1. Been excited about @JoeNBC's sustained convo today about @KBAndersen's new book Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America which explains how the Republican Party radicalized OVER ECONOMICS over the past 30 years. It was launched w the radical tax cuts in Reagan's presidency, but

1. From convo on @Morning_Joe today about @DrIbram's new article which asks that progressive policy not be blamed for D losses/underperformance.

One of my main concerns is intraparty factionalism/fighting. Everything a "moderate" & "progressive"

2. D fights- a R gets a vote. Certainly radical (and yes, defunding police departments IS radical) policy proposals that fall on the outside bands of the distribution are less attractive to this idealized "swing" voter who is, in our minds eye" always a high info, high reasoning.

3. I guess you'd call them a "fine dining" type voter. But we KNOW that actually, most swing voters are NOT like this. Don't believe me- check out @axios Swing Voter Project, which ran focus groups with Obama to Trump voters through the whole cycle.

4. Indeed, what @richthau learned about America's "deciders" is likely to haunt his sleep for ever as it personified a sticker I keep in my office which is a quote from George Carlin: "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." (K.I.M. when we talk "stupid"

5. on my threads about people, we're not talking IQ, or overall stupid. We're talking civics. We're talking about political literacy. Very smart, successful people can't name their senators or their governor & are thus, civically stupid. And I'm sorry, not sorry for labeling them

1. We've got @dananessel, killin' like usual on messaging w @HallieJackson on @MSNBC stating, objectively (accurately) that if SCOTUS were to grant the relief sought by TX & these other states & invalidate the votes of millions of Americans due to COMPLETELY FABRICATED claims of

2. of fraud, it would be the end of democracy in America. PERIOD. It would serve, functionally, as the moment of SC's succession, Dec 20, 1860 & also as a function of anti-democratic, unpatriotic, and TREASONOUS behavior post a presidential election they simply didn't want to

3. accept and spend 4 years living under. So instead, they "invalidated" it by refusing to continue to be part of the U.S. Here, if the Court was to play along (and to be crystal clear, the ONLY constitutional, pro-America position here is a full and unequivocal rejection of this

4. suit and frankly, a "supreme" legal tongue lashing at the ideologues that now control the modern Republican Party and by controlling it, have now forced the United States of America into its first constitutional crisis since the fields of her were strewn with bodies and blood

5. as she ripped herself apart to rid herself of her original sin of slavery, and in that process lost 620,000 Americans which at that time was 2% of the country's population. That Trump & his good squad fabricated a story of trucks in the night sneaking in 100Ks worth of ballots

1. "They're leaving! They're leaving!"" yell seditionist as they watch House members fleeing the floor through the glass doors the only thing (+ some under-armed officers + office furniture" that protected our elected REPs (same ballot as Trump, each & everyone

@McConnellPress

2. of them felt so inclined towards martyrdom and/or possessed the weapons (Jesus, what if they'd has a grenade & guess what, in America, yes, you can come up w functional equivalents of that bc barring people from them is a betrayal of freedom so great we must simply acquiesce

3. their eventual death tolls. One functional "freedom grenade" down that hallway, tossed w ease through a hole in the glass door, could have easily hit anyone fleeing.Unless it was Mo Brooks, MTG, or one of their well-known crazy boosters, here's a thing @LeaderMcConnell ought

4. to reflect upon as he makes his CRITCAL pivot decision, which he could rally 17 people & start a fight for control of the party that rest of the country will help him with,EVEN AFTER ALL THE SHIT HE'S DONE TO PEOPLE, YES, THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WOULD HELP HIM IF HE WAS TO

5. RALLY 17 SENATORS FOR IMPEACHMENT, he'd find his whole 🌎awakened. And Mitch, as far as I understand it, you could do it anonymously!! How much would THAT fuck w them?? How great would it be, for the 1st time in 5 yrs, to be the one w power- you LOVE power! Think of the FUN!

