know, but I’d guess a lot more than $35 million. The big question is whether WheelTug will be able to pull all this off. Will they ever need that 37,000 square feet of just-leased space? (“If you lease it, they will come.”) The company has a long — long — track record of missing target dates. And yet from what I can tell, it has serious people and partners working hard, often for little or nothing but WheelTug stock, to make the dream come true. Which is why this is a speculation only for money you can truly afford to lose; but also why I have a bazillion shares. What is life without a dream? SOMETHING HOPEFUL In first for Gulf, UAE opens embassy in Israel, hails trade ties SOMETHING BEAUITFUL Rare “glass” octopus filmed in remote corner of Pacific Ocean SOMETHING UNAMERICAN Frankly, We Did Win This Election: The Inside Story of How Trump Lost — an 8-minute interview with the Wall street Journal reporter who tells the tale. SOMETHING PATHETIC As recounted by Rachel Maddow Monday night (I’d much prefer to link you to the clip, but they don’t seem to allow that anymore, so I’ve condensed the transcript): This is a story that dates back to the summer of 2015 when a man named Donald Trump first announced he was running for president. The very next day, we ran a segment about what appeared to me to be fairly convincing evidence that the Donald Trump presidential campaign launch seemed to be the first in U.S. history where the candidate actually had to pay actors to show up and pretend to be supporters. . . . . . . [B]y the day after the Trump campaign launch, “The Hollywood Reporter” actually got its hands on an e-mail sent out by a company called Extra Mile Casting . . . a company that provides extras for photo shoots and movies and TV shows and stuff. . . . An e-mail blast sent out to their list of actors, their list of potential extras who they hire for all sorts of different gigs, said: “Hi there. We`re working with our associates at Gotham Government Relations. We`re working with them on a big event happening Tuesday, June 16th. This is an event in support of Donald Trump and an upcoming exciting announcement he`ll be making at this event. The event will be televised.” That`s an important thing for people who are considering extras gigs. “We`re looking to cast people for the event to wear t-shirts and carry signs and help cheer him in support of his announcement. We understand that this is not a traditional background job but we believe acting comes in all forms, and this is inclusive of that school of thought. The event is happening live and will be from 8:45 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.” Then in all caps: “THAT’S LESS THAN 3 HOURS.” Meaning even if this sounds disgusting to you, it`s less than three hours. And the rate for this event is 50 bucks cash at the end of the event. Isn`t that an easy way to make money? Quote: “We would love to book you if you are interested and still available. Please let us know.” So the day after this reality show guy Donald Trump announced his campaign for president we reported on this story. . . . It`s not normal for a politician to have to pay people to pretend to support his campaign. That`s sort of crazy, right? Especially because at that campaign launch event filled with actors Trump went out of his way to talk about his huge crowd and how much bigger his crowd of supporters was compared to the other candidates at their launch events. Yeah, he paid for them. That`s a story, right? By rights that should become like a foundational thing that you know about a candidate. It`s like finding out that a politician has a secret second family. You can like never forget that and talk about what their stance is on light rail. You`re always thinking, like, “Isn`t that the dude who had the secret second family?” A politician paying fake supporters to pretend to be there in support of his candidacy? That`s crazy. You can never escape that, right? So the day after Trump announced his presidential campaign, we covered that that day, we got so much shade for that. It was like we stepped on their tail, the way they screamed. Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski denied it in the most uncompromising terms. He said: There is nobody who believes that when Donald Trump goes somewhere, he does not generate the biggest, largest, and most rambunctious crowds on the planet. He said, quote: “It is just not true, unequivocally. The Donald Trump campaign and Donald Trump did not pay anybody to attend his announcement.” That was Trump`s campaign manager in 2015 when we first covered that story, and they screamed bloody murder. Boy, did we get a raft of shazizzle for our coverage of that story. Now that same Trump campaign manager admits that actually the story was true. The same Trump campaign manager telling “Business Insider” that it really was, quote, “$50 for every person to come in to stand in Trump Tower.” Ah, now they admit it. We knew it from the beginning. We reported it from the very beginning. But all the lies and the denial and the volume of the complaining and the counterattacks, somehow kept it from being one of the foundational things we understood about this little disastrous adventure we`ve just been through . . . Trump came down that escalator to the applause of cheering paid actors and, a year and a half later, on January 20, 2017, ended the American Century.
