Just yesterday, Trump was bragging about how he knew oil prices "would probably go up" because of his war. He's working on ways to bring those prices down. What ways? He couldn't say.
But he's also sure the war is pretty much done, kinda. Should end in a few days, or maybe weeks. Can't tell, really. This vague gibberish was enough to get the stock market going back up.
I never thought I'd see the day when our entire existence is ruled over by greedy imbeciles. But here we are.
Benjamin Netanyahu has been lobbying U.S. presidents for over 20 years to join Israel in a final assault on Iran's theocracy. He finally found one stupid enough to pitch in.
Trump's gaslighting just shows weakness. He has a short attention span and already tired of the war. He made the assumption Iran would break like Venezuela while ignoring history of the Middle East and Islam. Trump has no plan after, if there is an 'after.'
Netanyahu played Trump like a fiddle. So now we have spent billions of dollars and seven American lives doing Israel's dirty work. And it's not over yet.
Let Israel fight its own wars without our weapons or our subsidy payments.
And Iran played Netanyahu. They have a new martyr who would have died in the not so distant future anyway, so his successor is assured of the people staying with their theocracy for some time to come.
Are you suggesting they tricked Israel into attacking? I want to see some evidence for that. Otherwise it's like claiming that AQ tricked Obama into killing bin Laden.
Actually, he wasn't. He caught Covid-19 in September 2020 and it almost (damn!) killed him in October. His regrettable recovery was just another one of God's pranks on a heathen humanity, I suppose.
I still remember him standing up onm the balcony and ripping his mask off with a contemtuous look on his face. It was at that precise moment I knew he was going to kill a fuckton of Americans.
Another person who deserves credit and was fired is Anthony Fauci. He walked a tightrope with America’s interest always at heart but his integrity got him fired and the Right bash him because they want someone to blame for making them wear a mask. He worked behind the scenes and you can bet he was involved in the decision to treat Trump with monoclonal antibodies. “Let no good deed go unpunished!"
"Was this doctor part of his team of White House medics? Or a researcher?"
These days you can literally ask Google: "did trump fire the doctor who saved him from covid?"
Google confirms the story and offers up Dr. Peter Stein who was the Office of New Drugs' Director at CDER until Trump fired him. This was mentioned on Rachel Maddow's show here:
As early as 1965, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara knew the war could not be won -- and is on tape saying so! -- but still the big fool said to push on (to quote Pete Seeger from the same general time frame).
Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are friends of theirs who are betting and winning , often betting on utterances or minute actions, via Kalshi, Polymarket, and the like, and who have access to inside info about such utterances. I just listened to an episode of one of my favorite podcasts, Corporate Gossip. Unbelievable.
I can just hear the conversation. "Guys, buy today and I'll suggest the war will end soon, then sell tomorrow after the prices jump. Send me 3/4 of the profits."
Why? This little adventure will provide quite a windfall to Trump and his minions in the oil and arms industries. They inside trade on the stock and oil prices going down, then they inside trade on the prices going up, etc. The volatility is entirely intentional. In my view that's the only explanation for the moneyed interests to not be calling for Trump's head. They are in on the grift.
For you who weren't alive back then, McDonald served in the U.S. Navy at a time when a significant number of bombing attacks were hitting our troops or allies.
Just yesterday, on the radio, I learned of the existence of drone netting. Don't know what it's made of - I hope something biodegradable and non-lethal to birds - but sounds like a better investment (for these times) than a lot of things.
in Ukraine much of the netting is recycled fishing nets. This could actually be a great idea since many nets are just cut loose at sea and become 'ghost nets', continuing to catch all kinds of sea life until they sink from the weight.
Maybe. But for most of my life, corporations and billionaires were not directly dictating how government was run (E.G., DOGE), and people like the President of the United States were not as bone stupid as Donald Trump, and the entire supporting cast under the president was not dedicated to destroying both the government of the United States and the very country we live in.
What do they think is going to happen??? They're destroying the US financial system at its foundation. Do they think they'll still be billionaires when it's all over?
As one financial genius once explained it to me, it is far FAR better to pay $5,000 in taxes on $50,000 than it is to pay $20,000 in taxes on $100,000. Sure, the latter deal nets you a lot more money, but the first one has you paying lower taxes . . . and THAT'S what's important!
If you had REAL money, you'd understand that argument!
Long ago, I sat next to Marco Rubio at a fundraiser. Marco was just a wee little local politician back then, but he was already incredibly dumb. At one point, the subject of healthcare came up, and I said I was all for single-payer because our system was so broken. "Well, your taxes would have to go up to pay for that," said Rubio. Clearly, he thought that was the clinching argument.
I pointed out that I was paying $12,000 a year for health insurance with a $6,000 deductible, so my taxes could up up $18,000 a year and I'd still break even. You could see the little clown on the unicycle in his head come to a complete stop and fall over.
It's just wishful thinking. The idiots actually believe that they themselves may one day have a seat at the rich table. It's all a grift and there is no shortage of suckers.
We are decidedly not making progress. Look at the last 50 years of US policy making. It has all been about dismantling government protections for everyday people and enabling sociopaths and corporate criminals. Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump... all of them have played an active role in ensuring a massive and accelerating wealth transfer to the already wealthy. There are no natural laws at work (except perhaps the natural law of greed, rent and power-seeking). We have chosen the world we live in. It didn't (doesn't) have to be this way.
Or, can we make that, 'the preservation of what they THINK' are their systemic advantages? Cuz this white american 'they' are just as clueless as anybody about what will really server their self-interest. Something about all this coming back to bite them, too. Or as Grandma sums it up in the last scene of 'The American Dream', 'Well, now everbody at last has got what he wants. Or at least thinks he's got what he thought he wanted.'
Is the history of our relationship with Iran since we helped Britain overthrow Mosaddegh not the greatest argument for electrification of our transportation infrastructure?
For a fraction of what Trump is now spending on warfare we could have an array of charging stations nationwide. Instead of employing renewable energy sources to keep the machinery humming we are wasting manpower and economic resources on continued dominance of an unstable source of dirty energy. His hatred of windmills is a potent symbol of how we’ve debased ourselves at the altar of petroleum. He was bought by petroleum interests, of course, but what’s the people’s excuse? It’s not just the madness of kings that’s to blame, the electorate, with fair warnings, put him on his imagined throne.
Peter Thom, thank you! Clearly, now, oil is an unstable source of dirty energy. And so much time, so much money, and so many lives wasted to maintain dominance.
Whose dominance? In 1953 Mossadegh had to go, because US and UK oil companies wanted it that way. An early case of That’s Our Oil Under Your Sand.
What’s the people’s excuse? 1) History doesn’t go back as far as 1953, or the Carter administration or Bush II. 2) People are so busy being consumers and working to pay the bills that they are happy to have their opinions given to them by their pastors, “influencers” online, Fox, etc. 3) Donald Trump really “gets them.”
Actually a fairly late case of That’s Our Oil Under Your Sand. That started during the late Victorian era as the British Navy converted from coal-fired steam to oil.
Trump is also saying the Tomahawk missile that hit the Iranian girls school came from Iran, falsely claiming that many countries have those missiles. When a reporter asked why he is the only one making that claim Trump’s excuse was “Because I just don’t know enough about it” making it clear he just makes stuff up. If Biden had done that it would be the top story that the media would never let go.
The problem with Trump is that bad stuff is happening almost constantly. The media does report it but they can’t dwell on any one story because there’s too many stories. “Flood the zone.”
