johnsnotes.bsky.social
364 posts
57 followers
183 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
What’s weird here is I thought that the baseline 10% tariff is the one they have - up until now - said is not going away. That deals would at best only leave countries with that. (Which no one believed but whatever). Isnt this the first time that “go to zero” has been used?
comment in response to
post
I wouldn’t expect a guy in the twilight of his life to be objective at this point. But to your point, he may have gotten lucky but 2020 wasn’t an example of that luck playing out in a poll-defying way. I agree with WS broadly, just not sure Biden displayed the same disconnect he’s describing
comment in response to
post
I think the argument that Tapper makes is that the person with the important choice in the matter was not being shown these numbers. Maybe advisors committed this “sin” & used it as an excuse to shield him but if you believe Tapper, the most important person in process thought he was winning.
comment in response to
post
Add this to the concept that CBO is supposed to be incapable of scoring a bill that’s..keeping tax rates where they’ve been for 9 years. There’s a lot of competition for most insulting thing Johnson said today but that’s my winner. A high school Econ class could score this bill on deficit impact.
comment in response to
post
to watch Meet the Press to not make this point. If you cannot score *this* tax bill just admit you cannot score any bill and STFU when a Dem is in the White House.
comment in response to
post
And CBO isn’t scoring deregulation because, um, that’s not part of the bill. Congress by and large isn’t deregulating. I mean this isn’t hard even for Meet the Press. A high school Econ class could score this bill. It’s insulting to the intelligence of the few thousand people who take the time
comment in response to
post
I mean there is a lot of BS which passes for serious discourse here but the idea that some sort of Laffer magic is going to be unleashed by…keeping tax rates the same is absurd.
comment in response to
post
static - so not even keeping cuts static but keeping rates static lead to all of this hidden growth the CBO is supposedly missing? If anything, these forecasts should be more accurate than would be normal. No one thought these rates would snap back to 2016.
comment in response to
post
Best informed person in the US as to his awesomeness. Least as to any flaws. They block him from seeing all print bad news. Only critiques are what he sees when he hate watches CNN/MSNBC. (Legit think he ignores OTA networks).
comment in response to
post
One, I cannot imagine the NFL doing this. Two, how much control does MLB have here? A start time earlier than 7 in LA can get touchy with the home crowd & rush hour traffic…(I was enjoying the game from NorCal last night & was wondering how much Eastern audience they were sacrificing for this)
comment in response to
post
Final note. Go look at the Federal Circuit bios. For whatever reason, the 45th President did not nominate any currently sitting Judge on it. Mildly surprised.
comment in response to
post
I hate to tip my hat to Fox but their WH correspondent asked it best - why doesn’t the President just ask Congress to give him these powers? (Hint: he would not get them)
comment in response to
post
He can argue that the Court erred. But it’s not that the President has broad powers to set a trade agenda. If trade involves tariffs, he only has the powers Congress gives him. No more. The *best* argument he could come up with at CIT was that any fight should involve only Congress.
comment in response to
post
He can certainly negotiate trade deals (to be ratified by the legislative branch). He can ask Congress to set tariffs. Or to give him authority to do it. He cannot, however, just do what he's done. (Common theme I know recently.)
comment in response to
post
And to the commentators who argue "voters elected the President to do something" - maybe they did (maybe they didn't) - but the voters didn't give the President power to do this unilaterally any more than if he decided to double income tax rates unilaterally. The powers just are not there.
comment in response to
post
The Nixon era use of tariffs was different - but still prompted subsequent legislation which curtailed executive authority. The arguments as summarized by the Court for the government are pretty weak on the merits. Seems like they pushed nonjusticiable political question pretty hard to no avail
comment in response to
post
this before. (Not even close.) It's actually a media failure that this hasn't been conveyed to the public.
comment in response to
post
People may go on CNN or Fox and say crazy stuff like "commander in chief" or "foreign affairs" but tariffs were, in the eyes of the Framers - taxes. They were how the government was funded prior to the income tax. The power to set them was expressly given to Congress. They've never been used like
comment in response to
post
The War that Forged A Nation by McPherson
comment in response to
post
Lot of big talk until the social media & Fox attacks begin.
comment in response to
post
Yes! You can even bridge this concept deep into the MTV era. Why don’t they *just* show the buzz clips. (Possible flaw in my logic is that 1979 may have been such a buzz clip)
comment in response to
post
Did the one which existed in the 90s just....age out?
comment in response to
post
Cornhusker Kickback was only supposed to be $5 MILLION per year to get ACA across the line (never made it into law). Right could not stop talking about it for years.
comment in response to
post
It is if the statute was transferred to Grover Cleveland’s “foundation” & his family owned it and has been earning the revenue from admission ever since.
comment in response to
post
Amen. National corps were looking to reduce their real estate spend at every turn, new leases deliberately scoped to not have sufficient space for everyone. Can’t leave personal effects behind, hell, can’t even have trash cans in the office (b/c those are $$ to have emptied).
comment in response to
post
And the IOC is literally no better. Sorry folks, the US is going to host these events (and they will both be relatively fine for ticket holders). People looking to attend these events to bring attention to a cause? I’d make other plans.
comment in response to
post
I know this an “add it to the list” comment but this particular park was established by an Act of Congress. I don’t know of any way (even in an “emergency”) where it wouldn’t require an Act to carve it out of the park here.
comment in response to
post
Think this got reversed. Meaning I think they meant to argue, you guys are asking for what we have done to get him to the US, when we’ve only been ordered to facilitate relase from custody in ES. That’s without seeing the rog. It’s more games, more delay.
comment in response to
post
I am utterly baffled by the highlighted part, which isn't even a quote from the Supreme Court's order. What are they doing?!
comment in response to
post
People need to google Ernesto Miranda.
comment in response to
post
Bad for ports. Bad for Teamsters.