DAILY PHOTO: Ton Sai Bay
Image
1
These days? Trump — hands down. Beyond a few of his stated policy objectives, there is more and more I disagree with every day. (I emphasize “stated” because there is so little that’s coherent in his actions to prove he is really interested in advancing said objectives.) For example, I do agree that the swelling deficits (budget and trade) are something that should be treated as unsustainable. I’m not of the “a current account deficit is just a capital account surplus, so turn that frown upside-down” ilk. However, erratic and untargeted tariff policies that hurt successful sectors (e.g. agriculture and services) and which will only put the toothpaste back in the tube (bring [human] factory labor back to the US on a huge scale) by crashing the US into Third World status are not the way.
I disagree with this inexplicable monomaniacal obsession with heavy industry, while injuring those sectors that have done well in recent decades.
I agree with… Powell, that there is a high chance of stagflation if the Fed takes a loose money stance. The problem is… Trump. Ordinarily, it would be good to dump some money on an economy that is struggling. But the problem is that Trump is like a salesperson that would like to sell customers something, but he also enjoys chasing them around the store with an axe. The problem is that people and companies don’t make big purchases when they are afraid and the future is uncertain. (This is why even getting investment in robotic factories isn’t happening.) There’s uncertainty because of the tariffs. There’s uncertainty about whether companies will have to pay bribes to Trump, personally. There’s uncertainty about whether the legal and institutional frameworks that have so long made America an appealing place to invest and innovate will survive. So, if the Fed injects money but consumer confidence and investment are flat because of said uncertainty, then that money will be purely inflationary. [Remember, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods. More money needs to meet more demand for stuff.]
I disagree that one can have one’s cake and eat it, too. Specifically, tariffs need to be either for revenue generation or for policy negotiations, they can’t be both, but Trump talks like he doesn’t understand this. If tariffs are going to be the new primary source of government income, they need to bring in money sustainably. If they are a negotiating tool to lever policy, you need to be ready to negotiate them away in return for your own objective wins.
I definitely disagree with the ignoring of Supreme Court decisions. It’s particularly disconcerting to see him ignore 9 – 0 decisions, which means that even his own appointees could not find a hairsbreadth of wiggle room in the law by which his actions could be viewed as lawful.
I disagree with picking a raft of pretty-idiots / talking-heads for positions that require high levels of emotional intelligence and — you know — intelligence intelligence. If it weren’t for the fact that America has the most awesome and professional military in the world, I’d be especially afraid that Hegseth was going to destroy it. But while I think the US Military will be around long after he’s gone, I’m suspect he will have done damage to morale and operational efficiency.
I disagree with favoring dictators over longtime allies. [While I would agree that it’s good that Europe is taking on more of the burden of their own defense, I’m concerned that trashing relations to do so will not prove a sound approach.]
I disagree with all the attempts to play from the Putin-Orban Populist Dictators’ Playbook.
While I’m not at all averse to seeing cuts to the Federal bureaucracy, I do disagree with — you know — firing people before you understand what they do and whether it’s critical to health and safety, the necessary conduct of governance, or oversight against fraud and abuse.
I disagree that one should talk about making loophole end-runs around Constitutional prohibitions.
But, I ramble on…
Swimming: Vintage Minis by Roger DeakinHuman affairs ever grind on --
Ancient or modern, shit repeats.
Mountains and rivers are changeless.
We climb to find our vista seats.
Cascade, fisher, and bridge -- subdued;
Air grows cold near dreamy, deep pools.
We read an old stone monument,
As tears glisten on cheeks like jewels.
Original Poem in Simplified Chinese:
人事有代谢, 往来成古今。
江山留胜迹, 我辈复登临。
水落鱼梁浅, 天寒梦泽深。
羊公碑字在, 读罢泪沾襟。
Note: This is poem #125 from 300 Tang Poems [唐诗三百首]
Hah. That ship has sailed. But I could say that it’s to still have something to offer when machines / AI can do all productive tasks better and / or faster than humans — i.e. to be able to convey something of the art of being human. Even though, I suspect, I won’t be around to see that day, it will be catastrophic to the species if people don’t figure these things out in advance — i.e. if we don’t figure out human roles and purpose in a post-human industrial landscape.
The Meaning of Travel: Philosophers Abroad by Emily Thomas