They absolutely flood the zone which does make it hard for media to keep up and keep focus, but it also exhausts the general public, desensitizes people, makes people disengage altogether. I don’t think it’s *his* strategy because he obviously thinks his long winded, shit covered, word salads are the greatest words ever spoken. But it is definitely part of the strategy for control, both the narrative and the general public’s consumption. All that said, the media does tip toe around him far more than anyone else, definitely D but even R, when their (everyone on planet earth’s) strategy from the start should have been to ignore the petulant toddler…and of course report the truth on how gross and shady he is.
So, if Trump really did know beforehand that his war would cause gas prices to rise (who knows?), then he has a twofer on broken campaign promises. He promised not to start any new wars, and to reduce gas prices.
No expert is stupid enough to tell him something he doesn't want to hear. Not if they want to keep their job. It's the same problem Hitler had in 1944.
Glad the stock market rebounded yesterday, but I can't believe the market really put any faith in Trump saying the "war" was just about over. Of course he walked that back during the night and the stock market will drop again.
I expect him to declare victory and move on. Or keep playing along until Epstein blows over which might be a while. This is smash and grab, so something in it for him.
The end result will be a destroyed country with many dead including Americans, a tyrannical Iranian leadership hell-bent on getting revenge, a populace who once thought the US might be a savoir but likely hate us now, a wrecked world economy with more suffering, Americans with targets on their backs. And it might take a while but Iran will rebuild capabilities but do a much better job of dispersing and hiding them until the right time, probably after Trump is gone. At least that's what I'd do.
Greedy yes - imbeciles ( anyone who swallows anything Agent Orange says) - but t-Rump is an effective employee for boss Putin . Now sanctions have been lifted on Russian exports and the world price of crude is up - so Russia wins .
Pretty slick if you ask me to put son Don Jr. on the board of a company that sells replacement missiles to the
DOD ( sic War ) . That will help the family financially- ya think?
The fact that Trump "talked down" the price of crude by $16 is just absurd, and will only feed his belief that he can say anything and do anything, and the sheep will accept it. But sooner or later, the Strait will have to open, or all the meaningless blather and bragging in the world won't keep the price in check. What Trump thinks of as manipulation is just the Markets panicking, and then the mere fact of their panic actually manipulates Trump....
Since a majority of the US population is greedy imbeciles who want "MY SHARE" and to hell with everyone else, why are you surprised the same holds true for our 'elected' representatives.
It's interesting as whilst petrol and diesel are a lot more expensive in Europe, Americans spend a similar amount on transport fuel as they consume a lot more. Which is another good reason to reduce car dependency in urban environments.
Not to mention we spend MORE on health care for lower-quality returns on nationwide public health. Lower taxes, higher rates of death from breathing petroleum-byproduct-infested air.
Yes, reduce car dependency – walk, bike, or public transportation where possible – and go green: move to EVs and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal) to cut exposure to oil!
You won’t care as much about the price 'at the pump' if you don’t use it and never go there anymore, plus save thousands on fuel.
It’s insane that it’s the year 2026 and we’re still depending on dead dinosaurs to get around... Visitors from another planet would be incredulous.
"Lower taxes" is what has progressively destroyed the US, starting with the Reagan Administration. Economic inequality has soared since then, to the point where it is a serious threat to our democracy.
European cities were built for pedestrians and horses. They can revert. US cities since the mid-20th century were designed around everyone having cars (that's why, west of the original east coast cities, public transportation is grossly inadequate). We'd have to redesign from the ground up. It's going to be difficult to make that happen when oil companies, car companies, insurance companies, all win under the status quo.
California voted in high speed rail 26 years ago. Supposed to be built by 2008. It's just getting underway!
Not exactly why public transportation is inadequate, it’s because the auto barrons dismantled public transportation in order to make buying a car a necessity.
When public transport systems were dismantled it is because they were losing money, either due to the interference of populist politicians or (as with the "Red Cars" of Los Angeles) because they were built in the first place as loss leaders to sell real estate, and were thus financially unsustainable as soon as the real estate had been sold.
The U.S. government offered tremendous subsidies to the railroads, mostly in land. When the railroads converted from steam to diesel/electric, most of the land became unnecessary. The railroads sold the land but didn't put the money into improvements. By the 1960s, if you had a car, it took less time to drive from Knoxville Tennessee to Kansas City than to take the train. The government also provided tremendous subsidies to aviation in the form of airport construction. They've always subsidized whatever was the best form of transportation at the time.
And the Interstate connecting Knoxville to KC? THAT is not a heck of a subsidy -- for the car and driver?
Nudging back to the theme of the article -- and my responses - it's all about whose ox is being gored -- or fed. It might be faster to take the train, had the same level of support been kept up for that mode. This, without calling one or the other mode 'best' -- a judgement as much in the eye (and seat-crammed ass) of the one making the call.
What is best for the common good? And do we even think about that, or only what is in front of our nose. And windshields?
The US also had good cities prior to WWII, but ruined them far more since for the sake of highways, parking lots and other car infrastructure. In part this was because the US had plenty of its own oil then and was substantially wealthier than Europe -- not having been bombed (or worse, fought over) in the war -- and in part because the destruction of property values by racist redlining policies made it far cheaper to plow highways through urban areas.
My answer to this is allowing infill development. The demand for this in urban areas is there; look at housing prices! Building/operating good transit systems is another story, but one that’d be helped significantly by building housing more densely in places that the market tells us are begging for it!
The 2024 London mayoral campaign was marked by the Conservative challenger Susan Hall blatantly going for the motorist vote by complaining about congestion charging zones and promising to scrap rules on vehicle emissions "on day one" (sound familiar?).
But Londoners demonstrably like living in a far less congested city, both in terms of fewer cars on the roads (most Londoners simply don't need to drive, at least within the city) and noticeably less air pollution, and duly re-elected Sadiq Khan by a double-digit margin, something doubly impressive for the fact that this was an unprecedented third term. And the issue of traffic and pollution was central to both campaigns, so undoubtedly had a significant impact on the eventual vote.
I'm sure Zohran Mamdani's team has been keeping a keen eye on what's been happening on the other side of the Atlantic (and not just in London), because the fact is that for all the absurd shrieks of "communism!", such policies are demonstrably popular, if sold convincingly and administered sensibly.
The term "smog" was probably first used in 1905 by H.A. Des Voeux to describe atmospheric conditions over many British towns. It was popularized in 1911 by Des Voeux’s report to the Manchester Conference of the Smoke Abatement League of Great Britain on the more than 1,000 “smoke-fog” deaths that occurred in Glasgow and Edinburgh during the autumn of 1909.
Recently while in UK commented to someone what I enjoyed was being able to walk to do my grocery shopping. A group looked puzzled whereas one clued in person commented yes-being able to walk to a grocery store is a luxury for people in the usa
(Obviously not everywhere but outside of unaffordable housing areas the decades long policies favoring car use decimated neighborhoods and ability to walk to necessities
I walked to my doctor, the pharmacy, the grocery store(s), etc. when we lived in Chicago. Unfortunately living in the city became rather quickly too expensive (mainly the rent). So we moved to a suburb. Now I need my car again to visit the doctor, the dentist, do the shopping, etc.
Yes although I hear things are starting to improve in parts of the US. Apparently Houston is one of the most bikeable cities, who would have thought it? Maybe a silver lining of this insane war is a push towards better infrastructure. Wallability and bikeablity are an easier and cheaper sell than public transport, and of course offer fantastic health benefits.
