Author: A.T.

Israel, Are You Listening?

Of current events, my Israeli hosts from last month write:

We have reached a moment that frightens many but at which — from a systemic and historical perspective — we are lucky to have arrived and honestly should have arrived much earlier.

Bibi has drugged the masses for decades. Weaning will be difficult and painful, but after that the country will grow again and emerge stronger and more just.

The process of getting rid of “Bibism” has awakened huge parts of the population and consolidated in them a civil, political, social, political, and economic consciousness that was not there before.

Alongside it, a tremendous force derived from a sense of personal-social competence has also been released: the feeling that all of us together through partially coordinated individual actions can shape reality and our future.

When we cleanse bibism from the gutters of our state, we will build a civil and political coalition that will finally enshrine in a constitution the rights of all of us against any future “Bibi”. We must use our newfound strength to deal with the cost of living, a fair welfare state, and peace with our neighbors.

Necessary now: optimism, faith in our ability, big dreams and setting our eyes on grand national goals!

He is not backing down but he is being peeled off of power. I am guessing he will be out of power (formally or informally) within days.

“Let us pray,” as my mother used to say.

DISTURBING BONUS

“Israel, If You’re Listening.”

 

Triplets And Taxes

For me, kids are like boats.  Love ’em / would never want to be responsible for one myself.

Let alone three.

But reading about them?

That has turned out to be very fun:

The author‘s been a pal since college.

Living through his and Barb’s struggle to get pregnant without having to get pregnant myself . . . deciding whether or not to “reduce” the pregnancy without having to decide that myself . . . changing diapers 37,000 times (literally) without having to get anywhere near them . . . reading Not Your Father’s America I felt like the uncle who gets to enjoy the kids for a few hours with none of the hard stuff.

(Cort and Barb would be first to acknowledge they were blessed with the resources to get a lot of help.)

And as a bonus, sprinkled throughout the book are some socio-economic observations you won’t find in Dr. Spock.

Two of which I share here:

Determined to become his own boss, my father and mother drove to California in search of a small newspaper they could buy. Imagine that. It was every newspaperman’s dream to own his own paper. They drove from the top of California to the bottom, from Eureka, near Oregon, to Chula Vista, near the Mexican border, stopping in every little town and hamlet that had a small independent newspaper that was or might be for sale. They found the El Cajon Valley News in East San Diego County about thirty freeway minutes from the beach and about an hour from Mexico. I know. Too bad about the beach. I guess the La Jolla Light, in one of California’s premiere beach towns, wasn’t for sale. The paper was a “shopper” that came out twice a week on Thursdays and Sundays, and they could afford it. They paid $65,000, using money they had saved and some they borrowed. My father achieved his dream—he became the editor and publisher of his own newspaper. He got a piece of the American dream right there. It was 1954. Almost immediately, my dad set out to expand the Valley News, as it was also called, into a daily newspaper. He built a new building, bought a new printing press, and purchased composing machines, including some that had been damaged in a fire. He hired reporters, photographers, typesetters, proofreaders, pressmen, advertising salesmen and women, a circulation manager, job printers, and paperboys. He created jobs. He didn’t get any special tax breaks to do what he was doing; he just did it. He was turning a twice-weekly paper into a daily. Did I mention it was 1954? When my mom and dad were growing the El Cajon Valley News, the maximum federal income tax rate on regular income was 91 percent. That’s right, 91 percent. My father wasn’t complaining about the tax rate. He was growing a business, one that would serve the community and support our family for the next decade.

Growing up, I heard the old saying, attributed to Benjamin Franklin in 1789: “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” I got it. Taxes came with the territory. They weren’t evil. They were inevitable. They were part of life. Politicians didn’t swear a pledge that they’d never, ever raise taxes. That would’ve been like saying they were never, ever going to die. This notion that taxes are evil, and we shouldn’t have to pay them, is a relatively recent perversion advanced by a guy named Grover Norquist since the mid-1980s. Grover grew up rich. His father was a vice president of the Polaroid Corporation which, when I was growing up, used to make “instant” cameras. (Amazingly, they still do.) You could take a picture with a Polaroid and, in minutes, a color print of the photograph you had just taken would come out the front of the camera! It was (and is) astonishing. Around the age of twelve, the story goes, Grover came to believe that taxes were evil. I grew up not-so-rich and came to believe that taxes were a necessity, that they were the price we all have to pay to enjoy the country we live in. My family never belonged to a country club, and nobody I knew growing up belonged to a “gym.” I think some of my older brothers’ friends worked out at the YMCA because the “Y” had a gymnasium. And there were gymnasiums at high schools. But in the ’60s, people didn’t join gyms and work out. They smoked and drank, as you know if you’ve ever watched Mad Men. Today, of course, we know quite a few people who belong to country clubs, even more who have gym memberships, and hardly anybody who smokes. They gladly pay their dues to be members of their country clubs and gyms and don’t think much of it. But when you think about it, why should anyone have to pay dues to use a country club or a gym? Why can’t you just go in there and use the exercise equipment, swim in the pool, play golf, and use the tennis courts for free? It’s there. Why should you have to pay to use it? Because if you didn’t, there wouldn’t be a country club or gym. There’d be an empty lot with weeds on it. The gym or country club wouldn’t exist for you to use if someone didn’t pay for it. And that someone is you.

