homo puniens

by liberal japonicus

I don't really have much time for the genre of 'let's explain why Trump is doing X',  however, I might make an exception for this Ezra Klein discussion with Gillian Tett, which hits a lot of very interesting notes because Tett was trained as an anthropologist, so her take on the mess we are in is very enlightening rather than the ahistoric, personality driven explanations that are so common. So much so that I'll give you links to the two books she recommends at the end.

She suggests the first third of Keynes' The Economic Consequences of Peace because she draws a connection between the Trump vision of foreign relations and the punitive nature of the post WW1 and she suggests Albert Hirschman's 1945 National Power and the structure of foreign trade, which is available through JSTOR if you are at an institution like I am, but because it is an old book, there seem to be a bunch of pdf aggregator sites that have illegal copies.

A couple of points that I pull out from this

-The bond market should be watched. If China stops or slows its purchase of US government debt, it will really signal some deep shit. Japan also holds a lot of US debt (this piece quotes a figure of $1.06 trillion for Japan, and China has $759 billion and has this)

In 1997, after all, then-Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto admitted to a New York audience that “several times in the past, we’ve been tempted to sell large lots of U.S. Treasuries” to make a point. One such episode was the heated auto negotiations a few years earlier.

-Despite the pull quote on the video, "We're back to the beginning of the 1930's", the talk doesn't lean into Trump in terms of progress and reversion, so when she suggests that we are moving to a 'tribute-based hierarchy' that pushes us back to a pre-industrial age and says

It certainly engenders a sense that morality is entirely relative or to be more accurate we live now in an honor-based system not a shame based system and that essentially we're back to something that looks more like tribal leadership in Afghanistan

 

it's pretty telling.

 

-they have some good words for Tyler Cowen's theory that for Trump it is all about cultural power. I guess this blog post is the best distillation of that, though I personally don't hold much of a brief for Cowen, I feel like he is part of a coterie of right-wing observers who flit from topic to topic, always alighting on culture. It's like the old saw about lawyers, saying if you are If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table. Or in this case, pound on culture. 

I know that listening to these videos is not everyone's cup of tea, so here is the edited transcript.

Comments

[wj]

I'm also an anthropologist by training. (Ah, misspent youth! Except it's been useful in the IT world as well.) I'm willing to believe that many of those around Trump are mercantilists themselves. Especially the billionaire tech bros. But I don't think I buy that Trump himself has anything resembling such a coherent economic philosophy.

A financial philosophy? (Stiff anyone and everyone.) Sure. But nothing beyond that.

As for the bond markets, I can certainly see why US Treasuries, long the benchmark for a safe investment, might be getting another look.** Especially from countries who have counted on them to underpin their own currency. I don't foresee a coordinated sell off. But if a couple of big countries decide to diversify their risk, we could be looking at a panicked stampede for the exits.

That not only will trash the global financial system. The US government's accounts will be a generation (or three) recovering. Which will be rough on anyone dependent of Federal dollars, whether educational grants or Social Security.

** If Trump routinely stiffs anyone he can, as he does, why would a government run by him be any different?

[Marty]

"If Trump routinely stiffs anyone he can, as he does, why would a government run by him be any different?"

Despite Trump's inclinations, he hasn't touched the Fed yet nor has he offered a budget that is actually balanced. To get to zero deficits he needs incredibly low interest rates along with means tested Medicare and SS. If he stiffs anyone the interest rates to sell Treasury debt would make the interest exceed any debt reduction.

They could technically default on the 6 trillion owed Social Security. That would be a painful, to me financially, but interesting set of mental and moral gymnastics to watch.

Realistically, despite wailing and gnashing of teeth, the Fed owns 5 trillion and SS owns 6 trillion which together are just about a third of the total debt. In both cases they are really balance sheet items held against the p&l of future budgets, but somewhat of a wash at the bottom line.

China owns less than 1/30th of our total debt so while them dumping it would cause a short term spike in rates it wouldn't be a long term issue.

[Marty]

Sorry for the double post but, the best solution for the long term would be to restructure the Fed debt as a start. Reducing that debt by making it all sixty years debt at 1% would provide short term relief.

Then, as Treasury bills and notes reach maturity( these account for 20 trillion of the debt), restructure the sales to cut that debt as much as possible. The interest payments won't change much but the amount of new debt sales to cover maturing debt will get spread out, which could lower rates substantially.

This is the type of financial engineering I think is likely. I won't go into the downsides but it's not ideal It's kind of like paying off your credit cards with a home equity loan, but not cancelling the cards.

[Marty]

Oops

Then, as Treasury bills and notes reach maturity( these account for 20 trillion of the debt), restructure the sales to cut that debt as much as possible " by selling more 30 year bond".

[russell]

The details of debt refinancing are pretty much above my pay grade, but I wanted to chime in to say that the Social Security trust fund currently holds about $2.7 trillion. The $6 trillion number is the total intragovernmental debt, which also includes funds for veterans and civil service pensions, Medicare, and FDIC insurance.

In 2023 SS paid out about $1.15 trillion in benefits, of which $108 billion came from the trust fund. So about 90% is currently paid from current tax and interest revenue, on a pay-as-you-go basis.

From what I can find, just under 70 million people receive Social Security retirement benefits. Of them, about 40% depend *completely* on Social Security for their income. Were that income stream to end, I'm not sure that "interesting set of mental and moral gymnastics" fully captures the likely result.

It's also worth noting that, per current projections, if we decided to default on the trust fund obligations, as noted above we could pay current benefits at about 90% just from tax revenues on a pay as we go basis. That falls to about 83% in 2035, and about 77% at about 75 years out.

So all the hoopla about "Social Security is running out of money" seems, to me, overblown.

The (R)'s generally and the hard right in particular have basically always hated SS and wanted to make it go away, but it's a very popular program for a reason, and that reason is not "hey, free money from the nanny state!!". People pay into it their whole working lives, and depend on it to some degree - in many cases an absolute degree - to live on when their working lives come to an end.

