Linkage

This is  a  discussion  of how  best  to  reconcile  the demands  of War  and  the  claims  of private  consumption.

We already have the financial wherewithal needed to afford whatever is technologically possible. We do not need to go hat-in-hand to rich folks to get them to pay for it. We do not have to beggar our grandkids to pay for it. We do not have to borrow from China to pay for it. We do not have to get the Fed to “print money” to pay for it. All we need to do is to remove the self-imposed constraints, the myths, and the misplaced morality; then budget for it, approve the budget, and spend. No new spending process is required. Follow the normal procedures that the Fed and Treasury have developed. That is how you pay for it.

As the great J. Fagg Foster (1981) said, “Whatever is technologically possible is financially feasible.” There is really no other reason to have a financial system. If you know how to build houses but your financial system cannot find a way to make them affordable, then you must replace that system with one that will.

It is possible that we will need to constrain domestic consumption in order to release resources for the GND effort in a noninflationary manner. The problem is not that we cannot financially afford the GND—government can always bid resources away from private use by paying higher prices—but spending on the GND will generate private income that can support higher bids in competition with the government for scarce resources. This is the real reason that tax hikes might be desirable: to reduce private income and thereby remove competition for resources.

The House of Representatives seemed to achieve its summit of cynical grandstanding today, with debate over a resolution proclaiming that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. That measure is not only a kind of photographic negative of the 1975 UN resolution condemning Zionism as racism (revoked in 2019); it also is founded on the antisemitic equation of Zionist sentiment with Jewish identity, even though many Orthodox Jews, and secular dissenters, remain opposed to Zionism. New York Democratic Representative Jerry Nadler raised that crucial objection, among others, in an impassioned dissent to the resolution, but as Nadler spoke on Monday night, the measure was on track to be endorsed in a lopsided majority vote—not least because its language leaves ample room for anyone voting “no” to be branded an antisemite. Sure enough, the resolution passed by a resounding 311-14 margin, with 92 representatives voting “present.”

We generate a random email address each time you access our port.

You should send a message from your favourite Newsletter/email software to this email address.

Once done, click on the Check your score button and as soon as we receive your message, our snail will stop to give you your spam score.

Mail-tester will analyze your message, your mail server, your sending IP... and show you a detailed report of what's configured properly and what's not.

A Jeff Bezos-backed real estate investing startup is launching a new fund to make it even easier for everyday Americans to speculate on the rental homes of other everyday Americans.

Arrived, which first launched in 2021, snatches up single-family homes and turns them into rental properties that anyone can invest in for as little as $100. Until now, Arrived customers could only purchase shares of individual homes and receive dividends from the rental profits, effectively creating a distributed network of landlords.

Now, the company plans to allow customers to easily invest in a broad portfolio of its rental housing, further financializing the housing market for a growing consortium of fractional mini-landlords. The company’s newly launched “Single Family Residential Fund” lets investors put their money in a fund that invests in single-family homes across the company’s holdings, similar to a Real Estate Investment Trust. The fund also has a minimum $100 investment. 

In a webinar touting the new fund last week, the company explained it is betting on single-family home rentals because fewer people can afford to buy homes and more people are stuck renting.

One of the most genuinely confusing phenomena over the past few years has been the conspiracy theories surrounding “15 minute cities” that have caused people to see things we advocate for — traffic calming, quality bike infrastructure, and public transit — as government control, overreach, and even tyranny.

Instead of simmering in a stew of rage and resentment I began to wonder if that conferred invisibility could be harnessed. If I reframed it as a cloak of invisibility I could do all sorts of things “inappropriate” for my age.

I refrained from robbing a bank (though fairly sure I could have got away with the loot), instead turning my attention to street art.

My first guerrilla paste-up a decade or so ago was in a lane in Ballarat, Victoria. I was quite nervous and slightly fearful of being at least fined so I donned a hi-vis vest and put out semi-official public work signs and had a friend spotting for me. I needn’t have bothered – people went past me and simply did not see me.

As the Labour leader faces a backlash for his praise of the former Tory prime minister, a leaked email shows he stopped Sam Tarry, then the party’s shadow minister for transport, from attacking her failed policies in 2021.

[…] 

Left-winger Mr Tarry had wanted to criticise her 1985 Transport Act, saying it “failed to deliver lower fares and better services across Greater Manchester”.

But when the comments were sent to Sir Keir’s office for approval, one of his top aides insisted the reference to Thatcher be taken out.

The leaked email said: “Can we take out the Thatcher stuff and instead criticise the current government?” 

An adviser to Mr Tarry pushed back on the suggested edit and replied: “Mr Burnham’s happy with it and she’s despised in the north, so it will play well with voters.”

But Sir Keir’s aide insisted the reference be removed to “focus on the current set of elections and criticise the current set of Tories”.

[…] 

A source familiar with the exchange said it was indicative of Labour’s refusal to criticise Ms Thatcher under Sir Keir’s leadership, adding that recent praise for her was “less of a surprise and more of a confirmation of the Labour leader’s admiration for the former prime minister”.

Every moment of meaningful change in modern British politics begins with the realisation that politics must act in service of the British people, rather than dictating to them. Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism. Tony Blair reimagined a stale, outdated Labour Party into one that could seize the optimism of the late 90s. A century ago, Clement Attlee wrote that Labour must be a party of duty and patriotism, not abstract theory. To build a “New Jerusalem” meant first casting off the mind-forged manacles. That lesson is as true today as it was then.

It is in this sense of public service that Labour has changed dramatically in the last three years. The course of shock therapy we gave our party had one purpose: to ensure that we were once again rooted in the priorities, the concerns and the dreams of ordinary British people. To put country before party.

None of that was easy but it was necessary. Often, it meant taking the path of most resistance. It meant not just listening to those who felt unable to vote for us but understanding them and acting. The public do not have outlandish or unreasonable expectations. They expect taxpayer money to be spent wisely, our security and our borders to be prioritised and a politics that serves them rather than itself. On each of these, we are now ready to deliver.

Al Jaber spoke with [Mary] Robinson at a She Changes Climate event. Robinson said: “We’re in an absolute crisis that is hurting women and children more than anyone … and it’s because we have not yet committed to phasing out fossil fuel. That is the one decision that Cop28 can take and in many ways, because you’re head of Adnoc, you could actually take it with more credibility.”

Al Jaber said: “I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”

Robinson challenged him further, saying: “I read that your company is investing in a lot more fossil fuel in the future.” Al Jaber responded: “You’re reading your own media, which is biased and wrong. I am telling you I am the man in charge.”

Al Jaber then said: “Please help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socioeconomic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.”