It's U VA (University, Virginia). Penn State Main Campus doesn't reference "State College" (yes, that's really the town's name -- commonwealths are weird). Penn State California (should there be such a thing, and I'm pretty sure there's not) is a branch campus, referred to by it's location (and yes, in Pennsylvania there is a California)
This article evokes my pet peeve which is Paul Krugman. I know he's got a Nobel Prize and all that, but I'm sorry he just seems like a ridiculous partisan hack. He switches his positions on fundamental issues depending on whether there is a Democratic or Republic President. Growing the US debt was bad and irresponsible when GW Bush was President but then when Obama was President it turns out that growing the debt is fine and in fact Obama was a genius for borrowing as much as possible because low interest rates or something. Now you can find him writing about how tariffs are a dumb and discredited policy that only an idiot like Trump would consider but if you go back a couple of years you can read him gushing about Biden's "toughness" when Biden was imposing tariffs. It's fine to have a point of view but his Democrats-always-right-and-Republicans-always-wrong-even-when-they're-doing-the-same-thing schtick is off the charts.
A nobel prize is just another credential. It's not like Albert Einstein got a nobel prize for anything groundbreaking. Krugman is a way for smug liberals to receive validation that they are the "smart ones" and know what "economic wisdom" to smugly preach.
Pro-tip: if you think you're smart, you're probably not. Smart people live in a sea of uncertainty. "Try it and observe carefully" is their mantra, not "I'm right" (that's the mantra of a know-it-all).
I don’t think Joe Biden had any real problem with Trump’s tariffs. It was weird during this Trump era to see democrats with a history of pro-tariff statements oppose Trump’s tariff agenda. Trump’s tariff agenda is actually pretty close to what Bernie Sanders or any number of democrats have said for years. The best reading is that they weren’t idiots, just lying.
Joe Biden, as senator, was the ambassador to the US for the credit card industry, but he always thought of himself as a union guy. His instincts on trade was to go with the unions. Trump put them in place, so Biden could leave them and not get nearly as much pushback had he put them in place in the first class.
Tariffs are a dumb policy, even for national security purposes. They are a great example of dispersed costs and concentrated benefits. If your goal is to prevent strategic goods from being sold, place export controls with criminal penalties. We do it with nuclear technology, weapons, and any number of things.
If you want to develop or strengthen domestic industries for strategic purposes, you can do that with direct government subsidies, federal acquisition policies, and tax incentives. This is less efficient from a purely economic perspectives, because if it was the most efficient approach, you wouldn’t need the government intervention. It of course creates issues for corruption and political spending decisions, but nowhere near the chicanery that blanket tariff policies create.
And let’s be honest, too many deodorant choices is not an issue for your core Bernie supporters.
Why is the University of Virginia abbreviated to UVA if it's in Charlottesville?
Shouldn't it be UVC?
It's Jeff's lack of action on these burning questions that make me question my subscription.
Luckily the champagne in the Champagne VIP Room For Winners
is so good it keeps me around.....
It's U VA (University, Virginia). Penn State Main Campus doesn't reference "State College" (yes, that's really the town's name -- commonwealths are weird). Penn State California (should there be such a thing, and I'm pretty sure there's not) is a branch campus, referred to by it's location (and yes, in Pennsylvania there is a California)
Thank you Tori!
This article evokes my pet peeve which is Paul Krugman. I know he's got a Nobel Prize and all that, but I'm sorry he just seems like a ridiculous partisan hack. He switches his positions on fundamental issues depending on whether there is a Democratic or Republic President. Growing the US debt was bad and irresponsible when GW Bush was President but then when Obama was President it turns out that growing the debt is fine and in fact Obama was a genius for borrowing as much as possible because low interest rates or something. Now you can find him writing about how tariffs are a dumb and discredited policy that only an idiot like Trump would consider but if you go back a couple of years you can read him gushing about Biden's "toughness" when Biden was imposing tariffs. It's fine to have a point of view but his Democrats-always-right-and-Republicans-always-wrong-even-when-they're-doing-the-same-thing schtick is off the charts.
A nobel prize is just another credential. It's not like Albert Einstein got a nobel prize for anything groundbreaking. Krugman is a way for smug liberals to receive validation that they are the "smart ones" and know what "economic wisdom" to smugly preach.
Pro-tip: if you think you're smart, you're probably not. Smart people live in a sea of uncertainty. "Try it and observe carefully" is their mantra, not "I'm right" (that's the mantra of a know-it-all).
I don’t think Joe Biden had any real problem with Trump’s tariffs. It was weird during this Trump era to see democrats with a history of pro-tariff statements oppose Trump’s tariff agenda. Trump’s tariff agenda is actually pretty close to what Bernie Sanders or any number of democrats have said for years. The best reading is that they weren’t idiots, just lying.
Joe Biden, as senator, was the ambassador to the US for the credit card industry, but he always thought of himself as a union guy. His instincts on trade was to go with the unions. Trump put them in place, so Biden could leave them and not get nearly as much pushback had he put them in place in the first class.
Tariffs are a dumb policy, even for national security purposes. They are a great example of dispersed costs and concentrated benefits. If your goal is to prevent strategic goods from being sold, place export controls with criminal penalties. We do it with nuclear technology, weapons, and any number of things.
If you want to develop or strengthen domestic industries for strategic purposes, you can do that with direct government subsidies, federal acquisition policies, and tax incentives. This is less efficient from a purely economic perspectives, because if it was the most efficient approach, you wouldn’t need the government intervention. It of course creates issues for corruption and political spending decisions, but nowhere near the chicanery that blanket tariff policies create.
And let’s be honest, too many deodorant choices is not an issue for your core Bernie supporters.
Looking for the interview with Mike Pesca; can someone share a link?