One of the enduring myths about the Great Depression is that Herbert Hoover just sat on his haunches and did nothing.
Actually it would have been better if he had. He took active measures to reorganize the economy, but most of his key reforms just made things worse.
In fact, at the beginning of the decade, there were signs that things were recovering before Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley tariffs.
That's when the bottom really fell out and unemployment skyrocketed to 25% — when Hoover made it impossible for people to buy things!
I say this because if we have a recession now, there is a very good chance that Trump will do the same thing. He'll just ratchet up tariffs and be content with the fact that almost no one can buy anything or get a job, but hey, at least the few jobs and goods left are American.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Let me add something else: a lot of people are convinced that rail could never work in most U.S. cities because we have too much sprawl, but it's more complicated than that.
Transit can serve *residential* sprawl perfectly fine. What it can't handle is *commercial* sprawl.
In other words: it's still fairly doable to serve single-family neighborhoods with bus and rail service into the urban core, with park-and-rides and other concessions to meet drivers halfway.
The problem is when the places people *work* are sprawled across the city.
If there are a thousand different office parks, strip malls, and power centers around the city, good transit starts becoming impossible, because while you can affordably drive *to* a transit station, you can't drive *from* a transit station the last few miles.
Here's the big three things Democrats need to follow to fix the problems in their cities:
1. Police fairly but consistently. You don't have to jail people for minor offenses, but stop and ticket them. Don't let quality of life crimes go unpunished.
2. Stop privatizing local govt services. Homeless shelters should not be run by unaccountable corrupt nonprofits. Public works shouldn't be needlessly farmed out to contractors. Parks shouldn't be run by HOAs. Build a skilled, in house team of municipal workers and use them.
3. BUILD MORE HOUSING. Overrule the busybodies and reactionaries screaming at zoning board hearings. Cut the red tape. Stop trying to preserve the urban character of your city as was in 1993, stop driving people away with housing shortages, and just let your city grow.
If you're still wondering, "How did we ever let politics derail the COVID response?" Well, we've let politics interfere with public health crises several times throughout history.
I'd like to tell the story of Dr. Joseph Goldberger — kind of the Anthony Fauci of his day.
Goldberger was a Hungarian Jewish immigrant who became a renowned epidemiologist with the Public Health Service in 1899, screening new arrivals at Ellis Island, and doing research to fight infectious diseases all around the country.
In 1914, Goldberger was tasked with tracking down the cause of pellagra, a previously rare illness flaring up in the South.
Victims developed painful blistering rashes, diarrhea, and paranoid delusions. Tens of thousands were sickened and up to 40% of sufferers eventually died.
So I've wondered for a while too how Starbucks become such a huge target of online Gaza boycotters, since they aren't on the BDS list and don't even operate any locations in Israel.
I've looked into it and it turns out there are two extremely silly reasons for this.
First of all, it turns out that anti-Israel Starbucks boycotts didn't start with the Israel/Hamas war. In fact, it goes back WAY further than I ever imagined.
This started all the way back in 2006.
Specifically, in 2006, an antisemitic satirist named Andrew Winkler wrote a parody "Letter to Customers" from Starbucks' then-CEO Howard Schultz, who is Jewish, to thank them for all the profits the company will use to supply the IDF with weapons. spiked-online.com/2009/01/14/isr…
You know what? I'm going to set aside all my liberal arguments (we need affordable housing, segregation is bad) and libertarian arguments (zoning infringes on property rights) for why zoning reform is good, and I'm going to make a *conservative* argument for it.
Car-dependent suburbs as they exist today were built at least partly for a good, well-intentioned reason, which is that many people who need big city jobs nonetheless want to live in a small, closely-knit community that shares values and takes care of each other.
But, car-dependent suburbs also very often fail in this purpose, because the zoning that dictated how they were laid out does not allow for organic common spaces and places of public gathering.
They lack a "Main Street" that was common in small town life for most of our history.
There are a lot of reasons CAHSR has been so delayed and over budget, and a lot of them have been bad things — NIMBY lawsuits, grifting by contractors, the desire by politicians to use the project as a jobs program.
But I'd like to discuss one GOOD reason it's taken so long.
And that reason is: California officials conceived of this project, from the start, as a core trunk service that will connect and modernize all the currently disjointed and outdated rail systems in Northern and Southern California.
IOW, it's not just about building a line from point A to B, it's about making the whole of CA navigable by rail. It's about creating a system where you can hop a commuter train in the Bay Area, catch a bullet train to SoCal, then take another commuter train to your final stop.