HaroldWilson

HaroldWilson 9hr ago

Oh sure legally but the object-level principle at stake is basically the same - whether or not we should avoid using participation in local legal proceedings as a means of deporting illegal immigrants.

Context

HaroldWilson 18hr ago

As others have gestured at, this is just a rehash of the sanctuary cities arguments from Trump 1. The problem with using state courts/police as a convenient piggyback for immigration enforcement is that is encourages illegal immigrants to never show up at court or co-operate with police ever, either for their own minor offences or as witnesses etc.

Context

HaroldWilson 19hr ago

"using it as it was meant to be used?"

Fundamentally he seems either deliberately unwilling or simply unable to comprehend that the interviewer is asking about means rather than ends. Saying 'I was elected to close the borders/change our terms of trade' is just a total non-sequitur response to the question 'have you expanded the powers of the presidency'. It would be one thing to say 'I don't care about process, I care about results', but he doesn't say that, he's just talking past the question.

Context

HaroldWilson 19hr ago

A tiny portion of my taxes are spent on roads. Having paid my taxes, I feel entitled to use of public roads

Unless you actually live in New York City itself you don't pay for the upkeep of the roads in Manhattan since most are owned and maintained by the NYC Department of Transportation, and the remainder are operated by the state. Why should New Yorkers be forced to subsidise New Jersey suburbanites driving in to use their New York amenities without contributing anything? If you live elsewhere in NYC the objection is more reasonable, but the avenue for those grievances to be aired should be via state and local government, not the federal DoT.

And I notice the contempt and sometimes hatred new urbanists have for suburbanites

Some maybe do but that doesn't make the policy any less sensible just because a minority have an irrational basis for supporting it.

They cannot make me want to live in an apartment downtown or ride a train to work.

Fine. No-one is going to make you. But don't expect everyone else to have to cater to and subsidise your preferences and negative externalities. New York should be run for the benefit of people who live in New York, not for people who hate urban living and want to freeride off the amenities of a great city.

But they could possibly make me too poor to live any other way.

This is just silly and amounts to 'public policy should be geared towards me being able to enjoy the benefits of living in proximity to a great city without a) having to contribute anything and b) being allowed to make life worse for urban residents without paying any compensation'.

Context

HaroldWilson 1d ago

We won't see such a benefit.

Why? It seems unlikely that car journeys are immune to price signals.

-2

Context

HaroldWilson 1d ago

naked attacks on suburbanites by urban enthusiasts

If you like the suburbs so much then don't go to Manhattan, nobody is forcing you to do so.

-3

Context

HaroldWilson 3d ago

s Prima notes, the Supreme Court did not order a result. The courts that have denied 'make easier' efforts as sufficient facilitation are lower courts. Tthe Supreme Court has not specifically weighed in on their ability to demand a result versus an effort.

This is currently a moot point given that the Trump administration hasn't put in any effort whatsoever. If he asks Bukele to send him back and he says no, then we can move to the question of whether that is sufficient attempt at 'facilitation'.

Context

HaroldWilson 3d ago

“facilitate only to the extent possible”.

This is fair, but Trump has absolutely not met even this lower bar. He hasn't even asked. What 'facilitation' has he attempted?

Context

HaroldWilson 3d ago

offer Ukraine vague European security guarantees

Well this is the rub really isn't it. For any deal to not be completely worthless to Ukraine, it surely needs some real guarantee against the re-invasion of whatever is left at some future date, which seems to be only provided either by NATO membership or the continuous presence of Western troops in Ukraine as a part of any 'security guarantee'.

Context

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/reference-materials/ic/chapter-4/7

HaroldWilson 8d ago

So we can clean all this up with a quick Zoom call then? Don't even need to actually get him out of the prison.

Not necessarily.

except that evidentiary hearings on the merits may only be conducted by telephone conference if the respondent consents after being notified of the right to proceed in person or through video conference. See INA § 240(b)(2), 8 C.F.R. § 1003.25(c)

Context

HaroldWilson 8d ago

It's the due process that gives you your several days in court, however taxing they may be, rather than just, say, being disappeared to a banana republic's prison system.

Context

HaroldWilson 8d ago

take any and all actions

There are some intermediate stages between 'any and all actions necessary' and 'publicly approve of and pay for his foreign imprisonment'.

Context

HaroldWilson 8d ago

His immigration status is what determines how much process is due.

It may do, but even the Trump administration admits that the result of the due process he was entitled to has simply been ignored and now they say it doesn't matter because they have no obligations to someone in a foreign principle. The point is that the same logic could apply to citizens. Say a domestic citizen criminal is due to be deported to be held in a foreign prison, the judiciary decides this is not legal, but then the executive decides to do it anyway, the exact same logic Trump uses ('you can't compel us to take any action related to foreign policy') still applies and the citizen never returns.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

“How bendy can a banana be” a legitimate negotiating question.