In the America my father left to me, we understood this. I thought everybody understood this. Taxes are like dues, or better yet, membership fees. Taxes pay for all the things we all get to use—roads, bridges, schools, airports, dams, water systems, sewer systems, the power grid—things that wouldn’t be there if we didn’t all collectively pay for them. Taxes also pay for all the people who make our lives better and safer: teachers, first responders, city planners, postal workers, sanitation workers, the army, navy, air force, marines. Taxes are an investment in what we want and need to function as a country. Painting taxes with a big, black brush, the way Grover Norquist has, is called “framing,” which is a twenty-first-century term for spinning the truth or, more accurately, distorting it. Instead of “framing” taxes for what they are—the membership fees we pay to enjoy everything we all need and share—taxes have been framed as an excessive unnecessary evil, especially for the rich. “We should be able to keep more of our money instead of giving it to the government,” the anti-tax zealots say. I tried this with the gym. I told them I was going to keep more of my money instead of giving it to them. They said, “Fine,” and locked me out of the gym.

And this:

April 15, 1996

For the first time in our lives, we have three dependents we can claim on our tax return. Could it be there’s a silver lining in these diaper-filled clouds? I start looking at how we pay taxes, who pays taxes, and where our tax dollars go. As mentioned earlier, I’ve always believed taxes are an inevitable necessity, even as conservatives tirelessly “frame” them as a bad thing. Taxes, who pays them, and how we spend what’s collected reveals a lot about who we are, what we value, and what we’re committed to as a nation. In the 1996 US budget, for example, we’ll spend the most on Social Security (22 percent); Medicare and Medicaid is next (17 percent); defense (16 percent), interest on the debt (16 percent); domestic discretionary spending, such as health, education, housing, energy, food, and agriculture (16 percent); “other” (12 percent), and international affairs (1 percent). (Source: Govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-1996)

Mike Lofgren, an author and a Republican, has written incisively about taxes and budgeting, including a number of related realities, myths, and deceptions. Mr. Lofgren was a congressional staff member for twenty-eight years, serving on both the House and Senate Budget committees. When he left government service, he wrote a powerful essay on Truthout.org titled, “Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult.” In the essay, Lofgren recalls: “When I began work on Capitol Hill in 1983, President Ronald Reagan adopted policies devised by his young budget director, David Stockman, who came up with what he called a ‘magic asterisk’ in his documents to show that future deficits could be imagined out of existence” by simply placing an asterisk next to potential, future budget cuts. “This deception,” he observes, “allowed the Reagan Administration to push through steep tax cuts and vast military increases,” presumably while pointing to the “magic asterisks.” “Over President Reagan’s two terms,” Lofgren explains, “America’s gross federal debt nearly tripled. Republicans don’t like to talk about this. They like to call Democrats ‘tax and spend Democrats.’ But Republicans have been budgeting with the ‘magic asterisk’ and driving up deficits ever since Reagan.” In other words, with their “magic asterisk,” the Republicans were saying to themselves, “We’re going to explode the deficit by giving rich people a tax cut and spending more on defense but, if anyone insists on cutting costs, they could cut the lines in the budget that have an asterisk by them.” Welcome to “Magical Budget Thinking.” Lofgren later expanded on his essay in a book, The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted, pointing out that modest tax increases by both President George H. W. Bush and President Clinton effectively “refuted the Republican assertion that even the smallest tax increase would ruin the economy.” It blew a hole in their framing. “Republicans have been remarkably successful in delinking taxes from fiscal policy, ‘framing’ taxes as a distasteful personal burden unconnected to widely desired public goods like roads, food-safety inspections, or clean water,” Lofgren writes. “Instead, they claim that reducing taxes will spur so much investment the cuts will ‘pay for themselves.’ Three decades of evidence have shown this claim to be false . . .” “Working for Republicans,” Lofgren concludes, “I learned the hard way that expecting the [Republican] party to restrain the deficit, let alone balance the budget is, in Samuel Johnson’s words, ‘the triumph of hope over experience.’”

