Taxing The Super Rich September 30, 2021September 29, 2021 From Time: To Build Back Better, Tax Ultra-Wealthy Families Like Ours . . . America’s richest 400 families pay an average annual income tax rate of just 8.2%. . . . . . . Including taxes on billionaires and ultra-millionaires dramatically increases support for infrastructure and other Build Back Better investments. . . . In West Virginia, funding the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill with a billionaire’s income tax increases support from even (48% in favor, 47% oppose) to 2-1 in favor (65% in favor, 29% opposed)—a bipartisan supermajority. In Arizona, likely voters support the reconciliation bill when funded by a billionaire income tax by a 39-point margin (67% in favor, 28% opposed). These states are home to Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, respectively, whose votes will be needed to pass any final agreement. It’s popular, powerful politics for a simple reason: higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy can pay for urgent, shared needs without overburdening anyone. Fewer than 1,000 Americans would pay a billionaire’s income tax. Only one-twentieth of the richest 1% would pay the annual tax on fortunes over $50 million. Taxes like these on billionaires and ultra-millionaires wouldn’t damage their quality of life—it certainly wouldn’t hurt ours—and no one who wasn’t already an ultra-millionaire would pay a cent under either policy. Taxing America’s wealthiest citizens is productive and patriotic, not punitive. Improved roads and railways, safer neighborhoods and high-quality schools in every zip code boost economic freedom and allow working people to build wealth of their own. . . . All our wealth, in one way or another, is built on investments our country has already made. Additional investments will empower more Americans to compete in the global economy . . . Voters across the political spectrum view a system that asks Americans with massive fortunes to contribute so little to America’s future as fundamentally broken. They are right. Our estate attorneys might not thank us for pointing that out—but our grandchildren will. Amen, Liesel and Ian.
Afghanistan Explained September 29, 2021September 28, 2021 Listen to this “The Daily” with Brig. Gen. Khoshal Sadat. “We speak to the General about growing up under the Taliban, his career in the military and the future of Afghanistan.” It all makes a tragic sense. In unrelated news . . . https://andrewtobias.com/wp-content/uploads/6-brazilian-men.mp4 And while we’re on the subject: Apparently, this is true.
Positive News For Our Puts September 28, 2021September 27, 2021 But first . . . Required reading, in case you missed it: Our Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here, by Robert Kagan. Serious stuff going down. Better to fight it now, with votes, political activism, contributions . . . and multiple. long, respectful conversations with nice people who’ve been misled . . . than to see it play out in horrible ways, at which January 6th could just prove to have been a hint. STON, suggested September 16 at $1.92, popped a little yesterday on this letter to the board. I have no clue what will happen, if anything at all. We’ll have been robbed if, say, the stock is worth $15 and, a few months from now, we have to settle for $5.25; though I can think of worse things. EVLO, meanwhile — here, here, and here — yesterday issued what it called positive phase 2 results. The stock — $13.49 when Guru suggested buying puts (betting it would go down) — closed up 17 cents at $7.42 yesterday (and then fell to $7.01 in after-hours trading). I understand none of the science. In case you do — or don’t but, like me, bought October and November puts — I offer Guru’s take on that “positive” news: The primary analysis is the mean change in PASI, and you will see in paragraph three that there is no “p<0.05,” but instead some comment I’ve never seen used for a phase 2 that it was 80% – 90% probable on a Bayesian basis– that’s doublespeak for “it failed.” (Bayesian analysis is usually used for other assessments.) The next paragraph lists one of about 100 secondary endpoints, where they found “p less than 0.05” for the lowest two doses, but not the highest dose which had the weakest efficacy on this endpoint. Random analysis would say that of 100 endpoints you can see five that are “p<0.05” just by chance, and they’ve so far found two. Almost any failed trial will have this kind of “success.” The trial failed. There’s always some chance the stock rallies a bit anyway just because the analysts are more brain-dead now than ever before, but October is the month the mutual funds have to register tax losses, so there is a reasonable case that it continues to selloff into the end of the week and next week, to probably something around $5. Note that all the “efficacy” at week 16 is “loss of efficacy” in the placebo from week 12 to 16– which won’t happen in a second trial. Positive news indeed.