I’d love to agree but alas it’s a very small area too little too late imho. Although I’m curmudgeonly and fwiw that’s thinking that “everyone “ can bike. We can’t unfortunately but many of us live in hope for affordable housing and resources and responsive city planning that is responsive to all ages and earners
Back when I worked about two miles from my home, I vocally considered biking to work. My then boss said "Hell, they wouldn't even realize they'd run over you." I dropped the idea - he was right.
Urban environments is not the culprit; suburbs and exurbs eat gas, though the quality of mass transit varies greatly among cities, depending on their geography and formative years.
The road to energy independence is through renewables—- wind, solar and nuclear. Trump is so indebted to the fossil fuel industry that he cannot be reasoned with. He continues to build stagecoaches while Henry Ford is building cars.
And fossil-fuel extraction -- which permits poorly-educated but risk-tolerant men to earn big money -- is viscerally appealing to MAGA voters on an emotional level in a way renewables never will be.
The Trumps are also historically anti-density: Fred (Donald's dad) was the only NYC real estate developer to support the mass downzoning of the city in 1961.
One other factor which will have a long-term and growing impact on gas prices is the Dec. 3, 2025 Trump announcement to roll-back fuel economy standards in favor of supporting gasoline-powered vehicles over hybrids, partial- and full EVs.
"We're officially terminating Joe Biden's ridiculously burdensome, horrible, actually, CAFE standards that impose expensive restrictions," Trump said, referring to the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules, often called CAFE standards. "And all sorts of problems, all sorts of problems for automakers."
"The Trump administration has already defanged the existing CAFE standards by eliminating the fines associated with them, as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Under Former President Joe Biden, the rules called for vehicles to get 2% more efficient every year; the Trump administration is now proposing to revert to the 2022 baseline and increase by .5% annually."
We switched from a V-6 to a hybrid engine and doubled our gas mileage. As I drive around, I'm surrounded by giant pickup trucks with empty cargo beds and giant SUVs. Americans' fascination with big vehicles, bolstered by Trump's decision to favor the oil industry in return for contributions is another dimension contributing to higher gas prices.
And it's not just about choice -- these higher prices impact delivery trucks too, adding to our costs and inflation.
In a way, it's a fantastic thing that Elon Musk spent hundreds of millions of dollars to get Trump elected so that Trump could cut the legs out from under Tesla.
Well, Musk did a fair amount of self-de-legging with his bragging and incompetence and quasi-fascism that were reflected fairly quickly in Tesla sales.
The techies are trying to establish their own country on half of one of the Caribbean islands. They've already bought most of the land they need, but the existing population is working very hard to keep them out.
What Musk did was prove that even "geniuses" have "blind spots". Usually somewhere behind their egos. Tesla was in trouble before Trumpski's attack on electric vehicles because people wanted to punish Musk for DOGE.
Years ago, I ran the local radio station. It's not bragging to say that under my leadership, the place went from losing money to being profitable with an expanding listernership. And one of the main reasons for that was the fact that I made it an ironclad rule that the station had no particular political view. I interviewed candidates from both parties for office ranging from town council to United States Senate, and not once did I let my own political views color an interview or slant any programming.
This did not sit well with a couple of board members. They demanded that I make the place a Leftwing version of Rightwing talk radio. Afterall, they said, their political views were popular! I kept trying to point out that picking one side or the other just alienates half your potential audience, but they wouldn't hear it. I eventually left because of this.
After I quit, they tried their Leftwing Limbaugh thing. The station's audience fled. They eventually gave up and they place was taken over by a truck driver who turned it into a Rightwing radio station. Today, it runs on his meager paycheck with no revenue at all.
The point to all this is that we're all convinced our politics are not just superior or popular. We Leftys think this because that's who we talk to, just as Musk thinks being a Nazi is popular because that's who HE talks to. Neither case is true or definitive.
It is easier for audio-format media (whether talk radio or podcasts) to succeed if it is right wing, because these formats are suited to people who spend much of their day behind the wheel, and such people are more likely to be right-wing in the first place due to the zero-sum competition for road space and parking space.
The Muskrat thinks Nazi is popular because his father is one. "Teach a child in the way that he should [not] go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it."
I'm not unconvinced that Musk is a genius. He is certainly autistic and I suspect he does not fully recognize the business risks he has taken. So far they have paid off, but Tesla is not looking like a healthy company today as its sales have plummeted. Musk is now betting the farm on manufacturing robots.
Our local late Tv news in Barcelona connected online with you president press conference.....We where waiting for him to clarify when the war will be finished. What a waste of time. Self propaganda of the war dubious at least- was repeated 10 times. Just like a cheap infomercial program. How can people trust him?
About 67% of them voted for him. They form the only identifiable group of which over half voted Trump. If it weren't for evangelicals, our president would be Harris today.
Two years ago, my mother's doctor told me, calmly and quietly, that she had scored 13 out of 30 on the MOCA test. This test assesses memory, executive functions, attention, language, and orientation. Any score under 26 indicates the onset of dementia is a concern.
When I look at the federal US government today, it also fails the MOCA test.
I am not talking about the president personally, but the presidency, congress, and courts collectively.
Memory - The 1970's oil crises are within living memory. This experience of fascism is older, but still known. Individual politicians know the history, but it doesn't seem to inform their decisions - except for the many who quit.
Executive Function - The question, "So you have killed Iran's supreme leader, Now what? How does this end?" shows failure to recognize a plan is even necessary. If you say, other governments have acted like this before (though not as extreme), that reinforces the point about memory.
Language - When Trump demanded "unconditional surrender", the first reaction from the world press was, "does he know what 'unconditional surrender' means?" The answer was, "probably not". Communication regarding the Iran war with allies, congress, and the American people, generally, shows that even if the government knows that communication is necessary, they don't know how to do it.
Orientation - Pointless insults and tariffs applied to the allies on whom US security depends, shows a weak grasp of which side of the bread has the butter on it. You can go much deeper and show how government policy achieves the opposite of its stated goals. But the point is that even when the government has articulated a goal, it's actions are not leading the nation in that direction.
Again, I emphasize that I am not talking about any one person or persons. My concern is that the institutions responsible for ensuring that the US collectively acts in its own best interests, are failing.
You can point to specific choke points: gerrymandering, electoral college, campaign finance.. These are real issues, but they are not valid excuses.
Q: Whose job is it to fix a system that is unable to serve the public interest?
A: The American electorate.
Tough job, I know, but if left to the billionaires, you won't like the result.
Only thing you are missing is the realization that the destruction of a government that was meant to serve the public interest was entirely intentional. It has been the working strategy of policy makers from both political parties since Reagan.
"How can people trust him?" Ignorance, poor education, stupidity, gullibility, inherited privilege, extreme rightwing beliefs and attitudes, belief in the "strong man" theory of government--take your pick
I’m getting ready to go to Sam’s to get some gas. Why do I have the suspicion that Trump and his cronies are profiteering from this war and Middle East chaos that we, in part, create.
Two is few. Over a hundred, utilizing a double-tap, well, that’ll be the description of the late US Empire forever. Oh, enabled by Anthropic —your friendlier neighborhood artificial intelligence.
Norway is a country of mountains and large waterfalls and usually has a surplus of hydro-electric power. But we have decided to connect with other countries for energy delivery, so prices sometimes soar.
Since Europe is trying to wean itself off Russian gas, Norway has also been earning good money from North Sea oil and gas.
Another reason that Europeans are more protected from world oil price changes is that they pay more tax on fuel. So the percentage change will be lower.
The current VAT (Value Added Tax) rate on petrol ("gasoline") and diesel in the UK is 20%.
