Though I am absolutely not a fan of Ayn Rand, I do find her allusion to the makers and takers as outlined in 'Atlas Shrugged' a portent for today. Just Substitute China = Maker and US = Taker and bingo, you have the reality on the playing field.
436645 - I love how you cut to the chase about our world; our twisting of creativity versus consumption. For such a young person, you are such a world-thinker. I congratulate you for your wonderful analysis of the Barnum and Baily Circus that has evolved here.
The Republicans would argue that businesses are going to lead the American revolution and keep American dominance. They just say they're getting out of the way. Obviously, that's a bunch of baloney... But I was constantly thinking about their argument as I was reading through your post.
The actual businesses of America are not going to go down without a fight. And they're getting more preferential treatment so I'm not so worried about that aspect of America's place on the global stage. The continued challenge, as I see it, is the confusion about what makes a business successful (its employees, not its investors). I wish at least that the Republicans would push for the sorts of reforms that make EEs "owners".
---
I have so many other thoughts after reading your piece but I'll keep it to this single one (at least for now).
It's weaker than it was in the pension days. It should be stronger. EEs are only investors in the Tech industry, Wealth MGMT industry, and a few others. ESOPs should be the only companies that get corporate tax relief. There are many common sense reforms that could be implemented that bring value aggregation down to 3-5x EE salary rather than 10-25x EE salary. Investor risk does NOT justify 25x EE salary. Not even 10x. Gotta be reasonable.
Greetings from Alberta, Canada : ) Love your style & messages.... and your insta videos have even captured the attention of my teen kids (it feels like a war for attention).
I agree to all points, for a change. :) But it's not the fault of this government, or the previous ones, that things are the way they are. It is the fault of the ideology that drives both society and government, and ideologies are not changed. They only die when stopped by a roadblock.
It’s complex. I can tell you what I think would work, but it involves considerable pain, with such things as standing up to ICE etc. Conservative rhetoric flourishes when there is no draft, and military are volunteers. During Vietnam an 18 year old guy could go to college or war. Even if there had been internet/cable in ‘68 there would have been no chance for the MAGA-type rhetoric to hold. I’ve always said: if you institute a draft, but allow anyone to declare conscientious objector status, with the provision that they automatically become a CO party member restricted to a firm no on all things military, the GOP that we know could not exist
The most depressing part about reading this is seeing the problem and then knowing that there's no way Americans will collectively make the hard decisions to slow the current trend, let alone reverse it.
This is easy choices = hard life and hard choices = easy life at the nation state level.
I hate top be snarky here, but it's hard to find an alternative Trump since the Dems are so utterly repellant to men right now. You can try promoting the abundance agenda, but since men feel so alienated right now, the only other alternative right now is Catholicism.
I'm sorry to say this but I'm getting close to unsubbing right now. I don't think we're going to see eye to eye. I've been going back and forth from unsubbing for quite awhile and I'm getting pretty close.
Also: dont't look up the allegations surrounding David Foster Wallace. You will be very disappointed on what he's done with his personal life.
"the only other alternative right now is Catholicism."
It's not clear how you're defining or constraining "alternative", but recent data implies Eastern Orthodoxy, rather than Catholicism, is where many disaffected right wing males are flocking.
I like the article, and the building-extraction framing is good, but unsure that attention is the right way into this.
1) TikTok is Chinese and attention reducing slop is as much of a factor there as US, would be my guess.
2) CCP had incentive to keep growth sustainable. Revolution much more costly than lost election.
3) US incentives for extraction a part of its us v them inner split, as you mention. But this goes back to before any real attention harvesting by internet companies. (Media companies on other hand).
I think culturally there have been some shifts, particularly in America, that have contributed to the economic state we now live in, and I think it helps inform a way forward.
Liberals in The West (largely the US) have worked to dismantle social institutions that prevented us from realizing a more equitable society. This was necessary, and largely a good movement, towards realizing an even broader vision of liberty and inclusion for this country.