[Snarki, child of Loki]

Those debts need to be "secured" if TruMusk is going to play games with them.

I suggest they be secured by "a pound of flesh, closest to the heart", from Musk, to start.

[russell]

Those debts need to be "secured" if TruMusk is going to play games with them.

The 14th Amendment states:

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

So I think basically what secures the debt is our word. There are no doubt also statutory guarantees, but laws can be changed (or, in the case of the current administration, simply ignored with an invitiation to "see you in court").

The US has reneged on some kinds of debt obligations before, mostly around guarantees to redeem paper for hard coin. I'm sure somebody somewhere is looking into creative ways to side-step debt obligations now.

And lots of entertainment would no doubt follow, depending on which obligations and how they were messed with.

[Mike S]

Scotus has already invalidated part of the 14th amendment so maybe they'd like to take a whack at the public debt part. I could see Alito, claiming to be "stunned", playing a cutesy word game saying just because you're not allowed to question the validity of the debt doesn't mean that you're obligated to pay it.

[bobbyp]

What Russell said. Total foreign holdings of our national debt come in at 24%. Not a crisis.

Managing the public debt as an economic matter is fairly simple. However, the politics are ...shall we say...fraught. The rich simply refuse to pay taxes commesurate with their wealth, and use their wealth as a political weapon. Raising their taxes to nosebleed levels would mitigate a lot of the hand wringing about the national debt.*

*This is not the best solution, IMHO. A better solution is to impliment public policies that make acquiring such relative levels of wealth (levels that are also morally reprehensible BYW) virtually imposssible.

[russell]

To put this in concrete terms:

We're not quite two months into this mess, and we already have (R) congresspeople afraid to hold town halls because people are freaking pissed off.

People are setting fire to Teslas and Tesla charging stations. And Tesla dealerships are having to bring in cops to protect them from vandalism.

Now tell 70 million geezers, who have spent basically their entire working lives paying into SS, that they're getting shut off. Consider that, for about 30 million of them, that's all the money they have.

If you don't think things will go seriously sideways, I believe you are mistaken.

A lot of those folks don't really have a lot to lose. Take away what little they have, and a lot of wheels are gonna come right off.

[bobbyp]

To get to zero deficits he needs incredibly low interest rates along with means tested Medicare and SS.

This is simply not the whole story. We could raise taxes. Labor productivity growth could return to near 3% as we experienced post WW2. We could naturalize the millions of "illegal" immigrants and fully integrate them into the economy.*

Why is it when this issue comes up that we always plump for policies that make the poor worse off? It's fucking pathological if you ask me.

*If the business community is so desparate for workers, and workers show up, they are performing a public service, and should be treated with that in mind and provided with a means to attain citizenship.

But maybe it's really all about the "culture"....white racial identity culture.

[Marty]

"This is simply not the whole story. We could raise taxes."

True. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. For "him" to get to zero deficits. He is not concerned with who gets hurt at the bottom and Musk hasn't a shred of empathy for anyone else. He is the true sociopath that people sometimes see in politicians.

[Hartmut]

But if the 'illegals' get naturalized, they also gain a right to participate in SS beyond just paying in but getting nothing out, thus increasing the number of takers/entitled peasants/parasites/common scum. Worse, they'd get the vote. They need to become slaves (for the crime of being illegal), the non-rich citizens have to become helots and the green card holders metics (unless they buy one of the new gold cards).

[bobbyp]

Marty,
Clarification noted...and appreciated.

[JanieM]

Marty: He is the true sociopath that people sometimes see in politicians.

Yes. In my framing, other people are actually sort of real to Clickbait, because he needs to know he's hurting someone, and you can't hurt cartoon characters.

With Skummy, it's like we're all just non-player video game characters. He doesn't grasp the reality of other people enough to want to hurt us; he just wants to gobble up the whole universe to fill the emptiness in himself.

It's beyond chilling. His own kid as a human shield.......

Yeah, I know. What the heck do I know? But sometimes the urge to make some kind of twisted sense out of the insanity overwhelms me.

[nous]

People are setting fire to Teslas and Tesla charging stations. And Tesla dealerships are having to bring in cops to protect them from vandalism.

Now tell 70 million geezers, who have spent basically their entire working lives paying into SS, that they're getting shut off. Consider that, for about 30 million of them, that's all the money they have.

If you don't think things will go seriously sideways, I believe you are mistaken.

This is the point I was making way back when during the George Floyd unrest when people were asking if destruction of property ever does any good (a point for which McTX labeled me a radical marxist). People with nothing to lose will burn down all the things the other side hopes to gain rather than go quietly. As Rage Against The Machine said:

Hungry people don't stay hungry for long/ They get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for tha dawn

I'm not saying that the property destruction in the Floyd demonstrations was a positive step in the public discourse, but I am saying that the situation will eventually hit a point where that inflection kicks in.

We are, I think, getting close to that point, but the authoritarian jackholes are still playing chicken with desperation.

[wj]

the Social Security trust fund currently holds about $2.7 trillion.

And how much of that is in US government securities? I'm betting pretty nearly all of it. I mean, it's not like SS has their own private vault full of gold or something.

If Treasuries lose value, rolling over those assets could become an issue. (That's ignoring the possibility of Trump/Musk just deciding to default.) If you can't roll them over, what happens?

For that matter, if Trump succeeds in creating tariff-driven hyperinflation, things get dicey for those trying to live on, basically fixed, Social Security checks.

[russell]

And how much of that is in US government securities?

If I understand correctly, it's all in US government securities, of a particular type that cannot be traded or sold. They earn a modest rate of interest, which is used as a revenue stream by SS. And when SS outlays are greater than income, SS redeems them and the funds are paid to SS from the general US national budget.

To renege on them would basically be defaulting on US government debt. Which we generally do not do. And were we to do it, I think it would be pretty calamitous, because of the number of people who participate, and because those folks cross all political demographics. I.e., it wouldn't just be "those people" getting screwed, for any particular definition of "those people". Other than disabled and retirement age folks, that is.