This 20% VAT is applied to the total cost of the fuel at the pump, which includes both the underlying product price and the fixed Fuel Duty of 52.95 pence per litre.
Because VAT is charged on top of the Fuel Duty, it is often described as a "tax on a tax".
Here in the States, the federal government charges a tax of 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon on diesel. Then the individual States charge a "road-use" tax on top of that. This varies; Tennessee charges 27.4 cents per gallon and New Jersey charges 44.95 cents. So, tax on tax, but not as high as yours.
The point is that since the fuel price isn’t changing as much overall, they presumably won’t have the cost-push component of inflation due to higher shipping costs. We, in the US won’t only have to del with drastically higher prices at the pump, we risk the economic fallout from cost-push inflation. (That’s my understanding of it. BBC Global Story podcast had an economist on this morning’s episode—last evening in their timezone.)
"The point is that since the fuel price isn’t changing as much overall,"
I do understand the point. It's just based on the faulty premiss that oil companies charge what they must, when in reality they charge what they can. The fuel prices go through the roof whenever there's even a hint of a pretext. Here's but one example from Germany:
“The point is that…” sounds a bit or could come off as arrogant. It depends how it’s read. I wasn’t sure, in hindsight, and wished I’d phrased it differently.
No. A better idea would be to impose an export tax, which would drive a wedge between the domestic price of oil and the global price. It would also raise tax revenues.
I think it's pretty comprehensive, except for the fact that the author seems to be ignorant of the fact that we import the oil that is refined to gasoline and diesel. The idea about releasing from the reserve has seen limited success before.
As Paul pointed out, we import all of the oil we turn into gasoline. What Trump would have to do is pay U.S. companies to import oil and force them to pass the credit down. I'm not holding my breath.
Crap -- it reminds me of how Britain's fishermen were conned into supporting Brexit, even though they were dependent on exporting much of their catch to the EU.
(Britons don't like most of the fish caught in their own waters: they tend to prefer cod and haddock which are caught in more northerly waters: what did most of the earlier damage to Britain's fishing industry wasn't EU quotas, but loss of the Cod Wars versus Iceland.)
Oh gosh, I may be the first to comment. Nice reminder of the price controls of the 70s. It didn't work as intended, leading to shortages in some areas as the Professor noted (I believe an earlier post from Prof Krugman went into this in more detail).
Yes the people who strted this war should have seen this coming.....if they weren't stupid and ignorant. I could add a lot more applicable adjectives but I'll stop there.
"The people who decided to begin this war should have seen this coming. All the evidence, however, suggests that they didn’t."
Of course they didn't. What you've just described will come as a surprise to them. Do you imagine Trump, or any of his acolytes fill their own vehicles, or pay attention to the price of goods? No, they don't. And this is one of the many, many reasons that they should not have been left in charge of a democracy. But sufficient people, who did NOT know this about them, voted to put them in charge. With Vlad's help, obviously. I imagine he can't get out of his chair for laughing these days...
"... in charge of a democracy..." sounds like something of a contradiction in terms. Who but "the people" should be "in charge of" a democracy? Though it might take officials--as public servants--to keep it running. But authoritarians "in charge of" a democracy are the people who destroy it...
I'm aware of that. You have to imagine me saying it in a droll English voice. But sadly that is what happened and it is now bearing the entirely predictable poisoned fruit.
Just yesterday, Trump was bragging about how he knew oil prices "would probably go up" because of his war. He's working on ways to bring those prices down. What ways? He couldn't say.
But he's also sure the war is pretty much done, kinda. Should end in a few days, or maybe weeks. Can't tell, really. This vague gibberish was enough to get the stock market going back up.
I never thought I'd see the day when our entire existence is ruled over by greedy imbeciles. But here we are.
He also said Covid would be over by April, 2020.
Well, HE was over it. So there's that.
Benjamin Netanyahu has been lobbying U.S. presidents for over 20 years to join Israel in a final assault on Iran's theocracy. He finally found one stupid enough to pitch in.
Trump's gaslighting just shows weakness. He has a short attention span and already tired of the war. He made the assumption Iran would break like Venezuela while ignoring history of the Middle East and Islam. Trump has no plan after, if there is an 'after.'
I agree.
Netanyahu played Trump like a fiddle. So now we have spent billions of dollars and seven American lives doing Israel's dirty work. And it's not over yet.
Let Israel fight its own wars without our weapons or our subsidy payments.
And Iran played Netanyahu. They have a new martyr who would have died in the not so distant future anyway, so his successor is assured of the people staying with their theocracy for some time to come.
Are you suggesting they tricked Israel into attacking? I want to see some evidence for that. Otherwise it's like claiming that AQ tricked Obama into killing bin Laden.
Actually, he wasn't. He caught Covid-19 in September 2020 and it almost (damn!) killed him in October. His regrettable recovery was just another one of God's pranks on a heathen humanity, I suppose.
Amazing that the MangoIdiot receives the best of the best medical care, while the rest of us have to scramble for ours.
I still remember him standing up onm the balcony and ripping his mask off with a contemtuous look on his face. It was at that precise moment I knew he was going to kill a fuckton of Americans.
HE was over Covid, but Covid was not yet over HIM!
yeah and the Dr who gave him the antibodies for curing his covid was fired after his fascist doge moved in
Couldn't he have been fired ·before· he saved Trump? *sigh*
John, could you say more about that? Was this doctor part of his team of White House medics? Or a researcher?
Another person who deserves credit and was fired is Anthony Fauci. He walked a tightrope with America’s interest always at heart but his integrity got him fired and the Right bash him because they want someone to blame for making them wear a mask. He worked behind the scenes and you can bet he was involved in the decision to treat Trump with monoclonal antibodies. “Let no good deed go unpunished!"
"Was this doctor part of his team of White House medics? Or a researcher?"
These days you can literally ask Google: "did trump fire the doctor who saved him from covid?"
Google confirms the story and offers up Dr. Peter Stein who was the Office of New Drugs' Director at CDER until Trump fired him. This was mentioned on Rachel Maddow's show here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im9vHZwsZ04
The doctor's got a LinkedIn profile that suggests to me that he's more on the administrative side, although I might be wrong:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-stein-54b597365/
A researcher who developed the early antibodies for Covid before the vaccine that the orange Mussolini benefitted from
Thank you. I had not heard about the firing.
and everybody else was just suffering from a nasty flu. Just ask him.
At first, he called it a hoax..
Then told us to stop testing for it so it would go away.
that's the same as putting head in sand to become invisible.
From annals of famous last words:
https://youtu.be/k0XmRMEvTlc?si=X5O9rqJYTmzFvsbN
He didn't sound like he even believed what he was saying.
As early as 1965, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara knew the war could not be won -- and is on tape saying so! -- but still the big fool said to push on (to quote Pete Seeger from the same general time frame).
Classic clip, thank ye.
It’s amazing to me that stock futures are slightly up just because the idiot-in-chief suggests that the war may end soon.
Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are friends of theirs who are betting and winning , often betting on utterances or minute actions, via Kalshi, Polymarket, and the like, and who have access to inside info about such utterances. I just listened to an episode of one of my favorite podcasts, Corporate Gossip. Unbelievable.
The Atlantic has an article about that risk, correctly labeling it “insider trading”:
“ Insider Trading Is Going to Get People Killed
War markets are a national-security threat.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/03/polymarket-insider-trading-going-get-people-killed/686283/?gift=-PD_2pQePRfuIFj63FHJxgnNsXFSxFjOODFiodRoqVE&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
Thanks for the link. I hadn’t read that one yet.