(Unfortunately, in 2001, as our boys are turning six, George W. Bush will follow the example of Mr. Reagan, not his father, Lofgren recalls. “[W’s] policies turned a $236 billion budget surplus he inherited in 2000 into a $459 billion deficit in 2008, while in those same eight years doubling the national debt.” That’s a $659 billon swing in the wrong direction, which would have horrified fiscally conservative Republicans in the past. By contrast, when President Obama took office on January 20, 2009, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the projection for the deficit Obama inherited was $1.2 trillion and 9.8 percent of GDP. Five years later, the CBO projected the federal deficit would be $492 billion, down from $1.2 trillion, and just 2.8 percent of GDP, down from 9.8 percent. This five-year reduction under President Obama ranks as the largest and fastest reduction of the deficit since the end of World War II more than seventy years before. Yep. That’s what you get with “tax and spend Democrats.”) The bottom line: “Trickle Down Economics”—the distribution of wealth to big corporations and the very rich in hopes it will trickle down to benefit ordinary workers—has never worked. America will be rebuilt by restoring the middle class, not by continuing to favor the moneyed class. In the America we’re leaving to our children, vital pieces of our infrastructure—roads, bridges, schools, water systems—are failing and urgently need repair. Other essential pieces of infrastructure need to be created or expanded—rural broadband internet connectivity, investment in clean energy production, a nationwide smart electric grid. The money to pay for these things can be found by requiring the super-rich and our largest corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. This may necessitate a thorough revision of the US tax code and spending millions more to enable the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to enforce the new code, but it must be done.

→ It should be noted that the Lofgren essay and book linked to above are now more than a decade old.  The “crazy” Republican Party Lofgren abandoned when he decided it was a cult — scary as he thought it had become — was nothing compared with the cult it is now.

And while I’m plugging books, consider Trust.

Normally, I suggest listening to books — and you could certainly do that here.  But Trust is one that may be easier to follow in print.

Normally, too, one wants a hint, at least, of “what’s it about?”  But this novel is so inventive and builds in such an interesting way all I’ll say is: it’s about money.  At least in large measure.  No great harm knowing more, I guess.  But I’m glad I didn’t.

Have a great weekend.

 

Taking A Pickaxe To Democracy

How is it that a 50-50 state — that most recently elected a Democrat governor, so maybe slightly tilted blue — had a Congressional delegation that skewed 10 to 3 Republican . . . and may soon have it again?

Trey Beck explains.

(I didn’t know what a homologue was, either, but that’s beside the point.)

Please meet me at the end (read just what I’ve bolded if time’s tight), because this is bigger than just North Carolina:

North Carolina GOP says fairness is for losers

For a few years now, the North Carolina state GOP has vied with their homologues in Florida, Texas, Wisconsin, Ohio, Missouri, and Arizona to be the most obnoxious and checked out from the day-to-day needs of the people its members ostensibly serve. NC Republicans have alternatively expanded or circumscribed the governor’s powers, depending on who’s in office.

They have grossly interfered with the governance of the UNC System.

They have laughed in public hearings about how unfair their maps are. They have looked on passively as election workers have been hassled, or refused to certify election results, or both simultaneously. They passed HB 2, the so-called “bathroom bill,” which did much more than keep trans people out of the “wrong” bathroom, like overriding local ordinances that broadly protected LGBTQ rights. HB 2 was such a flop nationally and with local business leaders that it was incrementally watered down and ultimately repealed, but at a great economic cost to the state and a possibly greater toll on the emotional well-being of many individual North Carolinians.

With NC’s state supreme court now in conservative hands after the 2022 elections, Republicans there are again taking a pickaxe to democracy and the administrative state for partisan gain.

First, with the new conservative majority on the NC supreme court, NC Republicans are looking to basically undo the state supreme court’s abolition of partisan gerrymandering. In January, state GOP leadership asked the court to rehear a 2022 gerrymandering case (as well as a separate voter ID case). The gerrymandering case in question was to enforce court-drawn maps that were themselves the product of a pair of 2019 suits, one relating to U.S. House districts and another to state legislative districts, that had resulted in the court’s throwing out gerrymandered maps authored by state Republicans. The court’s then-liberal majority had agreed with the 2019 plaintiffs’ argument, among others, that partisan gerrymanders are plainly barred by the state’s constitution’s insistence on “free” elections. This provision is not included in the U.S. Constitution but is found in one form or another in many state constitutions, including in Pennsylvania’s, where litigants also were successful in having their supreme court throw out bad Republican maps. With fair maps, North Carolina’s U.S. House delegation magically went from a 3-10 D/R split in 2018 to its current 7-7 composition. (The state gained a U.S. House seat in 2020 reapportionment.)

