Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Well, it is a mouthful and then some. But one part of the long discussion did get my attention, and that dealt with (to paraphrase) the essential changes in direction of the Democratic party, as driven by the younger generations of Democrats who have been educated by "elite" educational institutions and who are now driven by different agendas than their parents.
By coincidence, I also just read this report in The Guardian, which made no attempt to examine those changes in detail, or speculate on how they have come about.
Rather, the Guardian report focuses on a particular situation in Michigan, which surprisingly synchronizes closely with respect to the results of the newer Democratic agendas, and how those agendas have completely failed to resonate with many previously dependable mainstream Democratic voters... the mainstream Democratic Michigan Base, as it were.
In short, the Guardian report agrees with and supports at least some aspects of the NYTimes article. I found that interesting because the NYTimes discussion dealt with a wide spectrum of political agendas, and the Guardian report coincidentally examined the actual real-life effects of some of those agendas.
The RE-election of the Orange Felon simply cements the fact that a rather large plurality of the country is just fine and dandy with amorality and immorality. We are fucked. What did we all get taught, right? Rome crumbled from within. Tick tock, tick tock....
I can hardly tell you how heartening to have a 'colleague' who reads all of these publications.
I don't know what to make of the Guardian interviews. Are there actual (effective, doable) recommendations in there? Gaza?? Seriously? Don't gesture toward housing??
Man. Particular situation, as you say.
I hope you and everyone else is also reading Krugman's substack, a short musing every other day, almost. Latest one shoots at Andreessen et alia:
Comments
Of what I don't know.
By coincidence, I also just read this report in The Guardian, which made no attempt to examine those changes in detail, or speculate on how they have come about.
Rather, the Guardian report focuses on a particular situation in Michigan, which surprisingly synchronizes closely with respect to the results of the newer Democratic agendas, and how those agendas have completely failed to resonate with many previously dependable mainstream Democratic voters... the mainstream Democratic Michigan Base, as it were.
In short, the Guardian report agrees with and supports at least some aspects of the NYTimes article. I found that interesting because the NYTimes discussion dealt with a wide spectrum of political agendas, and the Guardian report coincidentally examined the actual real-life effects of some of those agendas.
I can hardly tell you how heartening to have a 'colleague' who reads all of these publications.
I don't know what to make of the Guardian interviews. Are there actual (effective, doable) recommendations in there? Gaza?? Seriously? Don't gesture toward housing??
Man. Particular situation, as you say.
I hope you and everyone else is also reading Krugman's substack, a short musing every other day, almost. Latest one shoots at Andreessen et alia:
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/the-pathetic-billionaires-club