Im sure you’re correct
I can just hear the conversation. "Guys, buy today and I'll suggest the war will end soon, then sell tomorrow after the prices jump. Send me 3/4 of the profits."
"All in gold this time, dammit, no crypto"...
Why? This little adventure will provide quite a windfall to Trump and his minions in the oil and arms industries. They inside trade on the stock and oil prices going down, then they inside trade on the prices going up, etc. The volatility is entirely intentional. In my view that's the only explanation for the moneyed interests to not be calling for Trump's head. They are in on the grift.
The immortal verse of the “I’m Fixing To Die Rag” by the unfortunately mortal Country Joe McDonald who died last Saturday March 7th:
“Come on Wall Street don't be slow
Why man, this war-a-go-go
There's plenty good money to be made
Supplying the Army with the tools of the trade
Just hope and pray that if they drop the bomb
They drop it on the Viet Cong”
I’ll leave this here for the kids.
https://youtu.be/5XZ07UWhk8s?si=JHe1j18GAjWIUbF3
For you who weren't alive back then, McDonald served in the U.S. Navy at a time when a significant number of bombing attacks were hitting our troops or allies.
Eric and Don Jr. are now investing in drone warfare companies, so maybe the war won't end until they make even more money.
Just yesterday, on the radio, I learned of the existence of drone netting. Don't know what it's made of - I hope something biodegradable and non-lethal to birds - but sounds like a better investment (for these times) than a lot of things.
in Ukraine much of the netting is recycled fishing nets. This could actually be a great idea since many nets are just cut loose at sea and become 'ghost nets', continuing to catch all kinds of sea life until they sink from the weight.
For most of human history, the rulers have been greedy imbeciles. Unfortunately! We were making progress, but some people forgot about history.
Maybe. But for most of my life, corporations and billionaires were not directly dictating how government was run (E.G., DOGE), and people like the President of the United States were not as bone stupid as Donald Trump, and the entire supporting cast under the president was not dedicated to destroying both the government of the United States and the very country we live in.
FOX propaganda for 40 years. It worked. Misinformed, not uninformed.
What do they think is going to happen??? They're destroying the US financial system at its foundation. Do they think they'll still be billionaires when it's all over?
As one financial genius once explained it to me, it is far FAR better to pay $5,000 in taxes on $50,000 than it is to pay $20,000 in taxes on $100,000. Sure, the latter deal nets you a lot more money, but the first one has you paying lower taxes . . . and THAT'S what's important!
That's one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard!
If you had REAL money, you'd understand that argument!
Long ago, I sat next to Marco Rubio at a fundraiser. Marco was just a wee little local politician back then, but he was already incredibly dumb. At one point, the subject of healthcare came up, and I said I was all for single-payer because our system was so broken. "Well, your taxes would have to go up to pay for that," said Rubio. Clearly, he thought that was the clinching argument.
I pointed out that I was paying $12,000 a year for health insurance with a $6,000 deductible, so my taxes could up up $18,000 a year and I'd still break even. You could see the little clown on the unicycle in his head come to a complete stop and fall over.
"Yeah, but your taxes would go up!" he repeated.
It's just wishful thinking. The idiots actually believe that they themselves may one day have a seat at the rich table. It's all a grift and there is no shortage of suckers.
Brilliantly stupid!
Was this 'genius' named Wile E?
Yes. They believe they are completely insulated against the suffering they cause others.
We are decidedly not making progress. Look at the last 50 years of US policy making. It has all been about dismantling government protections for everyday people and enabling sociopaths and corporate criminals. Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump... all of them have played an active role in ensuring a massive and accelerating wealth transfer to the already wealthy. There are no natural laws at work (except perhaps the natural law of greed, rent and power-seeking). We have chosen the world we live in. It didn't (doesn't) have to be this way.
Or, can we make that, 'the preservation of what they THINK' are their systemic advantages? Cuz this white american 'they' are just as clueless as anybody about what will really server their self-interest. Something about all this coming back to bite them, too. Or as Grandma sums it up in the last scene of 'The American Dream', 'Well, now everbody at last has got what he wants. Or at least thinks he's got what he thought he wanted.'
Amen. And they are, right, of course, yes????
Is the history of our relationship with Iran since we helped Britain overthrow Mosaddegh not the greatest argument for electrification of our transportation infrastructure?
For a fraction of what Trump is now spending on warfare we could have an array of charging stations nationwide. Instead of employing renewable energy sources to keep the machinery humming we are wasting manpower and economic resources on continued dominance of an unstable source of dirty energy. His hatred of windmills is a potent symbol of how we’ve debased ourselves at the altar of petroleum. He was bought by petroleum interests, of course, but what’s the people’s excuse? It’s not just the madness of kings that’s to blame, the electorate, with fair warnings, put him on his imagined throne.
Peter Thom, thank you! Clearly, now, oil is an unstable source of dirty energy. And so much time, so much money, and so many lives wasted to maintain dominance.
Whose dominance? In 1953 Mossadegh had to go, because US and UK oil companies wanted it that way. An early case of That’s Our Oil Under Your Sand.
What’s the people’s excuse? 1) History doesn’t go back as far as 1953, or the Carter administration or Bush II. 2) People are so busy being consumers and working to pay the bills that they are happy to have their opinions given to them by their pastors, “influencers” online, Fox, etc. 3) Donald Trump really “gets them.”
Actually a fairly late case of That’s Our Oil Under Your Sand. That started during the late Victorian era as the British Navy converted from coal-fired steam to oil.
Wind in lieu of war.
Testimony in front of planning commission in favor of a wind farm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oyl17hKTmtU
Whenever the stock market gets on the verge of crashing Donnie pulls back on his actions that are causing it.
Once his friends have cashed in on their shorts.
Trump is also saying the Tomahawk missile that hit the Iranian girls school came from Iran, falsely claiming that many countries have those missiles. When a reporter asked why he is the only one making that claim Trump’s excuse was “Because I just don’t know enough about it” making it clear he just makes stuff up. If Biden had done that it would be the top story that the media would never let go.
The problem with Trump is that bad stuff is happening almost constantly. The media does report it but they can’t dwell on any one story because there’s too many stories. “Flood the zone.”
They absolutely flood the zone which does make it hard for media to keep up and keep focus, but it also exhausts the general public, desensitizes people, makes people disengage altogether. I don’t think it’s *his* strategy because he obviously thinks his long winded, shit covered, word salads are the greatest words ever spoken. But it is definitely part of the strategy for control, both the narrative and the general public’s consumption. All that said, the media does tip toe around him far more than anyone else, definitely D but even R, when their (everyone on planet earth’s) strategy from the start should have been to ignore the petulant toddler…and of course report the truth on how gross and shady he is.
It costs a lot to defend against one of his billion-dollar lawsuits, even when you win.
So, if Trump really did know beforehand that his war would cause gas prices to rise (who knows?), then he has a twofer on broken campaign promises. He promised not to start any new wars, and to reduce gas prices.
He himself is probably too stupid to know. But he supposedly has expert advice. He either doesn’t or he’s ignoring it.
No expert is stupid enough to tell him something he doesn't want to hear. Not if they want to keep their job. It's the same problem Hitler had in 1944.
True.
Glad the stock market rebounded yesterday, but I can't believe the market really put any faith in Trump saying the "war" was just about over. Of course he walked that back during the night and the stock market will drop again.
the war started with an itch and now he thinks he's had a thought
I expect him to declare victory and move on. Or keep playing along until Epstein blows over which might be a while. This is smash and grab, so something in it for him.