This equitable outcome annoyed NC Republicans, and now they have a chance to fix that. It seems likely that Republicans will prevail in this new challenge given that the newly conservative court agreed in the first instance to take up the settled case, against jurisprudential custom seeing as the facts and governing law had not changed in the one month since the previous court’s ruling. If so, we can safely bank on the GOP trying to re-map their way to three to five marginal U.S. House seats—potentially enough on its own to alter the U.S. House majority in 2024—and to aggressively engineer impregnable supermajorities in both state legislative chambers. There will be no recourse to SCOTUS because in 2017 John Roberts & Friends told us that it would be too political for judges to stop politicians from drawing maps that advantage themselves, and therefore it’s up to voters to vote them out of their gerrymandered districts if they are unhappy. (I do not think this is an unfair distillation by me, as ridiculous as it may seem.)

Of course, partisan gerrymandering is already old hat in NC. More remarkable is the second Republican, um, “innovation,” which is pending legislation that would radically alter the structure of the state’s senate. Currently, the North Carolina senate, like NC’s lower house and best I can tell every other state legislative body, is apportioned on the basis of population. A GOP bill (oddly, introduced in the lower house) would amend the state constitution so that each of the upper chamber’s 50 senators would represent exactly two of the state’s 100 counties.

This is a naked attempt to further disenfranchise urban and suburban, Democratic-leaning North Carolinians. This would mean that Mecklenburg and Wake counties, which contain the cities of Charlotte and Raleigh respectively and which, at 1.1 million residents each, account for over 20% of NC’s total population, would be accorded the same senate representation as coastal Tyrell County, the home of about 4,000 people whose voters happened to go 57-42 for Trump in 2020. Who needs gerrymandering if you can rig an even redder senate this way?

North Carolina is a politically competitive state, as evidenced by Democrats’ regularly winning statewide office for governor, AG, and supreme court seats. It is not lost on state Republicans that, per Ballotpedia, about 47% of the state’s population resides in 22 solidly Democratic counties while 46% of the state’s population resides in 66 solidly Republican ones. Rather than compete for vote share by putting forth the most popular program, Republicans are openly seeking to cement hegemony through demographic sorting, whether through gerrymandering or per-county representation.

If the proposed constitutional amendment passes both chambers, it would in theory be on the statewide ballot in the 2024 election, although many legal experts doubt the measure would pass legal challenges under federal law, especially in connection with the “one person, one vote” principle enshrined in the Warren Court’s 1964 Reynolds v. Sims decision. But with this SCOTUS, we’re in uncharted waters.

The third terribly cute maneuver by NC Republicans is the February adoption of a lower house rule change (introduced by the very same speaker who gave us HB 2) to ditch the previous legislative session’s two-day notice requirement for a vote to override a governor’s veto. The Republicans already have a veto-proof supermajority in the upper chamber, and they are only one vote south of one in the lower chamber. By calling votes when they expect a mere two members of the house minority to be absent, however briefly (including literally on a bathroom break, hence some ridicule of this as a new form of “bathroom bill”), Republican leadership can connive to override any of Democratic Governor Cooper’s many expected vetoes this session. The Republicans have already been pressed by social conservatives to move bills to further restrict abortions and to expand gun access, so this technical change may result in bad laws that Cooper will be powerless to stop.

That’s all the good news I’ve got for today.

It’s one thing for Republicans to oppose Democratic policies and programs, like Social Security and Medicare or the Violence Against Women Act — that’s their brand.  But lately they’ve come to oppose democracy itself.

Don’t like the outcome of the most secure presidential election in history?  Fight to overturn it.

Don’t like Georgia prosecutors pursuing crimes committed by Republicans?  Give yourselves the power to remove them.

Lose the popular vote in 7 of the last 8 elections?  Make a rule that a Democratic president twice elected with a majority of the popular vote can’t fill a Supreme Court vacancy in the last 8 months of his term but that a Republican president who lost the popular vote can — in the last 8 days of his term.

Don’t like that nearly 64.5% of Floridians voted to restore most ex-cons’ voting rights once they’d paid their debt to society?  Find ways to thwart their will.

Want to suppress the black vote?  Sentence a Texas woman to five years for casting a provisional ballot that was never counted.

And on and on.

Some think-tank Republican intellectuals — appalled as they may be by Trump himself — have quietly conlcuded that democracy is too cumbersome a system to compete in today’s world.  China can build a skyscraper in 19 days; it took Bill Maher1,131 days to install solar panels.  Autocrats get things done.