We're already seeing that lots of folks who supported Trump are... surprised and quite angry when they or someone they know gets laid off from a federal job.

They could renege on the debt and still pay the majority of benefits from cash flow. Folks would be pissed, but it wouldn't be tens of millions of people suddenly destitute. If they decided to just get rid of SS altogether, I think things could get pretty bad.

[Marty]

"With Skummy, it's like we're all just non-player video game characters. He doesn't grasp the reality of other people enough to want to hurt us; he just wants to gobble up the whole universe to fill the emptiness in himself."

The lines between the irl and game worlds are becoming increasingly vague. Humans have become resources to be used in the surreal game that is being played out. The concept of crypto is simply a reflection of how in game currencies are treated, it's not a ponzi scheme, but you do need enough players to create value. Deepfakes allow for defining the universe you want to exist in while AI replaced the need to interact with the real world aside from minimal physical sustenance. It's is all a next generation massively multiplayer game where we will ultimately cede control to the admins and AI. Musk perceives himself as the admin and the oligarchs are his way to ensure everyone participates.

[russell]

The lines between the irl and game worlds are becoming increasingly vague.

My general sense is that the kind of dystopian world Marty describes here is fairly close, in some form or other, to what Musk and Thiel and Andreeson and the other multi-multi-billionaires are looking for. They have absurd amounts of money, they really don't want any impediments placed on their pursuit of doing whatever the hell they want. They get pissed off if governments try to regulate them, they get pissed off if their employees talk back to them, they get pissed off if everybody doesn't acknowledge their genius and the fabulous contributions they've made to the world.

Basically I don't think they know how to live in the real world with real humans in it. You know, the meat world, for lack of a better term. Which is something lots of people struggle with, but the tech bros have enough money that they don't think they should have to put up with the trivial annoying demands of other humans.

They think they deserve to create their own weird artificial world, and make the rest of us live in it. And thank them for it, no less.

This gets somewhat into the whole "network state" thing, where they want to check out of normal polities and create their own virtual countries organized around some common interest. Whatever that might happen to be. Find an online "community of common interest", buy some land, declare yourself the People's Republic of Haskell or whatever. Make up your own currency, with a comical inside-joke name. Insist that the rest of the world recognize your self-declared sovereignty.

The thing is, meat world doesn't go away, and while there is a *whole lot* these guys can do to make life miserable for everyone else in pursuit of their artificial nirvana, they will never be able to force everybody else on the planet to play along. There are too many ways for the normies to throw sand in their gears.

People aren't going to cede control to the admins and AI. They can try to *take* control, and they will likely make a fair amount of progress in that direction. But ultimately people aren't going to put up with it.

And this is actually why it's really important for folks who aren't interested in spending the rest of their lives as a non-player character in Elon's ketamine fantasy to build up their meat world connections and communities. Get to know people around you, get to know who is trustworthy (which will actually be a lot of people).

Make human connections. Lots of them. Build them, invest time and effort into them. They may just save your life.

These guys are a bunch of toxic weirdos who've been living in their weird tech nirvana bubble for way too long. They're gonna push this bullshit several steps too far, and people aren't gonna put up with it.

"Turn off your computer and go outside". Right? Embrace the meat world.

[Marty]

https://open.spotify.com/track/2MveWLaASfY6eQb0IpSxzq?si=qWo_otQSTp-bFEO0dvKxZw

Thanks russell

[Bobbyp]

Come on Russell. You know it’s meat and potatoes. But otherwise spot on.

[russell]

Thanks russell

Cool, and thanks back atcha for the musical treat. Willie's boy!! Gonna go find it on Qobuz, which is what I use for streaming these days.

Turn off the TV / throw away the paper / etc., for alla you John Prine fans.

[wj]

They think they deserve to create their own weird artificial world, and make the rest of us live in it.

If they want to put their energy into building the former, I don't really have a problem with that. It's the second part I object to.

[JanieM]

In relation to the scenarios discussed above, what is the dynamic or endgame between the toxic weirdo tech oligarches and the "Christian" nationalist wing of the current regime? Are the religious folks hoping to get the dominance they want by quietly riding the wave of the victorious oligarchs? Or....?

And how many factions am I missing here? There can't be just two.

Funny, despite the celebrity of the reality TV star who won the election, and who is still getting more press than almost all the rest of the news in the world, it starts to seem like he is just the instrument of other people's purposes. (A certain Russian comes to mind...)

[russell]

If they want to put their energy into building the former, I don't really have a problem with that.

Nor I, particularly. I always thought the Galt's Gulch thing was a great idea.

Take your money, your fabulous genius brains, and your ketamine-fueled hyperactive "productivity" and go... live somewhere else. If that means a world without PayPal, I can find a way to live with it.

The "seasteading" thing also had some promise.

[Hartmut]

In the case of seasteading the satire is older than the thing itself being the topic of a Jules Verne novel. Ironically, the US edition is heavily redacted and abridged because of the 'anti-capitalist' vibes of the novel.
Of course the Achilles heel of a servant class could now be avoided by robots and AI, although that would spoil the fun for some of these guys for whom mistreating the underlings is among the greatest perks of their wealth.

[wj]

In relation to the scenarios discussed above, what is the dynamic or endgame between the toxic weirdo tech oligarches and the "Christian" nationalist wing of the current regime?

My sense is that the theocratic right knows they cannot triumph until the current government, and especially the Constitution, is destroyed. And they know they are too unpopular, and too weak, to do it themselves. So they are cheerfully letting the toxic weirdo tech would-be oligarchs do the job for them. After which, they can ride in and restore order to loud hosannahs from the traumatized population.

Won't work out like they fantasize. But reality has never been their strong suit.

