RAPID FIRE

Two pieces went up at other places yesterday.

One is at The Nation where I look at the tax bill's social rather than economic goals. Basically it's a throwback to Gilded Age capitalism, without even any window-dressing to try to make it look like it's intended to help anyone who isn't already wealthy.

The second is at Rolling Stone and is a polished version of Monday's "Fizzle" post, looking at the risks for the Democratic Party moving into 2018. It has built up momentum and has maybe one more election cycle in which it can coast on anti-Trump hatred, but if they don't start working harder for the people who bust their asses to get Democrats elected they're going to have big problems thereafter.

I like this. I like what I'm doing. I have no idea how I'm going to avoid living outdoors given what writing pays, but. I like the way this feels.

43 thoughts on “RAPID FIRE”

  • It could be worse, you could live indoors in Peoria.

    Glad to hear you like what you're doing. It's certainly awesome to see you getting published left and right.

  • Congratulations, again. You seemed pretty low for quite a while there, and it's good to see you kinda coming off of that. Happy Winter Solstice, sir, and all.

  • So happy to hear you are feeling good about what you're doing, Ed. I'm working on moving myself in that direction as well – towards doing work I actually enjoy. Your move is showing me it's possible, which is extremely helpful, so thanks for that :)

  • To many work gigs in these United States barely pay enough to keep oneself inside a home. I am lucky, I rent a room from two good friends for a fair rate. She has a great job, pays the bills, and he is now part time public radio host. Her 87 year old dad just moved in, way to conservative but a great guy. Really handy for an 87 year old man, he is getting the work shed reorganized, painted all the doors, working on a glass and wood sculpture, and volunteers 4 days a week for a local religious homeless shelter. Just need to turn him around on politics, he should get it since his retirement plan was screwed by a takeover.

  • Glad you're enjoying life at the moment. Glad to see you are getting writing work, too. About time someone saw your potential, other than us useless knobs.

  • Congrats Ed. Keep slamming out the truth. You are Spider Jerusalem (minus all the cool nano toys, hot assistants, etc).

  • Yes, yes. This is all positive, not the news, but the personal. Outdoor living? Takes too much time and maintenance. Stay cozy during these dim light days. Cheers!

  • Enjoyed your Guided Age piece….it lead me here. Also enjoyed your airplane piece. I spent about five minutes—ok, to be fair, two minutes—- in the free market before I swore off my notions that libertarianism is the path a businessman should take…

    I might prove helpful to you, as I distill gin for a living….although, I don't make tacos for a living. So upon reconsideration, this may prove troublesome since you are clearly Gin AND Tacos, not Gin OR Tacos.

    Cheers, and thank you for the stellar writing…..

  • Don't think I've ever posted here but have been lurking and reading for years. It's a great blog and I've learned a lot from it. It's really exciting to see you getting more widespread (and well-deserved) recognition!

  • schmitt trigger says:

    First of all, CONGRATULATIONS! For all of us long term readers, we are very happy for you. Really.

    Second, your statement: "I like this. I like what I'm doing." This is where true happiness lies. Loving your job means you are a single step below heaven.

  • As a CPA I must say this looks like a huge win for the middle to middle-low income earners to me. A doubling of the standard deduction and more than doubling the child tax credit is just huge for middle income wage earners. That will completely wipe out the federal tax liability for many people I know of. Just because someone, somewhere who makes more money than you and pays tons more taxes may have received a higher dollar cut (although much lower as a percent of the taxes they pay) than you doesn't mean you are going to think you got screwed when your taxes were cut 100%.

    It seems like all the analysis is just politically motivated. The changes most people will see will be very positive I believe…unless I'm missing something. Am I missing something?

  • @ Dookie

    My understanding is that this bill adds $1+ trillion to the deficit, and with the self-created hole therein the R’s are now saying means that social services have to be cut. Recall the one senator who said that there just wasn’t money to cover a children’s healthcare program, but somehow there was money to double the oil subsidy. Taken with the other R senator who said that poor people are only poor because they waste their money on booze, the Republican Party can go f**k themselves.

  • @ Safety Man!

    Adding to the deficit is a concern, although it is outside of the parameters I was considering. I seriously wonder how concerned you were about deficits when Obama and Dem legislature were adding $1+ trillion to the deficit (you mean debt, right?) on an annual basis.

    I guess I did miss that the R's are now saying social services have to be cut due to this tax bill. They are saying that? Why can't I find that?

  • "I like this. I like what I'm doing." The best writing I have seen by you. Very nice. Congrats. Keep it up, and thank you.