The end result will be a destroyed country with many dead including Americans, a tyrannical Iranian leadership hell-bent on getting revenge, a populace who once thought the US might be a savoir but likely hate us now, a wrecked world economy with more suffering, Americans with targets on their backs. And it might take a while but Iran will rebuild capabilities but do a much better job of dispersing and hiding them until the right time, probably after Trump is gone. At least that's what I'd do.
The truth is we’ve been living under those conditions since about the middle of Reagan’s first term. So you saw the day over 40 years ago.
Greedy yes - imbeciles ( anyone who swallows anything Agent Orange says) - but t-Rump is an effective employee for boss Putin . Now sanctions have been lifted on Russian exports and the world price of crude is up - so Russia wins .
Pretty slick if you ask me to put son Don Jr. on the board of a company that sells replacement missiles to the
DOD ( sic War ) . That will help the family financially- ya think?
It will end during Infrastructure Week!
Because "freedom isn't free..." or some such bullshit.
The fact that Trump "talked down" the price of crude by $16 is just absurd, and will only feed his belief that he can say anything and do anything, and the sheep will accept it. But sooner or later, the Strait will have to open, or all the meaningless blather and bragging in the world won't keep the price in check. What Trump thinks of as manipulation is just the Markets panicking, and then the mere fact of their panic actually manipulates Trump....
Since a majority of the US population is greedy imbeciles who want "MY SHARE" and to hell with everyone else, why are you surprised the same holds true for our 'elected' representatives.
It's interesting as whilst petrol and diesel are a lot more expensive in Europe, Americans spend a similar amount on transport fuel as they consume a lot more. Which is another good reason to reduce car dependency in urban environments.
Not to mention we spend MORE on health care for lower-quality returns on nationwide public health. Lower taxes, higher rates of death from breathing petroleum-byproduct-infested air.
Yes, reduce car dependency – walk, bike, or public transportation where possible – and go green: move to EVs and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal) to cut exposure to oil!
You won’t care as much about the price 'at the pump' if you don’t use it and never go there anymore, plus save thousands on fuel.
It’s insane that it’s the year 2026 and we’re still depending on dead dinosaurs to get around... Visitors from another planet would be incredulous.
Lower taxes??? Not really friend!
"Lower taxes" is what has progressively destroyed the US, starting with the Reagan Administration. Economic inequality has soared since then, to the point where it is a serious threat to our democracy.
European cities were built for pedestrians and horses. They can revert. US cities since the mid-20th century were designed around everyone having cars (that's why, west of the original east coast cities, public transportation is grossly inadequate). We'd have to redesign from the ground up. It's going to be difficult to make that happen when oil companies, car companies, insurance companies, all win under the status quo.
California voted in high speed rail 26 years ago. Supposed to be built by 2008. It's just getting underway!
Not exactly why public transportation is inadequate, it’s because the auto barrons dismantled public transportation in order to make buying a car a necessity.
When public transport systems were dismantled it is because they were losing money, either due to the interference of populist politicians or (as with the "Red Cars" of Los Angeles) because they were built in the first place as loss leaders to sell real estate, and were thus financially unsustainable as soon as the real estate had been sold.
But of course we offer exactly no, zilch, nada, nuttin' in the way of govt SUBSIDIES for cars, eh?
The U.S. government offered tremendous subsidies to the railroads, mostly in land. When the railroads converted from steam to diesel/electric, most of the land became unnecessary. The railroads sold the land but didn't put the money into improvements. By the 1960s, if you had a car, it took less time to drive from Knoxville Tennessee to Kansas City than to take the train. The government also provided tremendous subsidies to aviation in the form of airport construction. They've always subsidized whatever was the best form of transportation at the time.
And the Interstate connecting Knoxville to KC? THAT is not a heck of a subsidy -- for the car and driver?
Nudging back to the theme of the article -- and my responses - it's all about whose ox is being gored -- or fed. It might be faster to take the train, had the same level of support been kept up for that mode. This, without calling one or the other mode 'best' -- a judgement as much in the eye (and seat-crammed ass) of the one making the call.
What is best for the common good? And do we even think about that, or only what is in front of our nose. And windshields?
That, too. And we built cities out into suburbs, which requires a car or two.
And have ALWAYS but ALWAYS -- S.U.B.S.I.D.I.Z.E.D. the crap out of them -- cars that is -- too.
The US also had good cities prior to WWII, but ruined them far more since for the sake of highways, parking lots and other car infrastructure. In part this was because the US had plenty of its own oil then and was substantially wealthier than Europe -- not having been bombed (or worse, fought over) in the war -- and in part because the destruction of property values by racist redlining policies made it far cheaper to plow highways through urban areas.
We have plenty of our own oil now! Unfortunately, it’s a commodity, therefore its price will rise & fall accordingly.
Our refineries are set up to work with heavier crude oil that must be imported and it would be expensive to reconfigure them.
My answer to this is allowing infill development. The demand for this in urban areas is there; look at housing prices! Building/operating good transit systems is another story, but one that’d be helped significantly by building housing more densely in places that the market tells us are begging for it!
Yes and let me think of transit systems that receive NO tax support, that is support beyond farebox take, and also are terrible:
LONDON
PARIS
TOKYO
MILAN
TURIN
. . .
. . .
get the picture? ok - off snark. for now.
The 2024 London mayoral campaign was marked by the Conservative challenger Susan Hall blatantly going for the motorist vote by complaining about congestion charging zones and promising to scrap rules on vehicle emissions "on day one" (sound familiar?).
But Londoners demonstrably like living in a far less congested city, both in terms of fewer cars on the roads (most Londoners simply don't need to drive, at least within the city) and noticeably less air pollution, and duly re-elected Sadiq Khan by a double-digit margin, something doubly impressive for the fact that this was an unprecedented third term. And the issue of traffic and pollution was central to both campaigns, so undoubtedly had a significant impact on the eventual vote.
I'm sure Zohran Mamdani's team has been keeping a keen eye on what's been happening on the other side of the Atlantic (and not just in London), because the fact is that for all the absurd shrieks of "communism!", such policies are demonstrably popular, if sold convincingly and administered sensibly.
Mamdani has become an all purpose whipping boy on the right. They bring him up constantly.
It's probably pretty hard to sell scrapping emissions rules to a city that gave birth to the term "smog".
The term "smog" was probably first used in 1905 by H.A. Des Voeux to describe atmospheric conditions over many British towns. It was popularized in 1911 by Des Voeux’s report to the Manchester Conference of the Smoke Abatement League of Great Britain on the more than 1,000 “smoke-fog” deaths that occurred in Glasgow and Edinburgh during the autumn of 1909.
Most people would appreciate the opportunity of having public transportation.
Unfortunately most don’t know how much they would appreciate it! They drink the koolaid…snuff the gas fumes?
Recently while in UK commented to someone what I enjoyed was being able to walk to do my grocery shopping. A group looked puzzled whereas one clued in person commented yes-being able to walk to a grocery store is a luxury for people in the usa
(Obviously not everywhere but outside of unaffordable housing areas the decades long policies favoring car use decimated neighborhoods and ability to walk to necessities
Would be a minimum walk of 10+ miles each way here.
Don’t think I can walk that.
Twice at least.
About 6 miles each way here. And, no, I'm in physical therapy trying to get back up to walking two miles.
I walked to my doctor, the pharmacy, the grocery store(s), etc. when we lived in Chicago. Unfortunately living in the city became rather quickly too expensive (mainly the rent). So we moved to a suburb. Now I need my car again to visit the doctor, the dentist, do the shopping, etc.