However, what did not happen- and we are now suffering for this consequence - is an equal or even greater effort in creating secular alternatives for those institutions we tore down. Institutions that offered the very structures needed to maintain the kind of strong communities needed to combat this fragmentation. The village, the extended family, rural communities, churches, gender norms, etc. We’ve dismantled but didn’t rebuild, and in that vacuum what we’ve seen and will continue to see is many flocking back to the groups and institutions that still offer some kind of that lost structure, however bigoted they might be, however misinformed, because the alternative is loneliness, and lack of a cohesive community, and what worse fate for such social creatures as we are.
It appears you have foundational misunderstandings regarding the realities and economics of energy generation.
The Trump administration has reversed what many experts see as decades of unscientific and economically counterproductive nuclear energy policy in the United States. By supporting projects like the proposed Alaska pipeline, the administration is contributing to increased domestic energy production and potentially lower costs. These initiatives aim to expand the nation’s energy generation capacity, not attack it.
While some interpret recent policy shifts as attacks on solar and other renewables, I see them as efforts to level the playing field by removing certain federal advantages previously granted to renewable energy sources. To be clear, I also do not support the historical incentives given to the oil and gas industry. There is a meaningful distinction between government incentivizing broad outcomes and actively selecting specific winners and losers.
I encourage you to seek a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the energy economy. Although I do not have a list of truly unbiased sources at hand (if they even exist), I would be happy to help identify some reputable resources if you are interested in broadening your perspective on this complex topic.
Though I am absolutely not a fan of Ayn Rand, I do find her allusion to the makers and takers as outlined in 'Atlas Shrugged' a portent for today. Just Substitute China = Maker and US = Taker and bingo, you have the reality on the playing field.
BTW Kyla, great post!
thank you!
436645 - I love how you cut to the chase about our world; our twisting of creativity versus consumption. For such a young person, you are such a world-thinker. I congratulate you for your wonderful analysis of the Barnum and Baily Circus that has evolved here.
thank you!
The Republicans would argue that businesses are going to lead the American revolution and keep American dominance. They just say they're getting out of the way. Obviously, that's a bunch of baloney... But I was constantly thinking about their argument as I was reading through your post.
The actual businesses of America are not going to go down without a fight. And they're getting more preferential treatment so I'm not so worried about that aspect of America's place on the global stage. The continued challenge, as I see it, is the confusion about what makes a business successful (its employees, not its investors). I wish at least that the Republicans would push for the sorts of reforms that make EEs "owners".
---
I have so many other thoughts after reading your piece but I'll keep it to this single one (at least for now).
that's a fantastic way to frame it
Reducing taxes and making government smaller is a great start. Profit sharing and 401Ks have been around since 1978. The employees are investors.
It's weaker than it was in the pension days. It should be stronger. EEs are only investors in the Tech industry, Wealth MGMT industry, and a few others. ESOPs should be the only companies that get corporate tax relief. There are many common sense reforms that could be implemented that bring value aggregation down to 3-5x EE salary rather than 10-25x EE salary. Investor risk does NOT justify 25x EE salary. Not even 10x. Gotta be reasonable.
Greetings from Alberta, Canada : ) Love your style & messages.... and your insta videos have even captured the attention of my teen kids (it feels like a war for attention).
So keep up the good work! Miigwetch.
thank you! glad it's resonating :)
I agree to all points, for a change. :) But it's not the fault of this government, or the previous ones, that things are the way they are. It is the fault of the ideology that drives both society and government, and ideologies are not changed. They only die when stopped by a roadblock.
Outstanding. Thank you.
The fixation with phony masculinity has to be addressed, or nothing will change.
how do you think we address it?
It’s complex. I can tell you what I think would work, but it involves considerable pain, with such things as standing up to ICE etc. Conservative rhetoric flourishes when there is no draft, and military are volunteers. During Vietnam an 18 year old guy could go to college or war. Even if there had been internet/cable in ‘68 there would have been no chance for the MAGA-type rhetoric to hold. I’ve always said: if you institute a draft, but allow anyone to declare conscientious objector status, with the provision that they automatically become a CO party member restricted to a firm no on all things military, the GOP that we know could not exist
This is totally right.
