Yes. It is really sad that cost benefit analyses is dead. I like how Oren's broader writing exposes the theoretical dollar calculations of "social costs" of US based production without calculating the social benefits that it provides. For a hard-core globally minded environmentalist it seems like the only rational options for dealing with global production is to either eliminate it at scale to intentionally reduce population, or to regulate it globally to keep it clean based on reasonable cost-benefit tradeoffs. Any practical execution of the first option will destabilize global economics and geopolitics in a genocidal way and will exacerbate wealth divides in crumbling but wealthy states, and the second option would require constant cost benefit analyses. Instead of facing this dilemma our seemingly liberal and progressive policy is to outsource production of energy and goods to rogue states and transferring assets to them while punishing open societies and increasing the wealth divide--so in practice we are currently succeeding at de-facto execution of the first option. It must stop.
It's interesting Oren and his ilk seem oblivious to the security benefits the post-war order provided. It was a period devoid of major power conflict, one of the longest such periods in human history, and certainly a change from the period it succeeded. It's impossible to measure the avoided "costs" in blood and treasure from such success. The economics (closely related to the security question) can be debated, but most would agree that it was also the most economically prosperous period in human history (though obviously not perfect). But time marches on, and we need to keep up. As in the industrial revolution and other periods of fundamental change, people become unsettled and wish to return to what they knew as a child. In such periods, history shows that demagogues like Don find purchase. Historically, they'd have their moment, spew their venom, then be discarded as a historical footnote as we moved forward. In this case, we've managed to elect a particularly effective demagogue, one who threatens our most precious institutions, such as faith in free elections and the peaceful transfer of power. In such moments, elites like Oren and readers of this substack are called to put aside mundane economic policy debates and form non-traditional coalitions aimed at preserving the republic. Oren's failure to even acknowledge such a moment tells us where he stands. Read our smartest experts on authoritarian movements, study the experience of other countries. And be willing to speak the truth, the truth as so eloquently spoken by JD and Little Marco. They spoke directly to the above, until they capitulated in pursuit of power. Let's all hope Oren avoids such a fate.
The security landscape and long standing peace between WW2 and 1990 was defined by a cold war between two great superpowers. Between 1990 and now this security landscape has evolved in a unipolar context in which capitulation to China gave rise to a new global superpower. Meanwhile the sustainability of the trade relationship is questionable at best and America can no longer afford the costs of maintaining a unipolar US led order. It seems pretty clear that the latter phase is unstable and has made the world an even more dangerous place than how it felt in the cold war. Would you agree? It's certainly true that we are being led by a populist demagogue. As dangerous as that is I would argue that if we look beyond Trump this is nothing more(or less) than a populist backlash against elite overreach in economic as well as cultural domains. What's your take on that? As far as Oren's views on international security, geopolitical stability and global commerce, do you have any sense of what his feelings are? Do you feel that de-industrialization of the west has made us more or less secure? Also...at the risk of seeming kind of dim...insofar as I understand your points--and to some extent agree--I don't totally understand the connection between our comments. Am I correct in my interpretation that I should count outsourcing as having benefits that sustained global peace and prosperity? I could have mentioned that I am in favor of reshoring a lot of manufacturing, and that my own preference on foreign policy would be to respect the interests of other nation states and great powers, but not to capitulate to a world order in which they send us depreciating assets while we reciprocate by transferring appreciating assets to them. I imagine this perspective is shared by a lot of Oren's readers but I don't see how it falls from their alleged elitist mindset.
Hey t bought “Apple in China” yesterday!! That’s great you’re talking to the author, too. They used to do semiconductor assembly work here in Santa Clara (part of Silicon Valley), but Apple transferred all that to China. Sure wish they hadn’t, and I want to find out the how and the why behind it.
Sure hope that tax bill doesn’t pass. Taking from the poor and giving it to the rich (Medicaid cuts) is not a good look. We’ve had so many tax cuts already; we don’t need anymore. I’m glad Trump brought up raising taxes on the rich—now that’s a good look!!!
I refuse to believe Oren is this myopic. No honest observer thinks that Don’s foray to the Middle East was remotely about the long term interests of America rather than the personal enrichment of the dear leader. Oren, we know that you know the truth, although, I sense that a ride in that groovin 747 is calling your name… Don’t cave, you’ll end up like JD and Little Marco, two once promising pols whose soul has been removed.
Happy to see that bill stutter a little over debt, but I sure wish the Republican Party could face up to the fact that governments are financed with taxes, and we've been paying too little for too long compared to what we spend. We already cut way back on spending, now like grownups we have to pay more. Starting back during G W Bush's time we've been blowing it. Borrowing money at the same time as massive tax cuts and big expensive wars doesn't work.