Are You A Luddite? September 25, 2021September 25, 2021 The story of Ned Ludd — a fascinating 18-minute Planet Money from 2015, relevant today . . . . . . because, as suggested earlier this month, the future holds two daunting but potentially self-canceling problems: > Huge numbers of jobs lost to automation and artificial intelligence; > Huge numbers of workers needed to do the work Biden’s $4.5 trillion investment in physical and human infrastructure will require. To the extent there turns out to be more work than people, an easy solution will be to welcome more immigrants dying to come do it. Prior waves of immigrants only made the U.S. stronger and more prosperous. To the extent the opposite proves true — more people than jobs — there could be measures to encourage people to work fewer hours and spread that work around. If that strikes you as un-American, ask yourself whether “weekends” or “the 40-hour work week” or “child labor laws” were un-American? All served to spread the work around. Perhaps someday a 35-hour work week and the four-to-six weeks of vacation routine in Europe might not seem so bad in the U.S. Not to mention higher wages and the Universal Basic Income likely to become standard in advanced nations over the next couple of decades. Because: if America can feed, clothe, clean, house, power, transport, amuse, and otherwise care for itself with less effort, thanks to technological advance — isn’t that a good thing? It won’t be all smooth sailing — change disrupts lives. But the future is coming, and in the main, the country has prospered and living standards have improved even as technology has put millions out of work (remember the “information” lady?). Forty years ago, when inflation-adjusted wages stopped rising, how many middle class families had iPhones or GPS or endless entertainment choices? Our biggest challenge is not technological but political: finding sensible ways to reverse the enormous wealth inequality those 40 years have wrought as we’ve become a plutocracy with ever more families living paycheck to paycheck. The President’s Build Back Better investments will begin to address this problem, especially to the extent they’re paid for with higher taxes on those at the very top who saw their tax rates slashed again and again — and again — under the most recent Republican administrations. (Only Bush 41 had the good sense and decency not to slash taxes on the rich, instead raising the top rate slightly.) Hurray for automation. Hurray for productivity. Have a great week!
Debt And Piranhas – The Transcript September 24, 2021September 23, 2021 As promised, if you didn’t get a chance to watch. . . . . . the transcript (excerpted): [MADDOW] When World War I started in Europe, President Woodrow Wilson was bound and determined that the United States would not get itself involved. By keeping us out of the Great War, he was reelected in 1916. But World War I was nevertheless dragging on, and expanding and by the spring of 1917, not even six months after Wilson had been reelected on the slogan, “he kept us out of war,” Congress voted to declare war and we jumped in. But the political wrangling over that hard decision in 1917, left us with a little parting gift that is still totally screwing us up today. Because part of the way they tried to win over people who had objected us joining the war on cost grounds was to create a new thing in U.S. law. A new limit on what our country could spend. We could spend up to X amounts, but for any reason if the government wanted to spend any more than, Congress would have to affirmatively regroup, write a piece of legislation, and pass a new limit on what we could spend. That process was created in 1917 to placate the isolationists who didn`t want us to enter World War I. That is the very specific history of how we got what we call “the debt ceiling.” We got it in 1917 and for more than a hundred years now, we have kept it. It doesn`t function as a barrier to our government spending money, obviously. It doesn`t even keep us from spending endlessly and rapaciously on years-long epic wars. It doesn`t constrain U.S. government spending in any meaningful way at all. It just gives Congress something to do that they have to do every so often, because if they don`t, we will default on our debt and fling ourselves into a fiery self-imposed financial train crash for no reason other than that nobody ever thought to turn off this stupid thing that we turned on in 1917 because we needed to placate people who felt bad that we changed our minds about entering that war. And over the 100-plus years that we have been saddled with this thing, it has loomed smaller or larger depending on the decade, depending on circumstances. Just since roughly 1960, Congress had to vote to raise the stupid debt ceiling dozens of times, nearly a hundred times under presidents of both parties. Again, it`s work that you have to do for no benefit. You get nothing positive for doing it. But if you don`t do it, fiery financial disaster on a national, and indeed, international scale. It`s like if you have a backyard at your house or your apartment and you decided you were going to keep a piranha-filled lagoon right next to the swing set. I mean, yes, theoretically, having the piranha filled lagoon there might make your kids more careful in the swing