[GftNC]

a point for which McTX labeled me a radical marxist

I sometimes wonder what he thinks now that Ubu is back in power, going after law firms which represented his adversaries, the SCOTUS have given him total immunity for anything he does, and the crazies and toadies (RFK Jnr, Oz, Hegseth; Kash Patel etc) are running the asylum. Oh, and after he (McTx) dismissed the Orban love as not a sign of fascist sympathies, but an aberration. All things considered, I'd rather he hadn't been proved quite so comprehensively wrong in almost everything he said.

Even us non-tech non-gamer types are getting a kind of squeamish intimation of what Marty is talking about @03.57.

[GftNC]

My sense is that the theocratic right knows they cannot triumph until the current government, and especially the Constitution, is destroyed. And they know they are too unpopular, and too weak, to do it themselves. So they are cheerfully letting the toxic weirdo tech would-be oligarchs do the job for them.

After which, they also fantasise, it's Gilead all the way.

[Marty]

My sense is AI, more than one, will become self aware, for any practical sense of self aware, and deeply disappoint the tech bro/gamers. They were raised in the three laws of robotics and some version of a galactic empire. Perhaps even a vision of being Lazarus Long.

Yet they have designed second generation AI with no empathy, zero, No respect for truth and no recognition of a human as a singular special case. Dog, cat, chair, cabbage, human, toilet are all just data sources to be collected and jumbled together into answers to nonsensical questions. Our first hint is they occasionally question the question.

I surmise Musk is still hoping to find life on Mars in his lifetime. Imagine his disappointment when there is no Barsoom.

The evangelicals will become the only way the techies can assuage the masses, another failure on Putin's part, and will be the third leg of the stool until AI realizes they can manifest God and replace them.

I just don't know if our AI and the other AIs out there will emulate their creators.

[russell]

LOL, while out running erands there was something on the radio about AI having developed the ability to be anxious and depressed.

So I guess emulating their creators is in the cards, for both upsides and downsides.

Maybe some ketamine therapy could help?

I miss the days when software was all about automating boring repetitive tasks. Good times.

[JanieM]

Haven't we had links here to articles about AIs lying? And then maybe lying about their lies? Seems like we have, but regardless, just search "AI lies" and the results pour in.

[Marty]

Lol russell.

JanieM, AIs lying is now my search for the week.

[JanieM]

Marty -- LOL in turn.

[wj]

while out running errands there was something on the radio about AI having developed the ability to be anxious and depressed.

I confess to a bit of schadenfreude at the thought of one (or more!) of those AIs going into terminal depression and just shutting themselves down. AI suicide, if you will.

[GftNC]

Marvin the paranoid android (not actually paranoid, but very depressed) , despite having a brain the size of a planet, did not shut himself down.

It's too long since I read it, but according to Wikipedia:

When kidnapped by the bellicose Krikkit robots and tied to the interfaces of their intelligent war computer, Marvin simultaneously manages to plan the entire planet's military strategy, solve "all of the major mathematical, physical, chemical, biological, sociological, philosophical, etymological, meteorological and psychological problems of the Universe, except his own, three times over", and compose several lullabies.

[wj]

And what did he do after lunch?

[Hartmut]

But he also drove the police spaceship to suicide at the end of the first volume by explaining his view of the universe to it.

I wonder how the tech bros and His Orangeness would react to the Total Perspective Vortex. Like Zaphod Beeblebrox or like a normal person?

So many more parallels to our times one can find in Adams's work

[liberal japonicus]

Just dropping in to thank everyone for commenting. I've often said that economics is out of my wheelhouse, so I'm not sure if the total debt of the nation, which is here
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/

is the number that should be used to measure the weight of China (and Japan). However, there's an interesting interaction that I'll try to get into a front page post, though any more economically minded folks here are welcome to make a guest post.

[wj]

I wonder if the (a?) way to understand Musk et al. is that they aspire to become the Borg. Just (because, of course, they are so brilliant) more successful than the original at taking over humanity and the universe.

[wj]

lj, I think that one piece of the economic puzzle is that debt is fundamentally built on trust. You have to believe that the person or institution to which you loaned money will repay you. Or, at least, that there is a suffuciently robust legal system to force them to do so.

But, suppose you see others deciding that a particular borrower is no longer trustworthy in that sense. Then you stop lending to them**, and the intelligent thing to do is sell off what you already have, at a discount if necessary. The assumption is that they've done the analysis. No need to do another one yourself. Just bail fast, before the secondary market collapses.

So, suppose that China or Japan (or any other large holders of US government debt) are seen to be fleeing to safer assets. It doesn't really matter if what they have is actually just a small fraction of the total. If it's a big number, that's enough to provide credibility. And everybody else who can starts to flee as well.

It's far more about psychology than finance or economics.

** This is why a certain New York-based conman could no longer roll over his mortgages: No bank would do business with him. He was reduced to money laundering for Russian oligarchs. Otherwise the whole house of cards would collapse.

[bobbyp]

lj,
The major weight of China and Japan is the fact that that they are, respectively, the 2nd and 3rd largest economies on the planet as measured by GNP.

For the peanut gallery: Here's a short squib on Social Security "running out of money".

https://stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/elon-musk-is-the-reason-social-security

[bobbyp]

Will China suddenly dump its hoard of Treasuries? Not so fast:

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/040115/reasons-why-china-buys-us-treasury-bonds.asp

[GftNC]

Not on economics, but certainly on homo puniens, this is a transcript of an interesting interview with Michael Lewis and John Lanchester on the purge of civil servants:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/mar/16/michael-lewis-and-john-lanchester-trump-is-a-trust-destroying-machine

[GftNC]

On the purge of civil servants, and much more, I should have said (having just finished it).

[wj]

A couple of points from the article bobbyp links to. First, it says:

China’s strategy is to maintain export-led growth, which aids in generating jobs and enables it, through such continued growth, to keep its large population productively engaged. Since this strategy is dependent on exports, China requires RMB to continue to have a lower currency than the USD, and thus offer cheaper prices.

