Jim has a great paragraph:
You are probably also familiar with Moldbug’s theory that when Stalin was running the US state department, the US state department was also running Stalin, that the various wars that the US was involved in were not only proxy wars with the Soviet Union, but were in large part proxy wars between the Pentagon and the State Department, wars in which the Pentagon’s contractors have frequently come very close to shooting State Department employees, and have with great regularity shot state department contractors, that the reason that the State Department was so comfortable with Stalin’s agents was that they believed, in part correctly, that Stalin was their agent, that the reason that the CIA was so reluctant to believe the Soviet Union was falling is the same reason that NASA was so reluctant to believe the Challenger Space Shuttle was about to explode.
He also has some thoughts on Japan’s solvency, which I disagree with. Japan is solvent, because when push comes to shove, the Japanese will tighten their belts, honor their obligations and endure whatever hardships are necessary to do so along the way.
Why isn’t this chart racist?
Progress in economics seems to consist entirely of suggesting that governments become more irresponsible. Maintaining balanced budgets, sound currencies and sustainable policies are now considered barbaric. How can this chain possible continue without destroying itself?
Aretae says that working for bosses sucks. As usual, he’s generalizing to a point of absurdity. Working for bad bosses sucks. But there’s not much better than a good boss. The former fact does not negate the latter.
Larison on books and libertarians. Interesting issue.
Handle is creating a list of contradictions among the leftist coalition – see if you have any to add.
Yglesias channels Steve Sailer by pointing out that poor people aren’t too poor to afford lots of stuff, they’re just too poor to afford to live far away from other poor people.
The "fiat" dollar, he adds ruefully, "is one of the world’s astounding monetary creations. That a currency of no intrinsic value is accepted as money the world over is an achievement that no monetary economist up until not so many decades ago could have imagined. It’ll be 40 years next month that the dollar has been purely faith-based. I don’t believe for a moment it’s destined to go on much longer. I think the existing monetary arrangements are so precarious, so ill-founded and so destructive of the economic activity they are supposed to support and nurture, that they will be replaced by something better."