set, make them develop a good balance so they don`t fall in and get eaten by the piranhas, right? Theoretically, okay, maybe there`s some benefit to it. But honestly, it`s all downside. Why would you do that? They might fall in. Why would you set a trap like that in your yard? Why would you set a trap like this in American law? But we have kept it ever since 1917. There it is. Four years ago, September 2017, Trump’s first year, Democrats agreed to raise the debt ceiling. Not a single Democrat voted no. They voted unanimously not to throw the country in the proverbial piranha pit. Yes, the other party is in charge, but let`s not self inflict a totally pointless crisis and huge unnecessary expenditure on our country by having us hit the debt ceiling, default on our debt, have a credit rating downgraded, throwing ourselves and a big part of the world into another financial crash for no reason. Democrats said let`s not do that. It doesn`t matter that the Republicans are in charge. Nobody wants that for our country. We will vote unanimously, so that should not happen. That was four years ago. September 27. Now it is September 2021. And it`s the mirror image of the partisan control, right? Now we`ve got a Democrat in his first year as president. Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate. And just like September 2017, once again, it is time to do that thing. That we have been doing since World War I. Once again, it is time to take that dumb vote raise the debt ceiling, in order to placate the ghost of the Austria-Hungarian empire, or why ever we still do this. It is ridiculous that we still do it, but if we don`t do it — real problems, default crisis, huge, expensive, self-inflicted wound. And this time, with Democrats in control, Republicans say they won`t do it. They will not vote to keep the lights on. They will not vote to avoid a government shutdown, and they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. In fact, they say they will filibuster the debt ceiling vote, which means Democrats can`t raise the debt ceiling unless they get Republican senators to side with them and Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell says no Republicans are going to do that. When Trump and the Republicans were in charge four years ago, Democrats did this unanimously for the country. Now that Biden and the Democrats are in charge, Republicans stand unanimously against it. So, apparently, we`re going to take a deliberate leap into the piranha pool, unless something changes, soon. Tonight, the House just in the last half hour has voted to raise the debt ceiling to keep the lights on and keep our country out of the proverbial piranha pool. Zero Republicans voted with the Democrats to do this. And in the Senate, Republicans say they won`t do it. It doesn`t matter that Democrats voted to do that unanimously when Republicans were in control. With Democrats in control, Republicans say no, screw it. There’s much more, as you know if you watched. But that’s a good start. Spain is amazing. Wish you were here.
Debt and Piranhas September 22, 2021September 22, 2021 Watch this.* The history — and insanity — of the “debt ceiling” explained . . . and what it means to us today. Just as some would rather keep the pandemic going than get vaccinated (because Biden’s asked them to), so Republican senators say they would rather destroy the world economy than raise the debt ceiling. This is not the U.S. at her best. *The September 21 clip. It may expire soon; I plan to post the transcript, as an alternative, once available.
The Rain In Spain . . . September 21, 2021 . . . should now be on the wane. An impressive downpour in San Sebastián just now. Madrid was spectacular. Bilbao — oh-wow-oh! Taking a day or two off. Don’t let anything important happen. Thanks!
George W. Bush’s Finest Moment September 20, 2021September 19, 2021 Better late than never. Please share! (Sorry only to be seeing this now.) BONUS: Some men menstruate, too. Dan Savage explains. Bil Maher is so right! But so is Dan Savage, if you hear him out. Intelligent discussion at its best. Have a great week.
Al, Antietam, and Alec September 18, 2021 Al Franken on how being a Nazi in America was less acceptable in the Fifties. Five minutes. Heather Cox Richardson on Antietam. Is the battle over? I had actually never read Maurice (pronounced: MORE-iss), E.M. Forster‘s famous pre-World War I novel about the love that dared not speak its name (published only after his death, in 1971). What got me to read it was Alec, a novel written by William di Canzio a century later that tells the exact same story — but from the young game keeper’s point of view. When I finished, I could not fail to go back and read Maurice. It’s hard to imagine that things were ever such. But for the longest time they were — and in much of Africa, the Muslim world, Russia/Chechnya/Belarus and red-state America still are . Alec adds years to the story, up through and beyond World War I. That makes reading it perhaps even more compelling than reading Maurice, if you have time for just one. How little most of us know of World War I. Compare the sacrifice and suffering di Canzio describes (or that of Antietam) to the sacrifice involved in getting two shots of vaccine. Imagine if those wars could have been fought and won so easily. Have a great weekend!