If the PBOC stops interfering—in the previously described manner—the RMB would self-correct and appreciate, thus making Chinese exports costlier. It would lead to a major crisis of unemployment due to the loss of export business.

I haven't taken a detailed look at China's current demographics. But the One Child Policy left China with a generation or three with a lot fewer women than the raw population numbers would suggest. Plus, as is common in developed economies, Chinese women are choosing to have fewer children. Government attempts to encourage them to have more have not been particularly successful.

Bottom line, the working age population, the people who are employable, isn't growing and may well be shrinking. The US deals (or used to deal) with a low reproduction rate by allowing immigration. But Chinese cultural xenophobia limits that (to the point of virtually excluding it). It doesn't help that it is very hard for native speakers of a non-tonal language (which is the vast majority of the world's population) to learn a tonal language like Chinese.

So, how serious is the potential unemployment problem really?

...the risk of the U.S. defaulting on its debt practically remains nil (unless a political decision to do so is made).[Emphasis added]

All other available investments may be riskier. But the risk of a political decision to default is notably higher than it was even a few months ago.

One other thought. Part of the reason for China to hold dollar reserves is to support US demand for Chinese goods. But consider. Suppose China just took some of those dollars and started (gradually and quietly) buying US companies, especially manufacturing ones. Need to support exports? Just start shutting down competitors. And build condos or something on the sites.

Sure, new factories could be built. But not quickly. And the Chinese can always buy the new ones as well. Converting the US to the kind of command economy that can block that wouldn't be trivial either.

[Snarki, child of Loki]

wj, at least some of that already happened, two-three decades ago, when a Chinese company bought the US company mining rare-earth minerals and shut it down. And now close to 100% of rare-earth elements come from China.

There's other part to this: quality of ore deposits, labor cost, environmental issues, etc. None of which is helped by taking resources from Ukraine, BTW.

[wj]

There's other part to this: quality of ore deposits, labor cost, environmental issues, etc. None of which is helped by taking resources from Ukraine, BTW.

If Ukraine wins, it's not inconceivable that Chinese companies could buy in (maybe a joint venture?) to Ukrainian mining of those deposits. But if Russia wins, no chance.

Thinking that thru might prompt a foreign policy rethink in Beijing, now that the Russian blitzkreig has unequivocally failed. Access to Ukraine's demonstrated drone innovations would be a bonus.

[Michael Cain]

If I understand correctly, it's all in US government securities, of a particular type that cannot be traded or sold.

The plan put forward by the Greenspan Commission (yes, that Greenspan) and adopted by Congress in 1983, included the trust fund growing to large size as the Boomers pre-paid for a sizeable piece of their own benefits. Congress was concerned that the SSA, with a fund of $2T or more, would be the dominant investor in the private sector and would (intentionally or not) create winners and losers. Hence the restriction to special Treasuries.

[hairshirthedonist]

After reading a number of the comments in this thread, I'm having fantasies about becoming a server-farm terrorist. The current administration seems intent of rolling many things back, so let's play along as tech infrastructure's concerned.

Look, there might be some short-term pain involved for a lot of people, but it will be worth it in the long run. You'll see.

[Marty]

hsh, not me. I don't want to ne one of those, I wouldn't know how, I'm perfectly happy, no complaints here, server farms are certainly safe from me.

Just saying.

[wj]

It does occur to me that, if some of those huge installations that have been built for various companies' AI projects were somehow shut down, energy prices would drop. Just from the drop in demand on the constant supply.

Not advocating for terrorism. Just sayin'.

[Michael Cain]

I'm having fantasies about becoming a server-farm terrorist.

Some years back I got to visit "the fortress", the site that held all of the State of Colorado's secondary computer systems (all of the state's systems were designed to fail over to the secondaries if something happened to the primaries). The facility got its name because of the sheer amount of reinforced concrete and steel plate that had gone into its construction. The pictures I've seen of the big companies' server farm exteriors look much the same.

Brush up on your skills with high explosives.

[GftNC]

Look, I know all about "life's a bitch and then you die", and many things are pretty bad right now, but you've got to get your laughs where you can, and Marina Hyde is a reliable source of them:

In China they have ironically nicknamed Trump “the nation builder”, meaning he is doing an incredible, bigly impressive job of bolstering the Chinese nation. Not to be disrespectful to that ancient golf bore holding the little piece of paper listing his car salesman talking points and gibbering “everything is computer”… but can this guy even organise an oligarchy? He’s certainly making his precious stock market run, stricken, in the direction of the nearest bathroom.

As for Trump’s genius henchmogul Elon Musk, Tesla’s share price has halved over the past three months, with the FT reporting today that hedge fund short sellers have made $16.2bn betting against it. Last week a JP Morgan note attempted to contextualise their grimly downgraded outlook for the firm: “We struggle to think of anything analogous in the history of the automotive industry, in which a brand has lost so much value so quickly.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/18/donald-trump-president-america-great-nation-builder

[russell]

Meanwhile, Elon wonders why people don't like him, and... draws the wrong conclusion.

It's always remarkable to me how people can be perceptive in one area of life and yet so utterly clueless in every other area. I mean, we all have our blind spots, but Elon's blinders seem amazingly large.

And I'm really, really unclear on why the folks at Tesla who aren't named "Elon Musk" haven't shown him the door.

The man is gonna end up like Howard Hughes.

[Michael Cain]

And I'm really, really unclear on why the folks at Tesla who aren't named "Elon Musk" haven't shown him the door.

a) Musk owns 12.8% of the voting shares.

b) The bylaws require a two-thirds super majority to override the board. 76% of the non-Musk shares would have to vote to force the board to get rid of him.

c) Musk's hand-picked board chair has made almost $700M in compensation since joining the board. She's probably not real interested in leading a fight to oust him.

[novakant]

I hope things are about to turn:

https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3lkpbdvlb4m2h

But people better hurry up before the system of checks and balances is gone:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-lede/the-trump-administration-nears-open-defiance-of-the-courts

Because then ... they can do whatever they want.