  • Dookie: What part of this quote did you miss?

    Autoplay: On | Off
    House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Wednesday said House Republicans will aim to cut spending on Medicare, Medicaid and welfare programs next year as a way to trim the federal deficit.

    “We’re going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,” Ryan said during an interview on Ross Kaminsky's talk radio show.

    Health-care entitlements such as Medicare and Medicaid “are the big drivers of debt,” Ryan said, “so we spend more time on the health-care entitlements, because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking."

  • Dookie: What part of this quote did you miss?

    House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Wednesday said House Republicans will aim to cut spending on Medicare, Medicaid and welfare programs next year as a way to trim the federal deficit.

    “We’re going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,” Ryan said during an interview on Ross Kaminsky's talk radio show.

    Health-care entitlements such as Medicare and Medicaid “are the big drivers of debt,” Ryan said, “so we spend more time on the health-care entitlements, because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking."

  • Aardvark Cheeselog says:

    @Safety Man!, @errg, @oiojes:

    Please to not be feeding the troll.

    If not troll, has hopeless rectocranial inversion, so pointless to engage.

  • Ed, glad you're enjoying your success, even if it's not bringing in truckloads of simoleons. Overdue, and I hope 2018 brings more of it.

  • The feeling of relief from going over the wall is an incredible high, isn't it?

    Even if you know you now have to outrun the sheriff and the dogs and live in your car, you don't care.

  • A quote from your Rolling Stone article:

    "Frankly, the party could nominate a loaf of bread in some races and it would win by 20 points."

    The Democrats would only ever nominate half a loaf of bread.

  • "The Democrats would only ever nominate half a loaf of bread."

    But it would be a very centrist, fluffy, white loaf with as little nutritional content as possible.

  • @foxtrotsky

    The bread would immediately compromise with the bread eaters in the name of something called "biloafisanship" and turn over many of its breadthren.

  • But it would be a very centrist, fluffy, white loaf with as little nutritional content as possible.

    The bread would immediately compromise with the bread eaters in the name of something called "biloafisanship" and turn over many of its breadthren.

    Awesome, guys.

    I should borrow these for my arguments with Dembots over at Alicublog.

  • OMG ED PUBLISHED IN THE BAFFLER THEY'RE MY FAVORITE AND HAVE BEEN FOR THE LONGEST!!

    LOOK OUT THOMAS FRANK ED'S CATCHIN' UP WITH YOU BRO!!

    (Thanks, Mo! Happy Solstice!)

  • @democommie

    Well, whoever they are, I hope they're better than:
    Jones,
    Northam,
    Kaine and the rest of the assholes who couldn't be bothered to protest vote against CR

    I mean, you can criticize people without having alternatives in place. The Dem party has been so starved of talent and actual leftists, that finding them is going to take some damn time.

  • @ jcdenton:

    You can criticize them as much as you like. WHO are they going to be replaced by? Nobody has yet given ONE name of anyone who is going to be running as a progressive.

    Last night I was asked if I wanted a button for someone who will be running for a congressional seat in my district. I had never heard of the person so I asked if they were dem or independent. The answer was, "Trying to be a democratic ticket candidate.". Not really sure if they know themselves but a person who is not a democrat or republican can run until the cows come home but unless their supporters are registered as democrats I don't think that they can vote for them in the primaries.

    We just had a mayoral election in Syracuse. It was won by an independent–the independent son of a 10 term GOP Congressman and the grandson of a former mayor. He raised his campaign money the old fashioned way in tiny donations of $1K–5K from the "little people". Right. He may be a good guy and a decent mayor but when push came to shove he used his dad's juice to get the cashflow he needed.

    There is some odd notion held by a lot of people that I LIKE what the dems are doing. I don't. I also don't like that people who are offering nothing by way of feasible alternatives tell me repeatedly that ALL dems are the SAME as ALL republicans. It's bullshit and they know it's bullshit.

  • @Demo:

    unless their supporters are registered as democrats I don't think that they can vote for them in the primaries.

    They can't, which is why there was so much stupid tantrumming bullshit when non-Democrats learned couldn't vote in the Democratic primaries for their favorite non-Democrat (Sanders). Therefore followed the "my fee-fees are hurt and I'm gonna BURN THE WORLD DOWN!" when the actual Democratic candidate mustered more votes from actual Democrats at the primary.

    I also haven't seen any alternatives suggested. It's easy to lie around and criticize; much harder to propose actual solutions.

Comments are closed.