Why RCN’s Customer Service May Determine America’s Future September 16, 2021September 16, 2021 But first . . . I bought STON at $1.92 yesterday, hoping no one I know will ever be a customer. I knew them not when, as recently as 2016, their stock was $29 and paid a 66-cent quarterly dividend. I barely know about them now, except that a smart friend who does follow them closely believes they’re in much better shape than the reported numbers would suggest and is adding to his already not inconsiderable holdings. Only with money you can truly afford to lose . . . but it’s not crazy to hope for a double or triple from here within a year or two. I did not buy SPRT yesterday. I believe anyone who failed immediately to sell at $8 that glorious morning in March when out of the blue it quadrupled was an idiot. (Though, with the stock having hit $36 before dropping back, he or she might disagree.) This is a company that burns huge amounts of natural gas into the atmosphere to produce electricity to mine crypto, which is to say: nothing. The U.S. Treasury also creates money out of thin air, but without polluting that air. So long as the world loses faith in government-backed currencies –and governments themselves — crypto prices will continue to rise, just as tulip prices would rise if tulips became the medium of exchange people preferred as payment for their labor or their homes. (“I don’t want $575,000 for my house — I want 60 tulips! or 10 Bitcoin!”) And now . . . RCN is my cable provider. They let people like me suspend service for the summer, if we’ll be away, or the winter, or whenever . . . but it’s their policy to make it difficult, to discourage it. Call it “Customer Disservice.” As in, “Hello. Customer Disservice. Please hold.” (I’m leading to a larger point, so hang on.) The way it should work, of course, is that you sign on to their website, click a “Suspend/Resume Service” toggle, and you’re done. Given the huge investment they’ve made in plant and equipment, it would be perfectly reasonable for RCN to give people an incentive not to suspend service . . . to allow, say, no more than two suspensions a year. Or to charge a fee each time. Or . . . well, lots of ways to do it. Their chosen method, however, is to require a phone conversation with each suspension and resumption, which is a problem because they are almost always experiencing “unusually high call volume.” None of the menu options is “suspend or resume service,” so you just have to guess. I always guess “upgrade service,” thinking that might get me the shortest wait time. Anyhow, last night I spent 31 minutes trying to resume my suspended service so I could start paying — do not judge me — $177 a month to watch MSNBC. (Yes, I know. Do not email me about this.) Much of those 31 minutes were with a really nice woman in Oklahoma, none of whose fault this was. Each time she asked permission to place me “on a brief two-to-thee minute hold” (four times?) I had two to three minutes to think large thoughts. Eventually, she got it all squared way, told me how much RCN appreciated my business, told me how much she had enjoyed talking with me — we had become phone friends — and told me it all should be working in about 10 minutes. Today, and another phone call later, it is still not working — but that’s not my point. My point is that the U.S. faces two looming challenges: a huge unemployment crisis, as more and more jobs are filled more by robots and artificial intelligence (read Andrew Yang’s The War On Normal People for a sense of how quickly this trend may accelerate) a huge labor shortage as we look to spend trillions on labor to revitalize our physical infrastructure, provide more day-care and free pre-K, more eldercare, and so much more The sharp-eyed reader will note that each looming challenge solves the other. Granted, my RCN friend in Oklahoma didn’t sound as though she could instantly pick up stakes once replaced with a “suspend/resume” toggle and start installing solar panels or de-leading water pipes. But she sure sounded like someone who’d be great as a teacher or elder-care aide, or pretty much anything else that required a good heart, a good mind, and people skills. So maybe we should move aggressively on both fronts: make our economy as efficient as possible, racking up extra corporate profits . . . and use all that freed up labor (paid for in part with the extra tax revenue on those extra profits) to do the work that really does need doing here. Because there is a lot of it. Which leads me to today’s bonus: BONUS A Grand Bargain On Infrastructure And Saving Democracy? Maybe — just maybe — there’s hope yet.