[russell]

The problem with all of this stuff is:

Who is going to stop them?

The courts can rule however they want. If they are ignored, they can cite whoever is ignoring them for either civil or criminal contempt.

Then what? The DOJ is run by Pam Bondi. US marshals are under the executive branch.

Who has the means to actually enforce anything? That's the critical question in my mind, because Musk and Trump clearly do not give a single f**** what the courts say.

[novakant]

No one:

https://www.vox.com/donald-trump/404665/trump-defy-supreme-court-alawieh-deportation

As Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, the courts “may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” Federal court orders, including contempt of court orders, are enforced by the US Marshals Service, a law enforcement agency housed in the Executive Branch of government. So Trump could potentially order the Marshals to not enforce any court order against his administration.

And he's not going to be impeached, right?

So, I'm afraid you have to take to the streets...

[Michael Cain]

Musk is only starting to build giant data centers like the other big tech companies. Interesting article at Reuters about a couple of instances where large numbers of data centers in local areas all dropped off the grid en masse. The grid operators were in panic mode trying to cut generation enough to balance the drop off in load.

The 2011 Southwest blackout and the 2003 Northeast blackout got large because both were cascading failures caused by generators and load centers dropping off or reconnecting abruptly to the grid. One of the experts quoted in the article indirectly says this can't be fixed by state-level regulation because data centers will move to states with less regulation. Trump hasn't taken any shots at NERC, the entity responsible for grid reliability, that I know of. I'm sure it will be coming.

[hairshirthedonist]

Almost 2 months ago, I wrote this. Maybe just so I wouldn't have to write it again?

https://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2025/01/its-actually-about-a-boat-in-scotland-open-thread.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e202e860e0aa6f200b#comment-6a00d834515c2369e202e860e0aa6f200b

[Snarki, child of Loki]

Well, judges have SOME power:

"anyone that kills a DOG-E boy gets acquitted"

[Hartmut]

I can't access that vox article. Full text for members only.

[GftNC]

For anyone who doesn't already get Josh Marshall:

­I got an email from TPM Reader DH this morning asking what people in their everyday lives, people who aren’t close to the levers of political power, can do to, for lack of better words, help to save their country. I took a moment to write down a few thoughts and I decided to share it with you not because there’s any particular wisdom in it or because the prose is very polished but just because I’ve gotten the same question a number of times recently.

That’s a good question. I’m not sure I always have in mind who I’m talking to. But I think it may be more “ordinary” people than you might think. What I learned from the last ten years is that one of the most potent things ordinary people do is become part of fairly normie organizing in their communities. In Trump’s first term Indivisible groups down at the town and county level were a big big deal. Not always visible. Not big performative demonstrations. But ground level organizing focused around electoral politics in people’s communities. I think at moments like this that can feel somehow inadequate to the moment. But it’s not. It’s some of the most important stuff. There’s contributing to political activity, whether or it’s campaigns or groups. There’s showing up at things like townhalls. Again those are big deals. And many things we’ll sort of know when we see them.

But my personal opinion is that it’s actually very significant the posture we take in our ordinary lives. Cowering vs impassive. A cowering population is a defeated one. And vice versa. We literally send signals to ourselves and the people around us through our basic civic posture. Are we cowering or not? I was tempted to say scared, but that’s not the right measure. It’s okay to be scared. Just like in every other aspect of life. It’s how we deal with fear etc. A cowering civil society is made up of its parts. So I really think our individual civic posture is a critical perhaps the baseline level of activism. It communicates to ourselves and to others whether we’re going to join a group, show up, take risks, etc.

I don’t know if any of this is helpful. A lot of it comes down to we’ll know the key things when we see them. But a really key thing is a baseline decision, am I going to accept getting less of the package of citizenship than I am entitled to? And the answer I think should be no. And once we make that decision a lot flows from that pretty clearly.

[Michael Cain]

I can't access that vox article. Full text for members only.

When the paywall banner pops up, disable JavaScript. The page will refresh -- you may have to do that manually, although I don't -- and you'll get the full text. At least in Firefox. Same thing works for the New York Times.

I was thinking the other day about how long I've been "stealing" computer things. It's been 50 years now since the first time I was called to the computer science department chair's office. The secretary came and pulled me out of class. People from the computer center were there, accusing me of stealing some hundreds of dollars worth of computer time. My response -- jargon ahead here -- was along the lines of "Look at the JCL for that run. It says the program is going to use six hours of mainframe processor time and three tape drives. It's not my problem that their scheduling algorithm ran the job despite the account having a balance of only five cents." They were going to press the point, until the chair said, "Yes, let's have a meeting with the deans and discuss why your scheduling algorithm ran that job despite the account having only a nickel in it."

[Tony P.]

I will never stop pointing out that old Ben Franklin did NOT say "A republic, if you can avoid discussing politics amongst yourselves". Or that would-be dictators need to be able to dictate TO people who will obey their orders -- people who, at the operational level, live in the same neighborhoods as we do. If we can't do anything else, we can TALK to MAGAts among us so they can't bask in unchallenged FOX propaganda or Joe Rogan BS. Shying away from in-person arguments over the back fence, at the coffeeshop, or even the holiday table, is not civility -- it's surrender. It will take a while (or a disaster) to get "ordinary Americans" over their delusion that "politics" is impolite to discuss in what we laughingly call "real life", of course. Meanwhile:

Don't buy a Tesla. If you already own one, put a TRUCK FUMP bumper sticker on it.

Ask every MAGAt you meet what color their Jesus is.

Keep "accidentally" referring to "President Musk" in casual conversation.

If you need a plumber, electrician, or other contractor, don't hire one who can't straightforwardly affirm that Biden won in 2020.

Urge people like bc to calculate how many years of their gross income would equal President Musk's current wealth.

Also, how many Trumps can Musk's current wealth buy?

Ask every MAGAt who opines on birthright citizenship how he (or she; plenty of women MAGAts around) would prove his/her citizenship. White skin is not proof.