1. Yes, removing @DebHaalandNM from NM CD 1 intros risk on losing the seat, but maybe less now that I am connecting w @RepSeanMaloney.

The GOP will start w descriptive representation on this one. In other words, they will seek to run a Native American. If there IS a Republican

2. American active in politics that resides (or can be said to reside!) in CD 1, they will run that person. This is bc the GOP is esp good at the "biography" end of politics in these specials- IE: Mike Garcia in CA 25.

Ds *think* they're good too. But they're not! All D's needed

3. in CA 25's special election to ensure they held that seat was a qualified Latino nominee who passably personable. They literally GAVE that seat away under this myth that it would be too hard to beat Garcia when the whole election was a story of % R ballots relative to % D

4. ballots- as we ALL watched in the special election. And even with a candidate people told me was "flawed", "a mess" or even "crazy" Ds lost the damn seat again, sealed the loss in the fall general by 333 votes! If that doesn't hurt YJEM, it hurts ME. Makes me want to PUKE!!

5. And although white people, and most particularly white men, who are, in most cases, still in the positions that make the decisions for these things and THUS leave their orgs vulnerable to blind spots that they themselves have huge incentives to not get stuck on, bc like all

The economic impact of the Brexit deal: our

Key points to remember:

1. Leaving Single Market/Customs Union means major new trade barriers - customs and border checks, regulatory barriers, end of rules allowing services to be sold across borders.

2. A deal doesn't change that. It means no tariffs and quotas and *some* provisions that will stop trade breaking down. But the main impacts -on our and the government's own analysis, about two-thirds - happen either way

3. That also means that some disruption is inevitable. You can't introduce new systems/processes overnight. The delay in doing a deal plus covid means some things will go wrong

4. But short term disruption, even if it gets headlines, does *not* mean Brexit is a failure. And when that disruption is resolved and new systems are working, we should*not* conclude it's a success.

Ben Graham managed to compound money at 20%/year for 20 years at his partnership following a value investing strategy

In 1948 he acquired 50% stake in GEICO. It had to be distributed to his investors

They almost didn't make the investment due to some accounting questions 1/

Ben Graham paid $712,500 for 50% of GEICO in 1948. He put 25% of his investment assets in GEICO.

This investment did so well that the price of its shares advanced to two hundred times or more than the price of the half-interest by 1971/1972 2/

Ironically, the aggregate of profits accruing from this single investment decision far exceeded the sum of all the others realized through 20 years of operations in the partners specialized fields, involving much investigation, endless pondering&countless individual decisions 3/

Are there morals to this story of value to the intelligent investor?

An obvious one is that there are several different ways to make and keep money on Wall Street 4/

Another, not so obvious, is that one lucky break, or one supremely shrewd decision may count for more than a lifetime of journeyman efforts.

But behind the luck, or the crucial decision, there must usually exist a background of preparation and disciplines capacity. 5/

1/16

It is a little frustrating to see the response many analysts had to the GDP growth data Chinese released today. These numbers aren’t especially good, and they certainly shouldn’t have been surprising. Back in April and May, when most

2/16

were projecting negative or barely positive GDP growth for China in 2020 (the OECD, for example, expected China’s GDP to contract by 3.7%), I insisted that GDP growth for 2020 would be positive, and probably between 2% and 3%.

Today, it was reported as 2.3%. How did...

3/16

I know? Because I knew that while most of the healthy sources of Chinese growth would contract (except for exports, which would expand given Beijing’s intense supply-side response to the impact of Covid-19), Beijing was going to respond to a significant...

4/16

worsening of the healthy parts of its economy by unleashing enough of the unhealthy, non-productive growth it has long tried to constrain – basically real estate and infrastructure investment – in order to achieve as much economic activity as it...

5/16

needed for domestic political ends.

And that’s exactly what happened. While GDP grew by 6.5% in the fourth quarter, even with substantial tailwinds its retail sales measure – a proxy for consumption – was only up 4.6%, and it was down 3.9% overall in 2020.