Waste Not, Want Not; A Truly Great Man July 20, 2021July 19, 2021 We’ve all seen George shamed for eating an eclair out of the garbage. I’m with George. Waste not, want not. See, please: The lie of “expired” food and the disastrous truth of America’s food waste problem. I scoop red cups out of the recycling bin because (a) they currently recycle only #1 and #2 plastic out here and the red cups of song are #6; and (b) what are you, out of your mind? By which I mean, why on earth would you throw out a perfectly good cup that with a simple rinse is good as new? By far the best “recycling” is re-using. So Saturday, after editing the recycle bin, turning my attention to the trash and seeing a half-eaten deli-wrapped bacon, egg and cheddar sandwich winking at me, I did the only sensible thing and got some salt. Two bites in, Tyler came up from downstairs (it had been his), and issued a horrified, “What are you doing?!” I grinned, preparing to take my third bite. “There are ants in that!” “Oh, Andy,” Brian moaned, having followed Tyler up the stairs. I explained that I saw no ants and started to say something about all the insects we inadvertently eat (I’ve been reading Sex At Dawn, which mentions that the average American unknowingly eats one to two pounds of insect parts a year, while other humans enjoy popping live moths in their mouths and there is such a thing as urine beer) but Tyler interrupted to say he had left the uneaten part out in the sun and when he came back to it, there were ants and he threw it out. “If you’re hungry, we’ll buy you a sandwich,” Brian mocked, purposely missing the point. I was almost certain the ants had eaten their fill and moved on. Now it was my turn. But the peer pressure was too much — a crowd was beginning to form — and I dropped the sandwich back in the trash. I should have stood my ground. I’m glad Thurgood Marshall and his backers — and Louis Brandeis’s — stood their ground: . . . Not that Marshall was ever supposed to be on the Court of Appeals, any more than he was ever supposed to be a justice of the United States Supreme Court. Jim Crow’s protectors did everything in their power to keep both prizes from his grasp. To this day, the 1967 battle over Marshall’s confirmation to the Supreme Court remains one of the two most vicious in our history — the other being the 1916 fight over the nomination of Louis Brandeis, in which the opposition to the first Jewish justice included seven former heads of the American Bar Association, the president of Harvard and former U.S. Attorney General George Wickersham, who described Brandeis’s supporters as a “bunch of Hebrew uplifters.” But because there was no television — cameras were not introduced until 1987 — we engage in collective forgetting. . . . This past Sunday’s New York Times Magazine profile is so worth reading. A truly great man. (Thanks, Lev!)
Kids, COVID, and IKEA July 17, 2021 KIDS Can we pause a minute to note that the American Rescue Act — passed over unanimous Republican opposition –is cutting the child poverty rate in half? Though neither a child nor poor myself, I count that a good thing. Even if taxes on income above $400,000 go up to help pay for it. COVID Five friends have gotten it in the last couple of weeks, including a woman who sent her five year old daughter to stay with her mother so she could isolate responsibly. The five-year-old, however, passed it on to her immunocompromised 77-year-old grandmother. All are now well — hurray for the vaccine! — but everyone really does need to get fully vaccinated (duh) . . . and it might not hurt to have a few Abbott BinaxNOW 15-minute home tests handy (2-pack for $23.99 at Walgreens) before you go visit grandma. I followed Abbott’s instructions and 15 minutes later knew I was fine. If only IKEA instructions were so clear. IKEA How on earth do they stay in business? I’m certain they are nice people, but it would be so easy for them to improve! I ordered this “kitchen base” which arrived in ten separate boxes, plus one twin-sized mattress I had not ordered, and a spoon. The spoon is a matter of some debate. Friends tell me IKEA couldn’t possibly have included a single spoon with my order, and my right brain (left brain?) agrees with them. But a day or two into the assembly, I saw a small, lone spoon in the sink. I started to wash it — the handle felt sort of crusty — and the “crust” turned out to be IKEA’s logo stamped into the metal. I know every piece of frugal flatware in the house — including two extendable forks I use to amuse unsuspecting guests (or at least myself) as I reach across the table to lift something from their plate — and in 36 years had never before seen this or any other IKEA spoon. What were the chances it had just appeared, by itself, in the sink, by coincidence? I called the ferry company to ask them what to do with the mattress (“keep it”) and thought about spending an hour on hold trying to get IKEA to tell me what they wanted me to do with it. Take it back to the ferry, pay the ferry to take it back to the mainland, try to get IKEA to pick it back up? Life is too short. I gave it away. Somewhere, someplace, someone is still on hold fighting with IKEA about the mattress they paid for that was never delivered. Meanwhile, confronted with ten boxes, each with its own set of 20-step instructions (all pictures, no words) — 200 or so steps in all — I spent an hour silently thinking to myself, “what have I done?” I have no spatial intelligence; and the “pay one of our assemblers” option is presumably not available to someone in a small island community. As I say . . . I’m certain they are nice people. But as I replied each time they sent a “customer satisfaction survey” (on a scale from 1 to 10, I clicked 1): When you send something to assemble in 10 boxes, why not put a big bright yellow sticker on one that says OPEN ME FIRST. And in that box have a DayGlo-pink