And that’s a discussion to be had . . . but, I would argue, out in the open.  Those Republicans should say it: “We no longer think democracy is the best system for America.  The press is the enemy of the people.  The courts are rigged. We think Putin and Xi and Kim — and Orban! — have it right.  Freedom, shreedom:  We love the path Hungary is taking!”

 

Satire And The Singularity

Alexandra Petri’s Excerpts from a civics textbook I assume would be welcome in Florida. 

(Thanks, as always, Glenn.)

The above was a joke — or, well, satire.

Not this.  This is real:

Last fall, a guy used (free) ChatGPT to get D on one of his college exams . . .

. . . and made a bet it would take until 2029 before ChatGPT could score A‘s.

You know where this is headed.

Forget 2029.

Here we are a few months later and — yep — ChatGPT-4 ($20/month) got an A.

The singularity is near.

GPT-4 is 82% less likely to respond to requests for disallowed content than its predecessor and scores 40% higher on certain tests of factuality.

It will also let developers decide their AI’s style of tone and verbosity.

For example, GPT-4 can assume a Socratic style of conversation and respond to questions with questions. The previous iteration of the technology had a fixed tone and style.

Soon ChatGPT users will have the option to change the chatbot’s tone and style of responses, OpenAI said.

. . . GPT-4 can also help individuals calculate their taxes, a demonstration by Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president, showed.

The demo showed it could take a photo of a hand-drawn mock-up for a simple website and create a real one. . . .

If you want GPT-4, just go to your free account at ChatGPT and click the “Upgrade” option.

WACO / WEAK? NO / WACK-O / WOKE

WACO

Trump supporters are organizing to ‘stock up on weaponry’ after his arrest (should there be one).

He has scheduled a rally for this coming Saturday in Waco.

Younger readers may not know the town’s significance, but tomorrow, March 22, Netflix releases Waco: American Apocalypse.

‘Waco: American Apocalypse’ Isn’t the Waco Story You Think You Know
The new doc series includes FBI videos that’ve never been released to the public before.

By Amanda Richards & Ingrid Ostby

It’s a tangled, gruesome story you’ve probably heard before, but you’ve never heard — or seen — it this way. Waco: American Apocalypse explores the infamous 51-day standoff outside of Waco, Texas, between the US government and the Branch Davidian religious sect led by David Koresh. The bloody siege resulted in the loss of 86 lives, and the new three-part documentary retells this infamous event with never-before-seen material as well as realistic CGI visualizations.

. . . Koresh had convinced all of them that he was their messiah, the only one who could save them [he alone could fix it] when the apocalypse inevitably unfolded on their doorstep [he would be their retribution].

Koresh armed his followers with guns and grenades and converted automatic assault rifles, most of which broke federal gun laws. The US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) obtained a warrant for Koresh’s arrest, and what happened next was one of the most shocking tragedies in recent American history. The bloody, multi-week gunfight and televised hostage negotiations resulted in the deaths of dozens of people, including 28 children.

Thirty years after the tragic event, Waco: American Apocalypse airs intimate interviews with people from all sides of the conflict, including one of Koresh’s spiritual wives, the last child released from the compound alive and members of the ATF tactical team who watched their colleagues die in the shoot-out. The limited series includes raw news footage never before released to the public, as well as recently unearthed videotapes inside the FBI Crisis Negotiation Unit.

What a remarkable venue to choose for a rally.

The perfect spot if you want to portray the American government as the enemy.  As Putin and Xi and the Ayatollah do.  As the 9/11 hijackers and the Oklahoma City bomber did.

Will my pal Steve Schwarzman and these lesser-known multi-million-dollar donors to Trump’s 2020 campaign be there?

Will Tucker Carlson and Rupert Murdoch be there?  Roseanne Barr?

How about the majority of House and Senate Republicans who twice voted not to impeach or convict?  Or to certify the election?  Or to investigate January 6th?

Will the Chair of the Republican National Committee be in Waco commemorating the 30th anniversary of the stand the Branch Davidian cult members took against the United States of America?

I’m guessing not, but thousands of Trump’s cult members will be.

WEAK? NO

Those who are lamenting that “prosecutors are bringing the weakest case first” mean to say it is the least serious case.  A $130,000 illegal campaign contribution isn’t the same as attempting to overturn a free and fair election.  But it’s anything but a weak case, as Michael Cohen, who served three years in prison for it (in a case brought by the Trump Justice Department), would affirm.  As for its timing, as Chuck Rosenberg has explained: “you bring cases when they’re ready.”  A good prosecutor won’t rush a case for political reasons — nor delay one.  If Trump is outraged anyone would suffer consequences for something so trivial, why didn’t he pardon Michael Cohen or commute his sentence?