Well it sort of obviously is a negotiating question. If you want free access to European markets some degree of harmonisation has to occur - whether one party thinks regulation X is pointless isn't really material, the question is are they willing to endanger a trade deal to ditch the bendy bananas regulation. And so the inevitable horse trading.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

calculating emissions of imports in a unfavourable way

This I agree would be a non-tariff barrier to the extent that it happens.

It also inherently favours domestic European goods due to the lower transport emissions and the fact the Europeans are trying to develop green industries... but the fact it favours domestic industry must surely be a nice bonus.

Well this I think is silly. On this basis any taxation which is not very broad-based is a non-tariff barrier. If the British raise their alcohol duty on spirits faster than beer is this discriminating against American whisky-makers and French cognac producers in favour of domestic breweries, assuming Britain is more competitive in beer production than spirits?

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

I find it difficult to see how this is different to literally any regulation though. It's not as if any product is prevented from entering the EU under these rules, it's just a question of how it's marketed. It's as much consumer protection as producer protection - when someone sees 'champagne' they expect it be from Champagne (and not just because of expectations created by the regulations). After all the EU does enforce non-EU names - Celyon tea, Sussex wine, Mongolian Cashmere etc. etc.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

I am worried about this too, but the strength of the favourable initial market reaction to his climbdown makes me hope he might not try again in 90 days again.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

Ok, but until he climbed down the expert consensus was exactly right on what the reaction of the markets would be.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

at points in 2022 where all the gains of my portfolio were wiped out going back to 2017

What the fuck you invested in? Year end 2017 S&P 500 was below 2,700, the low point in 2022 was over 3,500.

These tariff hiccups don't even take my portfolio back to the beginning of 2024.

Until Trump climbed down today the slide was showing no signs of stopping whatsoever. We're barely more than a week removed from the original announcement.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

So it seems like it’s more of a targeted war against China specifically? Likely giving other nations time to choose (with us or against us), and slapping the nations who chose to align with China with huge tariffs in 90 days

I think this is giving too much credit. Plenty of people in Trumpworld, even people very close to him, have spent the past days insisting that the tariffs are not a negotiating tactic, they are a necessary measure, and even in some cases that the stock market collapse is a necessary correction. I think they just got spooked that the slide had no signs of stopping and went into reverse gear. It's hard to see that 90 days is sufficient to conclude trade deals with most of the countries in the world (TPP took over 8 years to conclude), it's just a panic button.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

doubt Trump's approval rating will drop below the high 30s for any sustained period of time

Probably true, but even a 55-45 margin in Presidential elections implies a landslide. Bush/Dukakis was 53/46.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

The Deep State will like the Great Depression; the last one is what created them, after all.

Idk about this, but I do wonder the extent to which Democrats will be tempted to let Trump shit the bed for two or even four years given that the ensuing backlash could create the environment for New Deal-era levels of political dominance. If the question arises they can't credibly choose not to step in, but in ways the best case scenario politically is for mostly-Democratic majorities in Congress to try to stop him and then a majority of the Republicans prevents the overriding of his veto, which prevents them from trying to shed the Trump legacy down the line. Indeed, when there was shutdown talk Nate Silver said Democrats should stop trying to be the adult party and just let Republicans take ownership of their own messes.

Context

HaroldWilson 17d ago

I meant to say sucking wealth away from productive enterprises around the world. Suppose Zhang in Chongqing makes an iphone that goes to a product manager who doesn't do any useful work, just sits around in meetings all day.

Ah I see. If this were true though the system would surely have collapsed long ago. In order that an American can buy that phone, the people of Chongqing must be willing to either buy American production (or buy the production of a country which in turn buys the production of America), or invest in America securities, assets etc. But since these are essentially a claim on future American productive capacity, if America didn't have much there would already have been a total crisis of confidence.

In any case the total American BoT deficit is not that large all things considered, about $120 billion - US imports from China are near $500 billion. This would seem to imply that the net size of the American 'fake' economy in relation to foreign countries is $120 billion at the most, because the rest of total imports beyond that figure are directly compensated for by the sale of American production overseas. Given that the size of the US economy is $22.7 trillion, this seems a fairly trivial problem. Again, I'm not necessarily arguing that the total fake economy in the US isn't larger than $120 billion if US productive workers are subsidising the non-productive industries, but this doesn't matter in relation to trade.

When Onlyfans whores delight in their paid-off houses

This seems like a particularly bad example because they clearly create a product which people are willing to pay for. Their job is no more 'fake' than an independent cobbler or carpenter just because the good they sell isn't durable - indeed the cobblers and carpenters are clearly willing to exchange their shoes and tables for subscriptions. The case of product managers, HR is different but an Onlyfans model seems analogous to other makers of frivolities insofar as their existence is a symptom of prosperity as we have enough productive capacity that people are willing to trade it away for non-essentials. But this isn't 'fake' any more than LVMH is a purely 'fake' company. Value has no meaning except what people are prepared to exchange on an open market.

Context