QR code to scan (or URL to visit) that takes you to a YouTube of two congenial people baby-talking you through each of the 200 steps, offering encouragement from every conceivable camera angle. Yes, I know they ship all over the world, but English is widely spoken, and they could have subtitles for other languages. And, yes, I know this stuff is modular. So there might be a separate YouTube for each box. I don’t care. The point is, it’s easily doable and would vastly improve the customer experience. Soon, though, weekend guests arrived and one of them volunteered that he was actually really good at IKEA assembly, had done lots of it, and would enjoy the project. “Really?” I worried he would spend his entire weekend on this. “Really,” Mikey said — he’d do it outside on the deck listening to music, a perfect couple of summer hours. Three hours later, his Saturday afternoon largely gone, he had made some progress. I was impressed, grateful, relieved and hopeful. I pretended to agree with him that the IKEA spoon could not possibly have been delivered along with the mattress . . . that it made perfect sense that it — alone — would be in the sink while my first-(and-last)-ever IKEA purchase was being assembled a few feet away. Sunday, his work resumed. The drawers were done and the outer cabinet was done, but, he said, we were missing two parts. He’d be back in a month if I still needed his help finishing. The house out here is appropriately small. It’s a beach shack. Do you know how much of my bedroom a big frame and four drawers that can’t yet fit into the frame take up? (All the pictures showed three drawers, but along with the spoon and the mattress, they had sent a fourth drawer.) I decided, look: most of the work is done; I have 18 years of education; there must be a way I can install the “rails” on the sides of the cabinet and slide the drawers in once we get the missing parts. Monday morning, when I should have been raising money to help stave off autocracy, revitalize our infrastructure, and confront the ever-worsening climate crisis (Mars once had water, too), I set up a three-way call with Mikey, who was then back at work in a major metropolitan area, and IKEA. Fifty minutes and one escalated IKEA technician later, we came to realize that we were not missing two parts, and that the fourth drawer was meant to fit inside the third drawer. I was on my best behavior. I made no mention of the mattress or the spoon. Armed with this new information, new determination, the aforementioned 18 years of education, and a project already 90% complete, I decided to really focus and install the rails and finish the job myself. Over the course the week, in between things, I formulated a strategy and even sort of figured out what to do. And while I might eventually have succeeded, a new set of house guests arrived and one of them, a lawyer awash in spatial intelligence and altogether more capable than I, spent three hours finishing the job. We moved the completed kitchen base out of my bedroom into the kitchen –and it’s pretty great. Both the initial technician and her escalated specialist agreed that my OPEN ME FIRST idea made sense; which was selfless of them, as — if it were ever implemented — call volume would drop 95% and they’d have to find new jobs. I’m thinking of framing the spoon. THE KREMLIN LEAK. In case you missed it yesterday, here is The Guardian report that has everybody talking. At this stage, at least, we can’t be certain it’s legit — Russia, are you listening? — — but read it anyway. Five minutes. Michael M.: I find that Guardian story trivial. Trump had been working with Putin for decades laundering money into U.S. real estate. More importantly, Trump and Manafort were heavily involved with Putin in laundering Ukrainian natural gas skimming funds into Florida real estate well before this time. Those skimmed funds were used to finance the pro-Russian political candidates in Ukraine managed by Manafort dating back to 2004. Putin had already become heavily involved in U.S. politics over the Magnitsky affair sanctions of 2010. This included pouring Ukrainian money into Republican political candidates in hopes of repealing the sanctions. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, more sanctions on Russian oligarchs were imposed which resulted in Putin taking extreme efforts to get them repealed by increasing his U.S. election efforts, including getting Trump into the Presidential race. The Guardian story reads like a possible event but there was much more involved dating back before that period. Trump was certainly Putin’s candidate, but this was just an ongoing political effort by Putin. Putin had been involved in funding Republican candidates to oppose sanctions against Russia since 2010 and Putin had been financially involved with Trump for over a decade before that. I would not be surprised to find out Putin is currently behind the Q-Anon phenomenon and the insurrection events. Occam’s Razor makes the Trump turmoil easy to understand if you realize Putin has had over a decade now in organizing shadow cyber efforts. Unquestionably the dominant factor in recent political events is White Supremacy, but Putin has used the NRA in American politics and has to know the history of the ‘Southern Strategy’ in Republican politics as the key issue. COVID AGAIN: “I was horrible. But I don’t think I was a bad person. I made a lot of bad choices and thought I was smarter than everyone else.” It’s great this famous anti-vaxxer has seen the light. But will enough people see the light — on vaccines, on Q-Anon, on Putin, on climate, on Trump — for us to come together and get fully back on track? Hope so. Have a great week!
The Kremlin Leak . . . WOW. July 15, 2021July 15, 2021 Putin denies it — and if we can’t trust Putin to have our best interests at heart, whom can we trust? — but read it anyway. Five minutes.