Yes although I hear things are starting to improve in parts of the US. Apparently Houston is one of the most bikeable cities, who would have thought it? Maybe a silver lining of this insane war is a push towards better infrastructure. Wallability and bikeablity are an easier and cheaper sell than public transport, and of course offer fantastic health benefits.
I’d love to agree but alas it’s a very small area too little too late imho. Although I’m curmudgeonly and fwiw that’s thinking that “everyone “ can bike. We can’t unfortunately but many of us live in hope for affordable housing and resources and responsive city planning that is responsive to all ages and earners
Back when I worked about two miles from my home, I vocally considered biking to work. My then boss said "Hell, they wouldn't even realize they'd run over you." I dropped the idea - he was right.
Urban environments is not the culprit; suburbs and exurbs eat gas, though the quality of mass transit varies greatly among cities, depending on their geography and formative years.
Absolutely; well designed urban or suburban areas are much more sustainable than rural ones for transport.
The road to energy independence is through renewables—- wind, solar and nuclear. Trump is so indebted to the fossil fuel industry that he cannot be reasoned with. He continues to build stagecoaches while Henry Ford is building cars.
Which is really important to my bespoke coachwhip holder business!
so if you give enough money to Trump, he will ensure by Executive Order that all new cars must be sold with coachwhips and coachwhip holders.
Whoa, whoa – keep it down, buddy! You'll blow my whole business model!
so we self flagellate and praise him for his foresight
Don't forget the harness makers, blacksmiths, hay and oats sources, they'll be booming.
Forget them, hell! They are part of my cartel!
And don't forget the poop bags to keep the droppings off the streets.
Horse be goin' "Dammit! I thought I left that pile back there on the road!"
Time to reinstate my sign slogan from 1967:
DRAFT HORSES – NOT MEN!
And fossil-fuel extraction -- which permits poorly-educated but risk-tolerant men to earn big money -- is viscerally appealing to MAGA voters on an emotional level in a way renewables never will be.
The Trumps are also historically anti-density: Fred (Donald's dad) was the only NYC real estate developer to support the mass downzoning of the city in 1961.
One other factor which will have a long-term and growing impact on gas prices is the Dec. 3, 2025 Trump announcement to roll-back fuel economy standards in favor of supporting gasoline-powered vehicles over hybrids, partial- and full EVs.
"We're officially terminating Joe Biden's ridiculously burdensome, horrible, actually, CAFE standards that impose expensive restrictions," Trump said, referring to the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules, often called CAFE standards. "And all sorts of problems, all sorts of problems for automakers."
"The Trump administration has already defanged the existing CAFE standards by eliminating the fines associated with them, as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Under Former President Joe Biden, the rules called for vehicles to get 2% more efficient every year; the Trump administration is now proposing to revert to the 2022 baseline and increase by .5% annually."
We switched from a V-6 to a hybrid engine and doubled our gas mileage. As I drive around, I'm surrounded by giant pickup trucks with empty cargo beds and giant SUVs. Americans' fascination with big vehicles, bolstered by Trump's decision to favor the oil industry in return for contributions is another dimension contributing to higher gas prices.
And it's not just about choice -- these higher prices impact delivery trucks too, adding to our costs and inflation.
In a way, it's a fantastic thing that Elon Musk spent hundreds of millions of dollars to get Trump elected so that Trump could cut the legs out from under Tesla.
Well, Musk did a fair amount of self-de-legging with his bragging and incompetence and quasi-fascism that were reflected fairly quickly in Tesla sales.
He just went "We must have a separate homeland for white people" so you can scratch that quasi.
Epstein's islands?
Im sure Norway is willing to cede the Bouvet Islands if he promises to go away.
The techies are trying to establish their own country on half of one of the Caribbean islands. They've already bought most of the land they need, but the existing population is working very hard to keep them out.
Both of these things can be true. I love it for Musk.
What Musk did was prove that even "geniuses" have "blind spots". Usually somewhere behind their egos. Tesla was in trouble before Trumpski's attack on electric vehicles because people wanted to punish Musk for DOGE.
Years ago, I ran the local radio station. It's not bragging to say that under my leadership, the place went from losing money to being profitable with an expanding listernership. And one of the main reasons for that was the fact that I made it an ironclad rule that the station had no particular political view. I interviewed candidates from both parties for office ranging from town council to United States Senate, and not once did I let my own political views color an interview or slant any programming.
This did not sit well with a couple of board members. They demanded that I make the place a Leftwing version of Rightwing talk radio. Afterall, they said, their political views were popular! I kept trying to point out that picking one side or the other just alienates half your potential audience, but they wouldn't hear it. I eventually left because of this.
After I quit, they tried their Leftwing Limbaugh thing. The station's audience fled. They eventually gave up and they place was taken over by a truck driver who turned it into a Rightwing radio station. Today, it runs on his meager paycheck with no revenue at all.
The point to all this is that we're all convinced our politics are not just superior or popular. We Leftys think this because that's who we talk to, just as Musk thinks being a Nazi is popular because that's who HE talks to. Neither case is true or definitive.
It is easier for audio-format media (whether talk radio or podcasts) to succeed if it is right wing, because these formats are suited to people who spend much of their day behind the wheel, and such people are more likely to be right-wing in the first place due to the zero-sum competition for road space and parking space.
The Muskrat thinks Nazi is popular because his father is one. "Teach a child in the way that he should [not] go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it."
I'm not unconvinced that Musk is a genius. He is certainly autistic and I suspect he does not fully recognize the business risks he has taken. So far they have paid off, but Tesla is not looking like a healthy company today as its sales have plummeted. Musk is now betting the farm on manufacturing robots.
Our local late Tv news in Barcelona connected online with you president press conference.....We where waiting for him to clarify when the war will be finished. What a waste of time. Self propaganda of the war dubious at least- was repeated 10 times. Just like a cheap infomercial program. How can people trust him?
How can people trust him? Most don’t!
Still has a 40% approval in the US. Scary and stupid.
Below 40 but not much. His absolute floor is about 35%—those are his maga horribles who think Donnie is always right v
MAGA do not just think that Trumpski is "always right". They fervently believe that he is the "new messiah", who speaks for "god".
A mindset heavily reinforced by "evangelicals" and "christian nationalists".
Don't the evangelicals make up about 20 percent of the US population? So they account for about half of his rabid base?
About 67% of them voted for him. They form the only identifiable group of which over half voted Trump. If it weren't for evangelicals, our president would be Harris today.
Two years ago, my mother's doctor told me, calmly and quietly, that she had scored 13 out of 30 on the MOCA test. This test assesses memory, executive functions, attention, language, and orientation. Any score under 26 indicates the onset of dementia is a concern.
When I look at the federal US government today, it also fails the MOCA test.
I am not talking about the president personally, but the presidency, congress, and courts collectively.
Memory - The 1970's oil crises are within living memory. This experience of fascism is older, but still known. Individual politicians know the history, but it doesn't seem to inform their decisions - except for the many who quit.
Executive Function - The question, "So you have killed Iran's supreme leader, Now what? How does this end?" shows failure to recognize a plan is even necessary. If you say, other governments have acted like this before (though not as extreme), that reinforces the point about memory.
Language - When Trump demanded "unconditional surrender", the first reaction from the world press was, "does he know what 'unconditional surrender' means?" The answer was, "probably not". Communication regarding the Iran war with allies, congress, and the American people, generally, shows that even if the government knows that communication is necessary, they don't know how to do it.