The most depressing part about reading this is seeing the problem and then knowing that there's no way Americans will collectively make the hard decisions to slow the current trend, let alone reverse it.
This is easy choices = hard life and hard choices = easy life at the nation state level.
"Nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.” Abba Eban (misattributed to Churchill)
I hate top be snarky here, but it's hard to find an alternative Trump since the Dems are so utterly repellant to men right now. You can try promoting the abundance agenda, but since men feel so alienated right now, the only other alternative right now is Catholicism.
I'm sorry to say this but I'm getting close to unsubbing right now. I don't think we're going to see eye to eye. I've been going back and forth from unsubbing for quite awhile and I'm getting pretty close.
Also: dont't look up the allegations surrounding David Foster Wallace. You will be very disappointed on what he's done with his personal life.
Well thanks for being here for the time being!
Religious indoctrination is one of the reasons for this entire mess.
A real man would make his own alternative instead of lining up to support the repellant vision of pseudo masculinity that Trump represents.
"the only other alternative right now is Catholicism."
It's not clear how you're defining or constraining "alternative", but recent data implies Eastern Orthodoxy, rather than Catholicism, is where many disaffected right wing males are flocking.
That’s the silliest goddam reply I’ve seen. Kudos to Kyla for not saying, don’t let the door hit ya. Stop whining. JFC
I'm a man, and not at all repelled by Dems. It is Trump and Maga I find absolutely repugnant.
I like the article, and the building-extraction framing is good, but unsure that attention is the right way into this.
1) TikTok is Chinese and attention reducing slop is as much of a factor there as US, would be my guess.
2) CCP had incentive to keep growth sustainable. Revolution much more costly than lost election.
3) US incentives for extraction a part of its us v them inner split, as you mention. But this goes back to before any real attention harvesting by internet companies. (Media companies on other hand).
Anyway, thanks for thought provoking read.
Thanks for your work and insight Kyla!
I think culturally there have been some shifts, particularly in America, that have contributed to the economic state we now live in, and I think it helps inform a way forward.
Liberals in The West (largely the US) have worked to dismantle social institutions that prevented us from realizing a more equitable society. This was necessary, and largely a good movement, towards realizing an even broader vision of liberty and inclusion for this country.
However, what did not happen- and we are now suffering for this consequence - is an equal or even greater effort in creating secular alternatives for those institutions we tore down. Institutions that offered the very structures needed to maintain the kind of strong communities needed to combat this fragmentation. The village, the extended family, rural communities, churches, gender norms, etc. We’ve dismantled but didn’t rebuild, and in that vacuum what we’ve seen and will continue to see is many flocking back to the groups and institutions that still offer some kind of that lost structure, however bigoted they might be, however misinformed, because the alternative is loneliness, and lack of a cohesive community, and what worse fate for such social creatures as we are.
Would leave thumbs up emoji but I think that might be part of the problem :) Great post
It appears you have foundational misunderstandings regarding the realities and economics of energy generation.
The Trump administration has reversed what many experts see as decades of unscientific and economically counterproductive nuclear energy policy in the United States. By supporting projects like the proposed Alaska pipeline, the administration is contributing to increased domestic energy production and potentially lower costs. These initiatives aim to expand the nation’s energy generation capacity, not attack it.
While some interpret recent policy shifts as attacks on solar and other renewables, I see them as efforts to level the playing field by removing certain federal advantages previously granted to renewable energy sources. To be clear, I also do not support the historical incentives given to the oil and gas industry. There is a meaningful distinction between government incentivizing broad outcomes and actively selecting specific winners and losers.
I encourage you to seek a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the energy economy. Although I do not have a list of truly unbiased sources at hand (if they even exist), I would be happy to help identify some reputable resources if you are interested in broadening your perspective on this complex topic.
Thank you, Kyla. Your work is inspiring in times of trouble. Thank you for being a rescue swimmer (if only in spirit.)
This was a tough read, but I’m really glad I read it. Thanks for writing
I found you via Ezra's pod and what a great treasure trove of insights here!