"Still: If this is an increasingly dangerous world, it means that in this respect President Biden can’t run a typical incumbent reelection campaign. He can’t simply say, 'Things are getting better! The world is safer than it was four years ago'.”
Voters who use reason don't need an incumbent to claim that "things are getting better," when they're not. In fact for my 52 years of voting nothing any candidate SAID won my vote. I ignored all "sales pitches" and weighed the facts to see who would do a better job. Often it was a tough call, and I have regretted a few votes. I may have more disagreements with Biden than most other candidates I voted for in the past, but he will get my vote in '24 as he did in '20. Unfortunately the whole purpose of a campaign is not to reach voters of reason but to appeal to those who vote on emotion and crave "feel-good sales pitches," even if they're untrue. And unfortunately any voter who's still in the "Maybe Trump" camp, or even in the "Definitely not Trump, but maybe nor Biden either," is that most likely that second kind.
No economist will ever convince me that raising prices during crisis events isn’t predatory and they will never convince me that “dynamic” pricing will actually happen. Companies wil raise prices to the highest point until they see a decrease in sales. However much they can squeeze me for is what they will charge.
FDR was so popular early in the war — not that he wasn't before — because he refused to blow smoke about world conditions. He told Americans exactly how bad things were, and then explained what the US intended to do about it. Biden should take notes.
"Still: If this is an increasingly dangerous world, it means that in this respect President Biden can’t run a typical incumbent reelection campaign. "
Not really. Leader Jeffries is telling the truth. If President Biden also says it, he'll be telling the truth as well. Telling the truth is even more important the more dangerous the world gets. One thing making the world more dangerous is the possibility that Trump might win. Beat him, and the danger level starts dropping.
Trump falling alseep should be a major point that the press and Democrats need to harp on. Shows that he is an old man and not the "virile, energetic" persona he claims to be. This with his verbal mishaps needs to be front and center.
Dynamic pricing isn't really a new concept. Taco Tuesdays. Whopper Wednesdays. BOGO wings but only on a certain day. Happy Hour at every bar and tavern from coast to coast. Wendy's recent foray flopped from a PR perspective, I think, because however they announced it the general perception was "charge more for food during peak times. " A much smarter strategy on their behalf would have left the impression that food during non-peak times was going to be cheaper (even if the former was really more true - it's about the marketing, people!). Even Uber, probably this decade's most prominent adherent to "dynamic pricing" (which has been largely successful, people generally understand it and have adopted if even if anger at spiked pricing during a high volume time like after a sporting event is largely taken out on the driver with decreased or eliminated tips) now routinely "discounts" rides during "non peak" hours when in reality the base (non-discounted) ride has stealthily been increased and the "discounted" ride is really the old base-line. Again, marketing! Protections from blatant price-gouging obviously needed to be in place, such as the show shovel scenario or a better example would be bottled water sales at Woodstock '99, but "surge" or "dynamic pricing" is neither new or going away anytime soon.
The idea that Donald Trump cannot get a fair jury in NYC (or DC) because they are democratic strongholds is patently dishonest. First, we *never* hear that a Dem can't get a fair trial in a red state, so it is apparently only democrats who are unable to set aside their personal preferences to do a job. The thing is, people are generally quite good at doing just that and judges, attorneys, cops, election workers, and others routinely do *exactly* that. Sure, there are some who allow their personal biases to inform their work, but my experience is they are the exception. Also, the fact that half of the jury pool was dismissed because they could not review the evidence fairly is an example of the system working as it should (I suspect many of them saw this as an easy button to get out of jury duty).
I personally believe Donald Trump to be manifestly unfit for office. I also believe that he doesn't deserve to be convicted if the evidence does not support a conviction. The Trump trial presents some unique circumstances, but I think most people are able to make that distinction.
Regarding on-demand pricing, as the story was unfolding about Wendy's, it made me think about airlines. I doubt hardly anyone pays the same price for a seat in coach; or a seat in first class, for that matter. No one can definitively say "It costs X to fly from NY to LA" because "X" does not exist. The price of your ticket depends on demand; when you buy the ticket; if you use money, points, a "special" credit card; etc. And we as the consumer decide if the ticket price is fair or if we want to go down the 'online road' and price it out elsewhere. Same with Wendy's -- either the convenience and timing work for you to pay the higher price, or go down the road to McDonalds, or Burger King, or Five Guys, or In-N-Out Burger, or Shake Shack, or Smashburger . . . I don't know . . . maybe something has changed since I got my Economics degree all those years ago, but I thought that is how competition was supposed to work???