WACK-O

$5 million per person for reparations?  Not a single Democratic candidate for the House or Senate supports it, but Republicans will use it to win more power to cut back Democratic efforts to lessen inequality.  It’s a huge gift to Trump and Q-Anon, Ted Cruz and Fox News.

Defund the police?  Insane!  Most voters see the need to reform and improve policing — but the slogan itself was a gift to Mirch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy even though none of our House Senate candidates wanted literally to defund the police.

The recent behavior of Stanford Law students — and at least one faculty member?  Outrageous!  Another gift to Republicans.  Most voters believe political correctness has gone too far.   Cancel culture has got to go.  Al Franken should still be in the Senate.

We badly need some Sister Soulja moments.

WOKE

It’s broke.  Bill Maher rails against wokeness all the time.  I’ve linked to his uber-sensible rants repeatedly.  Here he sums it up in under a minute.

Yes, we should take down statues of people who fought to preserve slavery.  But Lincoln’s statue?

If woke means being alert to the struggles and feelings of — well, of everyone, especially those who have it toughest — I’m all for it.

But if it means everyone has to walk on egg shells lest he use a word like “shoot” that might trigger a sensitive child — “shoot for the stars, kids!”  “shoot! I forgot my phone charger!” — or that we all have to indicate our preferred pronouns when signing our names . . . well, leaving aside the merits, that’s political suicide for the party that may not be perfect, but that really does care about the struggles and feelings of those who have it toughest.  Many of whom, by the way, are straight white men.

Anand Giridharadas argues: “The bottom line: Wokeness is good, actually. But we need a plan for the still-waking.”

Don’t forget to watch Waco: American Apocalypse.

 

ChatGPT (And 5% Tax-And-Risk Free)

Three quick takes first:

1. INDICTMENT:  If Trump believes the Stormy Daniels crime was not a crime — or trivial — why didn’t he pardon the man he instructed to commit it?  (We all know the answer; but I’d love to hear his.)

2. INFLATION: Mike Pence said yesterday “the American people are facing record inflation.”  Really?  Leaving aside 1920 (23.7% ), how about 14.8% in March, 1980 — more than double today’s steadily falling rate?

3. GREAT MOOS: How single-celled yeasts are doing the work of 1,500-pound cows.

Labs have created exact molecular replicas of cow dairy. Some are already on shelves and being hailed as a way to reduce harm to cows and cut down dairy’s huge contribution to climate change . . .Precision dairy doesn’t have cholesterol, lactose, growth hormones or antibiotics.

That’s the top line of a — to me, thrilling — piece in the Washington Post by Laura Reiley.

A human.

(To the best of my knowledge.)

OK.  So now . . .

After I posted the “Guest Column” by ChatGPT earlier this month, I got me-mail:

Dick W.: “So bland. No meat. No spice. No bite. If this is the best the robots can do, the cognitive elite has nothing to fear.”

→ Ah, yes, but early days.  The singularity is near.

Merle G: “Your column is scary. Not to be too ignorant, but what does the closing phrase, ‘the singularity is near‘ mean?”

→ A nod to Ray Kurzweil’s book title – the point at which artificial intelligence exceeds humans’ and all kinds of wonderful/terrifying things begin to happen.

J.S.T.: “I had ChatGPT write you a fan letter. I couldn’t have done better myself.”

→ I’m not posting it. Narcissism has its limits. But it was really, really nice.

Bob: “I had ChatGPT write you a guest column on the topic of favorable capital gains tax rates on longer maturity Treasuries with low coupon rates.”  Behold:

Another Case for Cowardice

Investing in Treasury securities is a safe and reliable way to build wealth and preserve capital. Most investors are aware that Treasury securities are taxed at ordinary income tax rates. However, many may not be aware that Treasury securities with a maturity greater than one year may be eligible for favorable long-term capital gain tax rates.

This is an important point to understand, especially when considering longer-maturity Treasuries with a low coupon rate. When combined, these two factors shift almost all of the total return of the bond to long-term capital gains. This is good news for investors because everyone benefits from these capital gain rates. For some investors in lower tax brackets, they may not owe any tax at all on the capital gain portion of their return. This effectively makes the investment a nearly tax-free bond with a very attractive rate for the near-zero risk.

For example, consider a Treasury with a coupon rate of 0.25% maturing on March 31, 2024. This currently has a yield-to-maturity of around 5.3%. Assuming that the investor holds the bond until maturity, the total return will be around 5.3%. However, because of the low coupon rate and longer maturity, the vast majority of the return will be taxed at the favorable long-term capital gain rates.

