Homeless

Seven Years ago, I started the series on the “Future Party.” The two-party system had increasingly become captive to its most extreme elements, and the situation becomes more divisive daily. During this time, we’ve experienced a mishandled pandemic, the most significant inflation in four decades, conflicts threatening a new Cold War, if not a hot one, and an upheaval in the world’s trading system.

Both parties contributed to these situations while ignoring the sword of Damocles hanging over the nation, our out-of-control debt problem. At the same time, we’re dividing in ways we haven’t seen before. We receive information from different sources, resulting in an inability to discuss the day’s issues. Each side presents its own “facts.” Where people on the left or the right enjoyed Johnny Carson or Jay Leno, those watching Stephen Colbert would never watch Gutfeld!, and visa versa.

The division has even spread to those we choose to associate with. Some won’t even consider dating anyone with different views. Whatever happened to understanding the other person’s position sufficiently to come to a compromise?

What has caused the widening gulf between Americans? One answer is too much Democracy. By that, I mean too many elections. As I pointed out in the Future Party series, national presidential elections get our attention and participation. Off-year elections and primaries have much lower turnouts. They appeal to partisans and those most directly affected. Government employees will turn out because local elections hit their wallets, but others can’t always devote the time.

Continue reading

Emily Post Values

I’m far from alone in being frozen in place rather than making everyday decisions in a timely fashion. It’s hard to make choices and commitments when the situation can change in a minute on a whim. The president explained what each nation would suffer from U.S. tariffs, complete with a visual aid, only to turn around and delay much of the implementation. Then came exemptions. Worse, the whipsaws often came while markets were open, so there was no time to evaluate.

It takes investment capital to create productive jobs; how can I or anyone else commit funds and effort under today’s circumstances? Franklin Roosevelt’s ever-changing policies prolonged the great depression, in my mind. Yet, Trump makes him look like the sole of consistency. Nothing seems safe. Even if you negotiated a trade agreement in Trump’s first term, the president unilaterally pulls out and enacts new terms. Do we have allies? Do we have friends? What are the rules? For how long?

We hear of dozens of nations lining up to come to terms. Maybe they just want answers to these questions. If I’m having problems going about my business under these circumstances, imagine what leaders of nations are going through.

There used to be rules of the road to avoid unintended collisions. When I grew up, it seemed everyone had a copy of Emily Post’s “On Etiquette” or something similar. While this may seem quaint today, it served a practical purpose, preventing misunderstandings that could create ill will when intending none. Simply forgetting to send a thank-you note or a reply sends the wrong message and ruins friendships. If you don’t intend a slight, do the right thing.

We have rules governing relations between nations, the government, and the people in the U.S. When someone runs roughshod over regulations and conventions, what’s the message? Some of them are treaties and legislation signed into law. Can you do your thing without regard for others, without sowing distrust and anger?

Continue reading

Bad Books

We’re at a point where it is impossible to comment on the present administration’s policies. Trump’s pledge to end both the Ukraine and Gaza wars quickly has dissolved into continued bloodshed, with only a few hostages returned and some prisoners exchanged. The administration apparently may move away from peace efforts. We must wait for information on what the administration is up to now.

There are three ways our tariff policy could go. First, Trump could come to his senses and reverse most of these taxes. The loss of trust in the U.S. will remain, but it mayn’t get worse.

On the other hand, if Trump truly wants us to produce everything within our borders, he has to raise the walls so high that nothing comes in from abroad. Of course, if nothing comes in, we take in no revenue—just higher prices and less choice.  

The third outcome may be an expanded version of Trump’s first-term approach: imposing tariffs and negotiating a patchwork of cut-outs and individual deals with countries, industries, and companies.

If I had to bet, I’d go with the last option. An endless procession of supplicants competing for favor is a narcissist’s dream. Of course, granting favors to those best appealing to his vanity would be a mercantilist economy on steroids—cronyism rules. Will this work better now than in the past?

While waiting for the fog to clear, it’s a good time to deal with the sudden spate of books and articles on Biden’s cognitive decline by people who were aware of it or should’ve been aware the former president wasn’t on top of his game.

Continue reading

These Bubbles Need to Be Popped

Prompted by my belief that radical elements in each increasingly control the two established parties, I posted the series on the “Future Party.” (It is Available on this site.) I worried this situation would lead to wild policy swings whenever we change presidents. Unfortunately, this has been the case from Obama to Trump. Bolstered by initial control of both houses of Congress, each president pursued policies opposite their immediate predecessor.

One only has to look at our border migrant policies. Trump tightened Obama’s, only to find Biden reversed course on his first day. Trump’s return reversed Biden on his first day. This whiplash is also evident in foreign, domestic, and economic policies.

In the past, people could count on continuity. Businesses could commit to multi-year plans. Friends and allies knew they could count on us instead of watching their backs. If there were problems, we could hash things out before radical change.

That’s all in the past. Where the far ends of each party differ, they are often direct opposites. The progressive wing of the Democratic Party backs its climate change convictions with billions of dollars for windmills, solar, and electric vehicles (EVs), which are anathema to the Republican right. They look to oil and gas to continue to power the world. To that end, they’ve encouraged vast liquefied Gas Terminals. This situation leaves anyone with significant power needs with a damned if you do, damned if you don’t headache.

Now, Donald Trump has escalated this uncertainty. He has reversed Biden’s energy policies and added supply chain anxiety with constantly changing tariff policies.

Continue reading

Changing Times

In line with my efforts to see all sides of an issue, I keep up with ideas on both the left and the right. CNN and Washington Post (WP) columnist Fareed Zakaria usually provides good insight into establishment thinking, especially on foreign affairs. His latest  WP column is an eye-opener. He calls into question the left’s efforts to benefit the working class.

Most noncollege graduates in Red states voted for Trump and Republicans, even though the Biden administration made significant efforts to provide job-producing projects there. Instead of appreciating their benefactors, the ingrates voted for the opposition.

Zakaria feels the left’s prevailing theory is to move away from a market-oriented economy to one with sweeping government interventions. “It passed massive infrastructure and climate spending bills, explicitly designed to help noncollege educated Americans.” Zakaria points to two congressional districts, one in Texas and the other in Mississippi, that received the most significant government-backed projects but still voted increasingly Republican.

Attributing the continuing working-class Republican migration to race, identity, and culture issues among noncollege-educated whites, he thinks the Democrats should concentrate on their “solid base of college-educated professionals, women and minorities,” and strive to add moderate swing voters. He observes, “Biden keeps touting his pro-union credentials but is increasingly speaking of a bygone era. In 2023, only 6 percent of private sector workers belonged to a union.” The votes to win are elsewhere.

Shortly after reading the Zakaria article, I read Peter Suderman, Reason Magazine’s features editor, “Biden’s Legacy: He Didn’t Build That,” “…over and over again, that’s what happened under Biden: Vast sums were spent or authorized, but nothing came of it.” Maybe that’s why the people in Texas and Mississippi aren’t thrilled if there is no lithium refinery or battery factory. Because of red tape, opposition, and slow-moving bureaucracies, building things in the U.S. takes forever or never gets done.  

Continue reading