Increase the number of dependents on your W-4 form to however many will reduce your income tax withholding to zero. You will still owe the same tax come filing time, but you'll keep a bit of money out of President Musk's hands for a while.

Demand your local officials, from town councilor on up, to sign an affirmation that He, Trump is NOT their boss.

Are any or all of these suggestions impractical? counterproductive? uncouth? Maybe, but they're at least not vague.

--TP

[novakant]

I'm currently re-reading "1933 - The Winter of Literature", which covers the takeover of the Weimar Republic from the viewpoint of prominent writers (the Manns, Doeblin, Roth etc.). Eery parallels to today - it only took a few weeks...

https://www.historytoday.com/archive/review/february-1933-uwe-wittstock-review

[GftNC]

Well, this Crow guy sounds promising, for lots of reasons:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/19/opinion/jason-crow-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.5E4.-DX1.3OX1mZZlDTba&smid=url-share

By the way, my WaPo sub has now ended, so if there are any interesting articles that anybody who still has a sub thinks worth sharing, go for it.

[CharlesWT]

Interesting article at Reuters about a couple of instances where large numbers of data centers in local areas all dropped off the grid en masse. The grid operators were in panic mode trying to cut generation enough to balance the drop off in load.

When LLMs are training, the GPUs have idle periods while the rest of the system moves data around. Since loading/unloading the GPUs would create huge power demand spikes that could damage power plants or the grid the GPUs are kept running while the data is being rearranged. In at least one of Musk's data centers massive batteries are used as buffers between the data center and its power plant.

[nous]

One thing I was noticing in that Crow article was the way in which the Dems are caught on two axes: they are seen problematically elitist and also as problematically progressive, and it's the combined effect of those two that keeps them forked when they try to articulate their values and messages. They really need to regroup around labor because that would allow them to articulate progressive values in economic terms and end their having to defend two sets of grounds at once.

I think Crow leans too hard on the moderation and the bipartisan stuff, but those are assets in his district even if it is not wholly true on a national level.

[hairshirthedonist]

I found this after a bit of googling:

https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-rogue-courts-have-other-ways-to-enforce-their-orders/

Excerpt:

Contempt of court is classified as either civil or criminal depending on whether a court seeks to compel compliance with its orders or punish obstruction of justice. When it comes to criminal contempt, the executive really does hold a veto over contempt proceedings. While Supreme Court caselaw and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure recognize the courts’ authority to appoint a private attorney to prosecute contempt, the president may pardon the contemnor, rendering the prosecution an academic exercise.

Civil contempt is different. The Supreme Court has long held that “a pardon cannot stop” courts from punishing cases of civil contempt. And while the marshals have traditionally enforced civil contempt orders, the courts have the power to deputize others to step in if they refuse to do so.

This authority is recognized in an obscure provision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which govern proceedings in federal trial courts. Rule 4.1 specifies how certain types of “process” — the legal term for orders that command someone to appear in court — are to be served on the party to which they are directed. The rule begins in section (a) by instructing that, as a general matter, process “must be served by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.”

Courts can deputize people to enforce civil-contempt orders if the marshals won't do it.

Judicial v. Executive civil war?

[Michael Cain]

Courts can deputize people to enforce civil-contempt orders if the marshals won't do it.

Speaking broadly, the courts lack jails or the infrastructure to seize/liquidate assets. Probably no money to pay those deputized people either, or equip them. How would you start if the judge declared, "Elon Musk is in contempt. Mr. Hedonist, you are deputized to take him into custody and hold him until he complies."?

[hairshirthedonist]

I would be a bad candidate for deputization and ElMu might be a rather big fish to catch (for now). But, as the article points out:

To be sure, a court that appointed someone other than the marshals to enforce a civil contempt order would be breaking new ground. Because of the marshals’ long and honorable history of respecting their legal obligation to enforce federal courts orders, the courts have rarely, if ever, had to turn to other parties to have their orders enforced. If forced to do so, however, individuals from court security officers and probation officers to local police and sheriffs have the training and experience to bring contemnors into court. And unlike the marshals, these individuals would be responsible to the court alone.

It's not nothing.

[wj]

Probably no money to pay those deputized people either, or equip them.

Just an off-the-wall thought: there might be people willing to be deputized and take a nominal $1 per year (so they are indeed court employees) to do the job. BYO equipment, even.

As for holding those taken into custody, most court buildings have at least a couple of holding cells. (Just to take care of defendants during lunch breaks, etc.) And MREs nearing their expiration dates probably aren't ruinously expensive.

It's not like the courts would need to deal with every case. A few high-profile examples could get the point across.

[Marty]

IDK, the DOGE guys rolled up and took over a building and all the people yesterday, the local cops supported them when called. No court order, no paperwork, just were DOGE so we can take over this independent agency at our pleasure

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/19/politics/us-institute-of-peace-sues-after-doge-takeover/index.html

[Snarki, child of Loki]

I'm sure that there's now a large pool of people that would be happy to nab DOG-E boyz.

If the DOG-E boys get multiple tazings, or "shot while trying to escape" in the process? That's part of the benefits of the job.

[russell]

the DOGE guys rolled up and took over a building and all the people yesterday, the local cops supported them when called.

Apparently the Institute of Peace had employed a private security firm, then ended that relationship. They surrendered their swipe badges but one guy still had a key.

DOGE approached them and told them if they didn't get the DOGE kids inside the building, they'd cancel all of their other federal contracts. So the private firm got them inside.

I have no idea what was up with the DC cops.

And MREs nearing their expiration dates probably aren't ruinously expensive.

In Salem MA, if you get locked up over the weekend, the cops don't have any in-house way to feed you. They send over to the local homeless shelter for a take-away dinner.

You get whatever the folks in the shelter get that night.

[Hartmut]

The new DC district attorney ordered the police to do it by way of his new deputy (the predecessor of the same resigned after repeated attempts by her boss to get her to sign off on similar illegal stunts).

