“To save its insurance industry, Taiwan probably needs to intervene massively to keep its currency weak. To save its export industry from the threat of “reciprocal” tariffs, Taiwan likely need to step back from the FX market and let its currency appreciate.” ~Brad Setser www.ft.com/content/d71c...
Taiwan’s double, double toil and trouble
Link Preview: Taiwan’s double, double toil and trouble: Quite the predicament
📌
📌
i was trying to be relatively mild, with “not-great”. i wonder has he blocked everyone critical of that post? oh well.
oh god.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
the situation in the US is similar. first-past-the-post renders “democracy” a set of tactics incumbent politicians use to defend themselves from change against the people, rather than a means of channeling the will of the people.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
or maybe just some “60 Minutes” style resignations.
oh, i can describe it as corrupt, i don’t have to wait for their act afterwards. my post was sarcastic.
a reaction of course to this. bsky.app/profile/eric...
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
countries with FPTP that are quasi multi party (there usually are still two major parties) do a terrible job at predictable representation, how choices split votes yields very noisy outcomes. with primaries or without, with two party entrenchment or without, FPTP is irredeemable.
they go together. FPTP means two major parties. if those parties were “strong”, voters would have a menu of two insider-selected candidates, not satisfactory. so a broader range of public choice is provided through the (catastrophic) kludge of primaries. 1/
if you fix FPTP, you can have multiple strong parties with free entry for aspiring new parties, then there’s no need for primaries. /fin
one hopes there is hope.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
Some thread openers from X: “I cannot stress how important this is.” “Everything changed today.” “I present to you [XXX] that you will NOT believe are real.” “9 wild prompts for image and video” “10 wild examples + Try it now & Code” “WAIT UNTIL YOUR ALONE, YOU WON’T LAST 20s THROUGH THIS THRÈAD”
it’s not like Elon and Donald shook hands on giving all the contracts to Tesla, SpaceX, even The Boring Company (why not?). it’s just their interests were aligned, once Elon bought the election. can you really describe that as corrupt?
(my sense of humor is perhaps a bit too dry. yes, you can obviously describe it as corrupt, or at least i can. i was mocking a not-great post on corruption, linked below.) bsky.app/profile/eric...
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
“As with donations to a presidential inaugural committee, gifts to the library fund fall between the cracks of campaign finance regulations and rules governing ethics in office.” @jacobtlevy.bsky.social www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/202...
Opinion | Qatar’s gift to Trump reveals a loophole big enough to fly a jumbo jet through
Link Preview: Opinion | Qatar’s gift to Trump reveals a loophole big enough to fly a jumbo jet through: A $400 million present shows how presidential libraries remain a blind spot in U.S. corruption law.
"we don't need any kind of corruption law. that's what the ballot box is for, right?"
that would make it a dramatically better thing, for sure.
good discussion by @deanbaker13.bsky.social of alternative mechanisms for funding “innovation and creative work (ICW)”. cepr.net/publications...
Professor Stiglitz’s Contributions to Debates on Intellectual Property
Link Preview: Professor Stiglitz’s Contributions to Debates on Intellectual Property
this definition would exclude revolving doors, the common practice under which public officials whose actions favor an industry are foreseeably hired into extravagant sinecures after their terms. no, the Supreme Court won't convict this as bribery. but in ordinary (and correct) usage it is corrupt.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...