I hope so! But unfortunately, opponents often don't have to go through voters, their role as donors, or potential donors to opponents, is enough. 1/
If we could get public engagement for a smart capital flow management norm, that might override, but as you say, it'd take some education before voters see and understand and might affirmatively support this stuff. 2/
I don't think it's impossible! I think voters are only stupid when the zone is flooded with shit, and under anything approaching sane electoral, media, and civil society institutions publics can be powerfully motivated for not obvious or stupid things. 3/
So, I try to do my part to make the case. But I'm not so hopeful under current circumstances, when the zone is noah's flood of shit, our commercial institutions prefer we stay divided and subject to their algorithms and ads, our electoral institutions encourage fascism. /fin
The effect isn’t restricted to rich people investment, but it affects it very directly, whereas tariffs affect only consumption costs directly. Investors prefer tariffs to capital controls. Ask them. 1/
A foreign payouts tax would affect the relative pricing of domestic vs foreign goods, but less than a tariff, because a large part of gross trade flows offset. Tariffs tax the gross trade flows, both sides if there’s retaliation. 2/
“If it were easy, Trump would have done it.” I don’t think so. I don’t think Trump understands the connection between net capital flows and trade imbalance. I think he decided in his 20s or 30s that tariffs are great and have fetishized it since. 1/
Capital controls restrict rich-people investment, rather than merely raise consumption costs that are in any case a small fraction of rich-person income and wealth like tariffs. Trump wouldn’t like the idea of restricting rich-people investing. /fin
hopefully not by tariffs. drafts.interfluidity.com/2025/04/27/h...
bacteria in a petrie dish eventually starve. but termites don’t much care when the roof falls in, they are happy to chew on the wreckage after it falls. i don’t know which metaphor is best.
What entity is paying for the new East Wing Ballroom? Who will legally own the structure?
wait, for like a day or two, was nazi tattoo guy a Bluesky main character? oh no.
one great thing about the full Reagan speech is that he emphasized the anticompetitive / tariff-protected-industries-make-low-quality-high-price-goods aspect of tariffs.
x.com has democratized the car wreck you can’t look away from.
Since China increasingly owns the global automobile industry, maybe we can revise our built environment so we are not isolated and helpless without constant access to that product. I mean we should have anyway, but maybe declining domestic lobbying clout and geopolitical exigency will help.
the Wayback Machine as a very personal, very fragmentary, time machine. web.archive.org/web/19970419...