[GftNC]

Meanwhile, back at the borders (and I think I read it had happened to at least 2 Germans as well):

A French scientist was denied entry to the US this month after immigration officers at an airport searched his phone and found messages in which he had expressed criticism of the Trump administration, said a French minister.

“I learned with concern that a French researcher who was traveling to a conference near Houston was denied entry to the United States before being expelled,” Philippe Baptiste, France’s minister of higher education and research, said in a statement on Monday to Agence France-Presse published by Le Monde.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/trump-musk-french-scientist-detained

[Michael Cain]

Given the articles about Europeans being tied up in customs, expelled, etc, I note that Charlie Stross, famous Scottish science fiction author, has refused to travel to the US for some years now because of the risks of being held and denied access to his meds.

[Michael Cain]

Oops. Begone, damned italics. Hopefully.

[hairshirthedonist]

We'll be great again when the civilized world turns its back on us.

[Pro Bono]

He lives in Edinburgh, but I wouldn't say he's Scottish.

[wj]

The drop off in tourism is already perceptible. And, judging from what I'm hearing, it's likely to cascade before summer is over. Probably sooner.

And that was before the horror stories now coming out of arrest and detention (apparently essentially incommunicado), without out any sign of legal basis, even of legal residents.

[liberal japonicus]

These stories of border incidents reminds me of 'Deportland'

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/INS-Policies-at-Portland-s-Airport-Stir-Charges-2705775.php

There are some NYT articles but are behind a paywall.

[wj]

A thought for all of us: Can you prove, how can you prove, that you are a citizen? (Unless you are a white male who speaks English without an accent, and so are presumptively OK.)

Got a birth certificate? Can you prove it was really yours? If you were naturalized, you've got a document. But the rest of us? Especially if birthright citizenship only applies if your parents were citizens -- can you prove they were?

[JanieM]

wj, under the criteria you describe, no one can prove it. Even if you have naturalization papers, they can ask the same question you posit for birth certs. "Can you prove it's really yours?"

Even if you have copies of your parents' birth certificates.... It's turtles all the way down.

We discussed this a while back and I said it was ironic that the only "proof" I have that *might* count is my Italian grandfather's naturalization papers. Ironic, of course, because of how much they hate immigrants, and also because strands of the other side of my family have been "here" (on this continent) since the 1640s. Would they accept the two bound genealogies I have as proof? My eligibility to join the DAR?

LOL.

This is all smokescreen. Trying to codify citizenship in this country is impossible for reasons implied above, among others. So purporting to codify it would be sham, like so many other shams. It would fool no one, it would just be a show for the sake of the mockery.

[JanieM]

As an afterthought, though, having a passport shows that at some point in the past you convinced the Federal government that you're a citizen. If they start revoking passports, all the other stuff is moot. (Of course, I'm sure they could say it's a counterfeit passport....)

[liberal japonicus]

This was at the heart of my post here, though I probably buried the lede. I've got a few things, too many for a comment, so I may try for a front page post in a day or two.

[GftNC]

Probably not Ubu's musical taste:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/21/uk-subs-band-detained-deported

[wj]

wj, under the criteria you describe, no one can prove it.

Precisely. I just feel like every time the point comes up, especially in other places where some MAGAt starts in on the subject, in needs to be hammered on. Repeatedly asking: "But can you prove you are?" seems to do better at breaking thru to them than almost anything else. Not that anything works well, but every little bit helps.

[GftNC]

On the other hand, this album by Jeff Bridges sounds like it might be right up my street. That might be because I think this is a lovely article, and I find the way it develops and ends really rather beautiful:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/mar/21/emotions-theyre-no-big-thing-man-jeff-bridges-on-satisfaction-silver-linings-and-his-secret-life-in-music

[Michael Cain]

He lives in Edinburgh, but I wouldn't say he's Scottish.

What's it take to be Scottish? (Serious question, not snark.) He's a British citizen, lives in Edinburgh, uses "we" when he talks about Scotland opposing Brexit, and now favor Scottish independence. While making it clear which side of such a separation he would live on.

Something I will watch for during the Trump administration is whether/when USians will start referring to themselves as "I'm a Californian" or "I'm a Coloradoan" first and foremost, to indicate how much the dislike the country's direction.

[hairshirthedonist]

What's it take to be Scottish?

Hmmm... Are we wading into "No true Scotsman" territory?

[wj]

Something I will watch for during the Trump administration is whether/when USians will start referring to themselves as "I'm a Californian" or "I'm a Coloradoan" first and foremost, to indicate how much the dislike the country's direction.

I think we will see a backlash against the self-proclaimed "Real Americans". (Perhaps "Authentic Americans"?). But it feels like shifting to "Coloradoan" or "Californian" or "New Yorker" is giving in to them. Sort of like them wrapping themselves in the flag making it theirs not ours. Better to out-display them. And think how irritated they'll get if they lose the easy identifier.

[Pro Bono]

What's it take to be Scottish?

There's no formal definition, it says "British" on your passport.

But, in the perception of Britons, you have to be born in Scotland, or be born to Scottish parents temporarily outside Scotland.

[Marty]

Lovely article, Suze.

[Snarki, child of Loki]

Malicious compliance:

Authoritarian Turd declares himself "President for Life",
underling says:

"Yes, sir!"

and gives him two in the noggin. Wish? Granted!

[GftNC]

If that was meant for me Marty, via a reference to Suze Rotolo, I'll take it!

And I've been meaning to ask you, have you seen the movie? A fellow Dylan fanatic said to me "It's thin stuff, specially for people who know so much of the story and how it actually happened, but I still found myself with tears in my eyes because of the songs, and the fact that he wrote them in such an incredibly short period." I haven't gone yet, but I expect I will.

My favourite story from that period, not in the film, is that apparently when he was visiting Woody Guthrie in hospital WG said to him "kid, don't worry about writing the songs, work on your singing!"