Drew Holden Profile picture
Sep 28, 2020 5 tweets 1 min read Read on X
My controversial take of the day is that the tax code is Bad.
Also, recognizing that the whole anti-libertarian thing may come off as overly glib, is to be clear: I think the government should serve a positive moral good, and that tax law should help bring that about, too.
I’m not some “make the government so small you can drown it in the bath tub” type. I don’t think taxes are theft.
I’m hoping to write more about it soon. I don’t think anyone shouting at me on Twitter is going to change my mind. Having a government is inescapable. Having an entirely amoral government is neither desirable nor possible.
I guess it mostly boils down to: I think the government does most things comparatively poorly. This is a good reason to limit the things it does.

It is also the only entity likely to do some important things. For those, it should work to bring about things we can agree are good.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Drew Holden

Drew Holden Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrewHolden360

Apr 17
🧵Thread🧵

I launched a newsletter, called Holden Court, about the media, what they get wrong & why it matters. The goal is to reach beyond what my 🧵s have on Twitter & to build a better recent history of media & media criticism.

You can sign up at the link in my bio. More ⤵️
At that link you can read my launch piece and get a better idea of what it is that I’m trying to do.

The piece also walks through a recent example of bad media coverage that I worry we’re already forgetting about: the start of Covid. Image
My general premise for the newsletter is that media criticism could be a lot better; more driven by what the media actually does and says and more set in recent context, rather than an impressionistic sense that the media is hopelessly off-track.
Read 8 tweets
Apr 16
I’m launching something new, so naturally I figured the best explainer was a 🧵thread🧵.

Introducing Holden Court, my Substack about the media, what it gets wrong, and why it matters.

You probably know the drill, but more details & links to sign up in the tweets below. ⤵️ Image
Holden Court aims to unpack media failures, particularly when the media misses in unison on important political topics. But I’ll also have one-off content, Q&A opportunities, a mailbag and maybe virtual (or even in person) happy hours, too.

Sign up here: open.substack.com/pub/drewholden…
That doesn’t mean the threads are going away. But the amount of context and nuance I can capture in a thread is limited. So the Substack will (hopefully) provide that more robust analysis, aiming ultimately at *why* the media misses the way that it does.
Read 8 tweets
Mar 19
🧵THREAD🧵

“15 days to slow the spread” kicked off four years ago Saturday, sending the media into perhaps its most deranged cycle of my lifetime.

I dove back into some of the worst lockdown media coverage from those early days.

Buckle in, this one’s long. ⤵️
The real worst of the coverage was when states started reopening. The media outrage was palpable. Republicans wanted people to die, we were told.

Remember @TheAtlantic’s “Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice”? You may’ve forgotten how wild the text of it was. I did.
Image
Image
But that wasn’t a one off sentiment. The belief four years ago among the media was that allowing people to leave their homes was tantamount to killing people.

@washingtonpost called it a “deadly error” — not in an opinion piece, mind you, but in a “health” news headline. Image
Read 23 tweets
Mar 12
🧵THREAD🧵

Another media conspiracy, this time that Trump attacked a Secret Service agent on Jan 6, imploded yesterday.

Remember when the media—in unison—reported the “bombshell” allegations as fact?

I do. And I’ve got screenshots.⤵️
You’re familiar with the story I suspect but just in case: when former aid Cassidy Hutchinson testified Trump had “lunged” for a secret service steering wheel on Jan. 6, the media rushed to print the salacious (& false) claims as true.

Here’s @NBCNews @CNN @ABC @washingtonpost


Image
Image
Image
Image
Trump was allegedly going to drive himself to the Capitol to take part in the riot.

That’s what @CBSNews @Independent @NPR @NewsHour said.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 18 tweets
Mar 7
🧵Thread🧵

Does it feel like the media call the border a “crisis” more lately? You aren’t imagining it.

After dismissing the term as Biden’s border crisis mounted, the press have broken it out to try to blame the GOP. @FreeBeacon

I break it down. ⤵️
freebeacon.com/media/watch-ho…
The new change is stark. I went thru @nytimes digital archive.

Since Biden said the border wasn’t secure in late Jan, “border crisis” appeared in 26 NYT stories, even as crossings declined.

When crossings peaked in Nov & Dec, but there was no one but Biden to blame?

5 mentions
So what changed? Well, Biden empowered the press by saying the border wasn’t secure in late Jan. Then Republicans voted against a “bipartisan” border deal.

After that, the media were off to the races: yes, there was a border crisis, and it was the GOP’s fault. Here’s @CNN.
Image
Image
Read 16 tweets
Mar 5
🧵Thread🧵

What happened to the media’s legal “experts” who said Colorado was right to kick Trump off the ballot? Remember them? I do. @FreeBeacon.

Quick trip down memory lane after even the liberal SCOTUS justices rejected Colorado’s claims. ⤵️
freebeacon.com/media/watch-su…
Here’s a link to the video which is incredible. Lot of media hosts and talking heads were convinced Trump was toast. (H/t @thaleigha_ for making this gem).

The “experts” said so!
Print reporting read the same way.

@nytimes cited an “expert” who said Colorado’s case was “legally sound” and that the only thing that could stop it was politics.

Why, then, did the 3 liberal justices also side against Colorado?
Image
Image
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(