It is interesting that in your discussion with Tucker, you carefully avoided any reference to the American System, which Trump is aiming at. All your references were to advocate of the British imperial system. Since you have repeatedly commented on such American System advocates as Hamilton, List, and Carey, your silence must be conscious and deliberate. You don't want the public, esp Tucker's audience, to learn that the real fight in economics is not some sociological evolution of ideas of the free market versus a directed market. it is in fact a very conscious attack of malicious intent to destroy the US Republic.
AW Aaron D! proves my point even further, thank you :) Have a good time listening to George. Another guy who thinks he's a great philosopher and thinker. Academia is one place you can have a bad product (bad unproven not thought out non empirical ideas) and still make a good living and won't go out of business. In the real world you put out crap you go out of business, and you're finished really quick. But they are not the real world.
The University = Ther new religion (The religion of nihilism)
Trump is transactional. Trump is a businessman. Put those together, and Trump's basic view is "that which brings money to the US is good."
One of the founders (I think Thomas Jefferson) warned about the dangers of businessmen holding elected office, that the skillset is radically different for each job. This can be seen in modern times as well in the GOP division between the chamber of commerce wing vs the ideological wing.
I'm sure Pres Trump is envious of the Persian Gulf countries and how easy it is to build and do things there. Getting things done in this country with all of the self-interest and greed is plain out demoralizing. As I get older I keep wondering about a democracy? How do you get anything done in a democracy especially when every kook in the world can speak or babble.
I mean just look at this small Oren web site and all of the kooky stuff and responses you have to read and you have to shake your head in wonderment. Then all of the foreign involvement here too. The bots and trolls. Foreign money into these radical groups where they learn to riot and protest learned in college courses at Yale and Havard and other schools? And we haven't blown up yet? Amazing.
Well, I'm going to sit back and read the trolls comments now and laugh my ass off! lol crazy!
Ironically, JD and Little Marco have said far harsher things about Don, publicly, than anything I've seen here. I'd argue they were truthful then, not now. You? I will agree that democracy is messy and slow, and that Don admires the "efficiency" enjoyed by Vlad and Xi. This is precisely why we need to speak the truth about Don, he agrees with you that this is desirable. Most of us prefer democracy.
Better Arabs than Chinese or Europeans but we really need to bring it home
Yes. It is really sad that cost benefit analyses is dead. I like how Oren's broader writing exposes the theoretical dollar calculations of "social costs" of US based production without calculating the social benefits that it provides. For a hard-core globally minded environmentalist it seems like the only rational options for dealing with global production is to either eliminate it at scale to intentionally reduce population, or to regulate it globally to keep it clean based on reasonable cost-benefit tradeoffs. Any practical execution of the first option will destabilize global economics and geopolitics in a genocidal way and will exacerbate wealth divides in crumbling but wealthy states, and the second option would require constant cost benefit analyses. Instead of facing this dilemma our seemingly liberal and progressive policy is to outsource production of energy and goods to rogue states and transferring assets to them while punishing open societies and increasing the wealth divide--so in practice we are currently succeeding at de-facto execution of the first option. It must stop.
It's interesting Oren and his ilk seem oblivious to the security benefits the post-war order provided. It was a period devoid of major power conflict, one of the longest such periods in human history, and certainly a change from the period it succeeded. It's impossible to measure the avoided "costs" in blood and treasure from such success. The economics (closely related to the security question) can be debated, but most would agree that it was also the most economically prosperous period in human history (though obviously not perfect). But time marches on, and we need to keep up. As in the industrial revolution and other periods of fundamental change, people become unsettled and wish to return to what they knew as a child. In such periods, history shows that demagogues like Don find purchase. Historically, they'd have their moment, spew their venom, then be discarded as a historical footnote as we moved forward. In this case, we've managed to elect a particularly effective demagogue, one who threatens our most precious institutions, such as faith in free elections and the peaceful transfer of power. In such moments, elites like Oren and readers of this substack are called to put aside mundane economic policy debates and form non-traditional coalitions aimed at preserving the republic. Oren's failure to even acknowledge such a moment tells us where he stands. Read our smartest experts on authoritarian movements, study the experience of other countries. And be willing to speak the truth, the truth as so eloquently spoken by JD and Little Marco. They spoke directly to the above, until they capitulated in pursuit of power. Let's all hope Oren avoids such a fate.
