Intl gold standard was a (dumb) fixed exchange rate scheme but did not have the main pernicious effects of the full gold standard. (that is, making monetary policy a function of mining productivity and random luck of gold discoveries).
"Knowing the current state of the SPR" may be a bit of an aggressive assumption about Trump's knowledge.
I wonder if it's to allow him to weirdly straddle the PM/politician thing. Like PMCarney@liberal.ca would not be appropriate for Prime Minister stuff, but PM@canada.ca would not be appropriate for express politics and would be handed over when the office is.
Reminds me of the classic Ben Bernanke paper that basically showed countries got out of the great depression exactly whenever they ditched the gold standard.
www.nber.org/system/files...
I genuinely wonder how much was the new deal and how much was just ditching the gold standard as stupid and bad. The inflation stability coming also with '33 makes a case for the latter.
Space lasers.
And if there's something Netanyahu cares about less than oil prices, it is the views of Israeli Arabs.
Isn't Mullin's term up this year? The appointee would only serve til Jan 3, and the winner of the non-special election in November would serve a full 6 year term.
This, and nuclear level punishment (immediate tow) for plate covers. You didn't accidentally put a plate cover on.
I don't even think it's drones and missiles that are the big threat. It's artillery and mortar fire. There simply is no anti-shell defense system besides "don't get hit."
like, TACO is not possible ***EVEN IF*** trump decides to just completely turn tail and run because it also requires what's left of the iranian state to sign off and they do not want to do that, they want revenge bsky.app/profile/sky....
Also in '22 the number of voters in the R primary was notably bigger than the D primary. Reversed this time to the tune of a 14 point gap.
And for what it's worth, doing so is tactically insane. The Supreme Court has (still) massive social acceptance that you must follow their orders. Whatever replacement you make won't, and will have Revaunchist Roberts lobbing grenades at it via contrived cases on the original juris. docket.
Right! That's what I was saying about cutting square corners still giving Congress tons of power. But that power does not extend to one neat trick that makes Sam Alito stop having a 1/n vote on the court (except by impeachment and removal).
Yeah, I think the whole "we can downsize a specified constitutional organ to ~nothing" is basically Calvinball, and you shouldn't want to operate a Constitutional democracy on Calvinball. You wanna fundamentally change what the court is? You need to amend the Constitution.
I think the instinct comes from wanting to subject the R justices to some greater punishment than sitting there writing dissents while Justice Jackson charts a new course and invalidates their life's work. But barring maybe charging Thomas for genuine $ fuckery, I just don't see it.
I think Congress' power in the "cutting square corners" realm is great enough to make this kind of plan silly. Congress can clearly expand the court, and can clearly establish a system other than discretionary cert for what cases are heard. Those things are sufficient to totally overhaul the court.
A screenshot of the preliminary primary election results in North Carolina showing 821,051 votes cast in the D primary, and 623,931 cast in the R primary.
Just adding the raw number of voters in the NC primaries, which are almost fully reported, it's 56.8% D vs 43.2% R. That's with the headline D race also being a snoozefest, and in contrast to the 2022 midterm primaries where Rs outvoted Ds 55-45.
2026 has a very 2006 "everybody fucking hates republicans but national media/pundits will be reeaaaaaaaaaaallllllly slow to properly understand that because of their priors about the two parties" feel to it
Literally my first thought was mosquitoes.
At these price points I really don't think the material/labor costs are as relevant. Both the Eames and Planter chairs are selling at large multiples of input costs, and the prices they set are based solely on what they think they can extract from the high-end market, not their input costs.
Semi-presidential.
The US would obviously be operating in a federal parliamentary democracy. And the core problem the UK has in that realm is absolute parliamentary supremacy and no codified constitution, which is a choice ~nobody else makes for good reason.
I don't think you need an independent agency for that - the decision to wage/continue war is too fundamentally political. After overturning *Chada* you just make it require an affirmative vote of Congress to continue the war past 30 days or whatever.
Even *within* that world, this price is eye-popping though. For a point of reference a much more materials intensive and famous Eames chair costs like a third as much. www.dwr.com/living-loung...
There is a whole world of designer furniture that is branded around famous designs (or at least, famous to people who "know"). The branded ones cost wild numbers, similar to like handbags where you just see eye popping numbers when you get to "authentic" stuff vs stuff for normal ppl.
That's what threw me - I guessed around the price of a branded Eames chair and it is like 3x that, which is *wild.*
I imagined a number in line with other branded designer midcentury stuff we laughed at when decorating our house, and was *still* off by more than half.
I think the court can make a grant of immunity conditional on the analysis being done. The underlying immunity only comes from statute. And so Congress can say if the constitutional analysis boxes aren't checked by the court, the immunity doesn't apply.
I for one want to know which crusades were or were not supported by antipopes.