This is a significant advantage for investors, particularly those in lower tax brackets. For example, a single filer with taxable income of up to $44,625 (or a joint filer up to 89,250) would owe no tax on long-term capital gains.

Of course, every investor’s tax situation is unique, and it is important to consult with a tax professional before making any investment decisions. However, it is clear that Treasury securities with a longer maturity and low coupon rate offer a potentially attractive tax advantage for investors seeking a low-risk investment.

In conclusion, Treasury securities are a great investment option for those seeking stability and reliability in their portfolio. When considering longer-maturity Treasuries with a low coupon rate, investors should be aware of the potential tax benefits available through favorable long-term capital gain tax rates. By taking advantage of these benefits, investors can potentially earn a tax-free return on their investment, making Treasury securities an even more attractive investment option.

→ And if you think the above doesn’t apply to you, remember: taxable income is what’s left after deductions.  (How to pay 0% capital gains taxes with a six-figure income in 2023.)  Thanks, Bob!

Allen B.: “Here’s what ChatGPT took 3 seconds to produce when asked to write 350 words about why a US citizen would believe Republican myths and fallacies:

It’s important to note that beliefs and political affiliations are complex and multifaceted. While there are several reasons why a US citizen may believe in Republican myths and fallacies, some of the most common reasons include:

  1. Confirmation bias: Many people tend to seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs and dismiss information that contradicts them. This tendency can lead individuals to selectively consume media outlets and sources that align with their political leanings, reinforcing pre-existing beliefs and myths.
  2. Group identity: Political affiliations can be influenced by group identity and socialization. People often align themselves with political parties and beliefs that are shared by their family, friends, and communities. This can create an echo chamber effect, where people are exposed only to information that reinforces their pre-existing beliefs and reject information that challenges their group identity.
  3. Misinformation: The spread of misinformation, particularly on social media, has been a significant factor in shaping political beliefs and attitudes. Studies have shown that misinformation is more likely to be believed and shared if it aligns with pre-existing beliefs or biases. In the case of Republican myths and fallacies, misinformation can spread rapidly, particularly if it supports a specific political agenda.
  4. Political polarization: The US has become increasingly politically polarized in recent years, with Republicans and Democrats holding increasingly divergent beliefs and values. This polarization can make it difficult for individuals to consider alternative viewpoints or to engage in constructive dialogue with those who hold different political beliefs.
  5. Economic concerns: Some individuals may be attracted to Republican myths and fallacies due to economic concerns. For example, Republicans often advocate for policies that promote free-market capitalism and limited government intervention, which may be appealing to those who believe that government interference in the economy is detrimental to their financial well-being.

Ultimately, belief in Republican myths and fallacies is a complex phenomenon that cannot be explained by any single factor. Rather, a combination of cognitive biases, socialization, misinformation, and political polarization contribute to the formation and reinforcement of these beliefs. It’s important to engage in critical thinking, fact-checking, and open-mindedness when evaluating political beliefs and information.

→ So I tried two things.

First, I tried the identical instruction, to see whether I’d get the identical result.  I did not.  Each time, I got a similar but different essay.

Next I tried the identical instruction — only swapping D for R: write 350 words about why a US citizen would believe Democratic myths and fallacies:

It is important to note that political beliefs and affiliations are often shaped by a multitude of factors, including one’s upbringing, personal experiences, and exposure to media and information sources. With that said, there are a variety of reasons why a US citizen may believe Democratic myths and fallacies.

One possible reason is the influence of media and social networks. With the rise of social media platforms, individuals are increasingly exposed to news and information from a variety of sources, many of which may have a partisan bias. This can make it difficult for individuals to separate fact from fiction and may lead them to believe in myths and fallacies that are perpetuated by like-minded individuals or groups.

Additionally, the Democratic party has historically been associated with progressive policies and ideas, such as social justice, equality, and environmental protection. For individuals who prioritize these issues, it may be easy to overlook potential flaws or inaccuracies in Democratic messaging and policies, leading them to believe in myths or fallacies that align with their values.

Furthermore, the political polarization that has increasingly characterized American politics may contribute to the propagation of myths and fallacies. When individuals are deeply entrenched in their political beliefs, they may be less likely to critically evaluate information or ideas that challenge their worldview. This can create an echo chamber effect, where individuals only consume information that reinforces their existing beliefs and may be more susceptible to accepting myths and fallacies that align with their political views.

Another potential reason why a US citizen may believe Democratic myths and fallacies is due to the influence of political leaders and influencers. Political leaders and pundits often have a significant platform and may use their position of power to spread misinformation or perpetuate myths and fallacies. For example, Democratic leaders may overstate the impact of certain policies or downplay potential negative consequences, leading individuals to believe in myths or fallacies that are not entirely accurate.