Orientation - Pointless insults and tariffs applied to the allies on whom US security depends, shows a weak grasp of which side of the bread has the butter on it. You can go much deeper and show how government policy achieves the opposite of its stated goals. But the point is that even when the government has articulated a goal, it's actions are not leading the nation in that direction.
Again, I emphasize that I am not talking about any one person or persons. My concern is that the institutions responsible for ensuring that the US collectively acts in its own best interests, are failing.
You can point to specific choke points: gerrymandering, electoral college, campaign finance.. These are real issues, but they are not valid excuses.
Q: Whose job is it to fix a system that is unable to serve the public interest?
A: The American electorate.
Tough job, I know, but if left to the billionaires, you won't like the result.
Only thing you are missing is the realization that the destruction of a government that was meant to serve the public interest was entirely intentional. It has been the working strategy of policy makers from both political parties since Reagan.
So sorry to hear about your mother. How is she doing now?
As an American, the 40% thing has me the most upset. Unbelievable these fools.
Polls are mostly done by corporations. We already know not to trust what they tell us.
Aren't polls still done on landlines? Who still has landlines? That's a built-in pro-conservative bias right there.
I have a landline. My children have a landline. Their children are not allowed to use anything else. As to polls, I get several in my email every day.
No, polls are not done by corporations or solely by landline.
"How can people trust him?" Ignorance, poor education, stupidity, gullibility, inherited privilege, extreme rightwing beliefs and attitudes, belief in the "strong man" theory of government--take your pick
I hope you guys awake soon, he's not only destroying US Democracy.
So do most of the people reading Krugman's substack.
Don't expect anything sensible from our fat orange overlord.
He has a solid base that favours him because he’s deporting brown people. That’s their #1 issue. They’ll overlook everything else in return.
I’m getting ready to go to Sam’s to get some gas. Why do I have the suspicion that Trump and his cronies are profiteering from this war and Middle East chaos that we, in part, create.
The reality under felon Trump and his fascist regime - a wholly-owned subsidiary of Big Oil - is, “Kill, baby, kill.”
Good one.
Well, at least they managed to kill a few children and help Russia out.
Two is few. Over a hundred, utilizing a double-tap, well, that’ll be the description of the late US Empire forever. Oh, enabled by Anthropic —your friendlier neighborhood artificial intelligence.
Norway is a country of mountains and large waterfalls and usually has a surplus of hydro-electric power. But we have decided to connect with other countries for energy delivery, so prices sometimes soar.
Since Europe is trying to wean itself off Russian gas, Norway has also been earning good money from North Sea oil and gas.
We are the ones who profit from the madness, true.
Looking at the US government I keep thinking "what were they thinking¨. Then again, perhaps, they are not.
Another reason that Europeans are more protected from world oil price changes is that they pay more tax on fuel. So the percentage change will be lower.
To a point, fuel duty in the UK is flat rated but VAT is a percentage.
The current VAT (Value Added Tax) rate on petrol ("gasoline") and diesel in the UK is 20%.
This 20% VAT is applied to the total cost of the fuel at the pump, which includes both the underlying product price and the fixed Fuel Duty of 52.95 pence per litre.
Because VAT is charged on top of the Fuel Duty, it is often described as a "tax on a tax".
Here in the States, the federal government charges a tax of 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon on diesel. Then the individual States charge a "road-use" tax on top of that. This varies; Tennessee charges 27.4 cents per gallon and New Jersey charges 44.95 cents. So, tax on tax, but not as high as yours.
The UK is in Europe? :)
Absolutely! Brexit doesn't change geography ;)
We’ve continued with the CAT system more or less unchanged.
Sorry - “VAT”.
Do you mean CAT or VAT?
What is "the CAT system"?
Didn’t Paul say US (me) was more exposed because in general we drivable bigger, less fuel efficient cars!
Yup. And we are more spread out and suburban than European.
If you accept $9 per gallon as being "protected from world oil price changes", then it should actually work for you.
The point is that since the fuel price isn’t changing as much overall, they presumably won’t have the cost-push component of inflation due to higher shipping costs. We, in the US won’t only have to del with drastically higher prices at the pump, we risk the economic fallout from cost-push inflation. (That’s my understanding of it. BBC Global Story podcast had an economist on this morning’s episode—last evening in their timezone.)
"The point is that since the fuel price isn’t changing as much overall,"
I do understand the point. It's just based on the faulty premiss that oil companies charge what they must, when in reality they charge what they can. The fuel prices go through the roof whenever there's even a hint of a pretext. Here's but one example from Germany:
https://www-zdfheute-de.translate.goog/wirtschaft/tanken-spritpreis-iran-krieg-abzocke-100.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true
I guess I sounded like a jerk. Didn’t mean to. Price gouging sucks.
"I guess I sounded like a jerk."
Not at all, you didn't. I'm actually puzzled why you would think that.
“The point is that…” sounds a bit or could come off as arrogant. It depends how it’s read. I wasn’t sure, in hindsight, and wished I’d phrased it differently.
Well, we have a ways to go here in New Jersey. I saw $4.99/gallon for diesel today, and the gasoline price was about $3.45 for high-test.
Energy independence doesn't mean price independence when oil is priced on a global market.
If Trump wanted to protect American drivers from price rises he'd need to institute an oil export embargo.
Add to that, he wouldn’t have abolished vehicle fuel efficiency standards.
No. A better idea would be to impose an export tax, which would drive a wedge between the domestic price of oil and the global price. It would also raise tax revenues.
CBS published this March 10. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-lower-oil-gas-prices-iran-war/?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us
I think it's pretty comprehensive, except for the fact that the author seems to be ignorant of the fact that we import the oil that is refined to gasoline and diesel. The idea about releasing from the reserve has seen limited success before.
As Paul pointed out, we import all of the oil we turn into gasoline. What Trump would have to do is pay U.S. companies to import oil and force them to pass the credit down. I'm not holding my breath.
Crap -- it reminds me of how Britain's fishermen were conned into supporting Brexit, even though they were dependent on exporting much of their catch to the EU.
(Britons don't like most of the fish caught in their own waters: they tend to prefer cod and haddock which are caught in more northerly waters: what did most of the earlier damage to Britain's fishing industry wasn't EU quotas, but loss of the Cod Wars versus Iceland.)
Trump's comments on oil & the war against Iran sounded a lot like pumping the prices to me.
they have definitely worked to that end, for insiders paying attention.
Oh gosh, I may be the first to comment. Nice reminder of the price controls of the 70s. It didn't work as intended, leading to shortages in some areas as the Professor noted (I believe an earlier post from Prof Krugman went into this in more detail).
Yes the people who strted this war should have seen this coming.....if they weren't stupid and ignorant. I could add a lot more applicable adjectives but I'll stop there.
"The people who decided to begin this war should have seen this coming. All the evidence, however, suggests that they didn’t."
Of course they didn't. What you've just described will come as a surprise to them. Do you imagine Trump, or any of his acolytes fill their own vehicles, or pay attention to the price of goods? No, they don't. And this is one of the many, many reasons that they should not have been left in charge of a democracy. But sufficient people, who did NOT know this about them, voted to put them in charge. With Vlad's help, obviously. I imagine he can't get out of his chair for laughing these days...
"... in charge of a democracy..." sounds like something of a contradiction in terms. Who but "the people" should be "in charge of" a democracy? Though it might take officials--as public servants--to keep it running. But authoritarians "in charge of" a democracy are the people who destroy it...
I'm aware of that. You have to imagine me saying it in a droll English voice. But sadly that is what happened and it is now bearing the entirely predictable poisoned fruit.