The security landscape and long standing peace between WW2 and 1990 was defined by a cold war between two great superpowers. Between 1990 and now this security landscape has evolved in a unipolar context in which capitulation to China gave rise to a new global superpower. Meanwhile the sustainability of the trade relationship is questionable at best and America can no longer afford the costs of maintaining a unipolar US led order. It seems pretty clear that the latter phase is unstable and has made the world an even more dangerous place than how it felt in the cold war. Would you agree? It's certainly true that we are being led by a populist demagogue. As dangerous as that is I would argue that if we look beyond Trump this is nothing more(or less) than a populist backlash against elite overreach in economic as well as cultural domains. What's your take on that? As far as Oren's views on international security, geopolitical stability and global commerce, do you have any sense of what his feelings are? Do you feel that de-industrialization of the west has made us more or less secure? Also...at the risk of seeming kind of dim...insofar as I understand your points--and to some extent agree--I don't totally understand the connection between our comments. Am I correct in my interpretation that I should count outsourcing as having benefits that sustained global peace and prosperity? I could have mentioned that I am in favor of reshoring a lot of manufacturing, and that my own preference on foreign policy would be to respect the interests of other nation states and great powers, but not to capitulate to a world order in which they send us depreciating assets while we reciprocate by transferring appreciating assets to them. I imagine this perspective is shared by a lot of Oren's readers but I don't see how it falls from their alleged elitist mindset.
Hey t bought “Apple in China” yesterday!! That’s great you’re talking to the author, too. They used to do semiconductor assembly work here in Santa Clara (part of Silicon Valley), but Apple transferred all that to China. Sure wish they hadn’t, and I want to find out the how and the why behind it.
Sure hope that tax bill doesn’t pass. Taking from the poor and giving it to the rich (Medicaid cuts) is not a good look. We’ve had so many tax cuts already; we don’t need anymore. I’m glad Trump brought up raising taxes on the rich—now that’s a good look!!!
I refuse to believe Oren is this myopic. No honest observer thinks that Don’s foray to the Middle East was remotely about the long term interests of America rather than the personal enrichment of the dear leader. Oren, we know that you know the truth, although, I sense that a ride in that groovin 747 is calling your name… Don’t cave, you’ll end up like JD and Little Marco, two once promising pols whose soul has been removed.
Happy to see that bill stutter a little over debt, but I sure wish the Republican Party could face up to the fact that governments are financed with taxes, and we've been paying too little for too long compared to what we spend. We already cut way back on spending, now like grownups we have to pay more. Starting back during G W Bush's time we've been blowing it. Borrowing money at the same time as massive tax cuts and big expensive wars doesn't work.
It is interesting that in your discussion with Tucker, you carefully avoided any reference to the American System, which Trump is aiming at. All your references were to advocate of the British imperial system. Since you have repeatedly commented on such American System advocates as Hamilton, List, and Carey, your silence must be conscious and deliberate. You don't want the public, esp Tucker's audience, to learn that the real fight in economics is not some sociological evolution of ideas of the free market versus a directed market. it is in fact a very conscious attack of malicious intent to destroy the US Republic.
As it stands you are on the side of the British.
Please prove me wrong.
AW Aaron D! proves my point even further, thank you :) Have a good time listening to George. Another guy who thinks he's a great philosopher and thinker. Academia is one place you can have a bad product (bad unproven not thought out non empirical ideas) and still make a good living and won't go out of business. In the real world you put out crap you go out of business, and you're finished really quick. But they are not the real world.
The University = Ther new religion (The religion of nihilism)
Trump is transactional. Trump is a businessman. Put those together, and Trump's basic view is "that which brings money to the US is good."
One of the founders (I think Thomas Jefferson) warned about the dangers of businessmen holding elected office, that the skillset is radically different for each job. This can be seen in modern times as well in the GOP division between the chamber of commerce wing vs the ideological wing.
I'm sure Pres Trump is envious of the Persian Gulf countries and how easy it is to build and do things there. Getting things done in this country with all of the self-interest and greed is plain out demoralizing. As I get older I keep wondering about a democracy? How do you get anything done in a democracy especially when every kook in the world can speak or babble.
I mean just look at this small Oren web site and all of the kooky stuff and responses you have to read and you have to shake your head in wonderment. Then all of the foreign involvement here too. The bots and trolls. Foreign money into these radical groups where they learn to riot and protest learned in college courses at Yale and Havard and other schools? And we haven't blown up yet? Amazing.
Well, I'm going to sit back and read the trolls comments now and laugh my ass off! lol crazy!
Sorry I was going to respond thoughtfully to your comment but I'm late for my riot and protest class with Professor Soros
I’ll take that to mean you believe the current version of JD and Little Marco regarding Don, not the first?
Ironically, JD and Little Marco have said far harsher things about Don, publicly, than anything I've seen here. I'd argue they were truthful then, not now. You? I will agree that democracy is messy and slow, and that Don admires the "efficiency" enjoyed by Vlad and Xi. This is precisely why we need to speak the truth about Don, he agrees with you that this is desirable. Most of us prefer democracy.