Overall, there are a variety of factors that may contribute to a US citizen believing in Democratic myths and fallacies. From the influence of media and social networks to political polarization and the influence of political leaders, it is important for individuals to critically evaluate information and consider a variety of perspectives when forming their political beliefs and opinions.

→ Asked to assess which are more extreme and widespread: Democratic or Republican myths and fallacies, ChatGPT diplomatically demurred.

Have a great week.

 

Lindbergh And Carlson

Thom Hartmann  explains why he thinks Republicans Frightened of “A Guy Called Tucker Carlson” Could Cause WWIII, arguing that “In the 1940s, Republicans appeasing a fascist dictator were led in the media by an ambitious young man named Charles Lindbergh; today’s GOP follows — and fears — Tucker Carlson.”

Some really interesting history, if you click.

Let’s hope it neither repeats nor rhymes.

But it sure makes you wonder how different things would be if Lindbergh had won the day and we were now 80 years into the 1,000-year Reich.

(As imagined, for example, in Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America.)

 

What To Do Before Your House Burns Down

But first . . .

YESTERDAY’S MUST READ

Tom Friedman: Putin and Netanyahu Show Why Bad Things Happen to Bad Leaders

TODAY’S BEST QUOTE

David Currier was my hands-on editor at PARADE.

You’ve never heard of him, even though he worked on thousands of pieces by scores of writers reaching tens of millions of people.

He died at 87 a few months ago, beloved by everyone.  Brilliant, mirthful, and completely without ego.

At the Zoom memorial this week I learned that “in addition to his passion for ballet and opera, he attended the show where Andy Kaufman invited the entire Carnegie Hall audience to board buses for milk and cookies afterwards” — perfect.

And one of David’s colleagues, remarking on his lack of ego, remembered David once telling him:

“I’ve always preferred to dance in the spotlight of others.” 

If PARADE was your newspaper’s Sunday supplement, David quietly added something to your life.

AND NOW!

Last week: advice in case  someone gets hit by a bus.

Today: advice born of the house fire that upended my friends lives:

Google Lens has been an amazing tool to help us recover.  I can’t even begin to tell you how many sentimental things we found online that we would never have been able to find with just simple searching and online shopping.

For example: We went to the Star Wars Celebration last year and purchased amazing, custom (expensive) artwork from some independent artists. They were completely destroyed.  Imagine typing “Star Wars artwork” in Google hoping to find that custom artwork!  Impossible.  But we found an image of the artwork in the background of another pic on our phone. We zoomed on the background and Google Lens found the exact artwork on the artist’s website.  Amazing!  We purchased it — something we thought would never be replaced.

We also found vintage cookbooks, kids’ childhood memory toys (2004 Mickey Mouse) and clothes using Google Lens. It’s an amazing tool. With Google Lens, eBay, and some other online auction sites, we have been able to replace much that went up in smoke.  It has really helped with the recovery process for the kids. When they come home, there are some familiar items in our rental house to help them feel as though not everything is lost.

Our takeaway message #1:  Take pics or a simple video to document everything in your house.

Message #2: Store important backups offsite. I had tons of backups of all of my stuff (expecting earthquake), but just had external hard drives in my office (next to the machine I backed up). Dumb. All of those external hard drives melted in the fire. Laurie had lots of stuff stored in DropBox so she was able to recover all of her work.

Message #3:  Be sure to check your insurance policy to see what coverage you have. You want “replacement cost” insurance!  Because we had paid extra for it, we got NOT for the depreciated “actual value” of the house and contents but the MUCH higher cost to replace it all.

 

Eric, Hunter, And H—er

Republicans are keen to discover what improper things, if any, Hunter Biden may have done even though he has no role in the Administration.

This piece contrasts his situation with that of Donald, Jr., Jared, Ivanka, and Eric.

It’s night and day — written in 2019.

Updating it, I would note two more differences:

> Hunter did not plot with his father to overthrow our democracy.

> Hunter does not tour the country with a Nazi sympathizer as Eric Trump does.

That link is worth your four minutes because — just as elements of today’s Republican Party seem to be taking Russia’s side over our own — so the resurgent American Nazi movement has found a home, along with Q-Anon and the Boogaloo Bois, in today’s G.O.P.

And, yes, the Boogaloo Bois Are Back.

Bigger than you think.

I promise lighter fare tomorrow, with less to click, but let me end with another of Arnold’s videos.

The former Republican Governor has a message for the neo-Nazis and white nationalists.  It is so powerful, not least because his father was a Nazi.

Some Americans thought we were on the wrong side of that war, too.