In the early 1990s, I was a contractor on a DISA project that involved on-site coordination with U.S. Central Command, USAF Space Command, and U.S. Space Command (a Joint Command). The CENTCOM staff with whom I worked consistently impressed me (a former Navy Chief) by their intelligent approach to issues, dedication, and principles. The other two commands were organizationally at each other's throats more often than not, despite the fact that both were led by the same Flag officer and their staff members were, individually, very good.
"They are watching to see if America will stand up for its Allies and it's own interests around the globe, and we will." - Mike Johnson, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, 15 April 2024.
The Speaker favors consideration of four separate appropriations bills but is apparently open to a single bill with four elements (... as the Chamber decides).
The specter of the Hastert Rule threatens each approach thanks to the whole-hearted advocacy of anti-U.S. misinformation promulgated by the foreign axis-of-evil facing us that the so-called "Freedom" Caucus has bought. Additionally, Members could (probably would) attach amendments that would force the approved legislation back to the Senate for negotiations, further delaying an already deadly delay.
Resolution of this crap depends on a bipartisan discharge petition brought to the House - perhaps two such petitions - to pass the $96B USD foreign assistance and the Lankford border security bills approved by the Senate.
I am 80, still waiting to see prices " come down" .
Bill, the world IS a dangerous place, and getting worse . Hardly the time for anyone to run on " making the world safer". That ship has sailed...
"Still: If this is an increasingly dangerous world, it means that in this respect President Biden can’t run a typical incumbent reelection campaign. He can’t simply say, 'Things are getting better! The world is safer than it was four years ago'.”
Voters who use reason don't need an incumbent to claim that "things are getting better," when they're not. In fact for my 52 years of voting nothing any candidate SAID won my vote. I ignored all "sales pitches" and weighed the facts to see who would do a better job. Often it was a tough call, and I have regretted a few votes. I may have more disagreements with Biden than most other candidates I voted for in the past, but he will get my vote in '24 as he did in '20. Unfortunately the whole purpose of a campaign is not to reach voters of reason but to appeal to those who vote on emotion and crave "feel-good sales pitches," even if they're untrue. And unfortunately any voter who's still in the "Maybe Trump" camp, or even in the "Definitely not Trump, but maybe nor Biden either," is that most likely that second kind.
No economist will ever convince me that raising prices during crisis events isn’t predatory and they will never convince me that “dynamic” pricing will actually happen. Companies wil raise prices to the highest point until they see a decrease in sales. However much they can squeeze me for is what they will charge.
Love that little detail about the bureaucratic shift. Good story!
FDR was so popular early in the war — not that he wasn't before — because he refused to blow smoke about world conditions. He told Americans exactly how bad things were, and then explained what the US intended to do about it. Biden should take notes.
Since when is President
Biden responsible for World
Peace?
Last time I looked, yesterday,
he was having dialog with
Iran and Chec leaders. He's
also been trying for MONTHS
to get aid to Ukraine! He just
finished important talks with
Japan's president.
In the last 2 months the
TrumpMaga House and a few
Senators are taking "orders"
from a demented "citizen"
running for president. Since
when is this allowed when
the voices, emails, phone
calls of the people who
elected these house and
senate members go unanswered?
The Squeaker of the House
goes to Mar-a-Lago to
discuss policy??? Trump is
NOT the President. Johnson
should be growing a
backbone and bringing the
bipartisan Senate aid bill to
the floor! He should be
bringing the bipartisan border
bill to the floor. The hell with
the Freedom (sic) Caucus!
The Economists/Economy?
Where do these people shop?
What is their take home pay?
Every week the prices on any
given food item at our big
super store changes. When
a major storm is forecast, you
bet prices go up and it's not
an umbrella 🌂 folks are
buying!
"Still: If this is an increasingly dangerous world, it means that in this respect President Biden can’t run a typical incumbent reelection campaign. "
Not really. Leader Jeffries is telling the truth. If President Biden also says it, he'll be telling the truth as well. Telling the truth is even more important the more dangerous the world gets. One thing making the world more dangerous is the possibility that Trump might win. Beat him, and the danger level starts dropping.
Trump falling alseep should be a major point that the press and Democrats need to harp on. Shows that he is an old man and not the "virile, energetic" persona he claims to be. This with his verbal mishaps needs to be front and center.
Dynamic pricing isn't really a new concept. Taco Tuesdays. Whopper Wednesdays. BOGO wings but only on a certain day. Happy Hour at every bar and tavern from coast to coast. Wendy's recent foray flopped from a PR perspective, I think, because however they announced it the general perception was "charge more for food during peak times. " A much smarter strategy on their behalf would have left the impression that food during non-peak times was going to be cheaper (even if the former was really more true - it's about the marketing, people!). Even Uber, probably this decade's most prominent adherent to "dynamic pricing" (which has been largely successful, people generally understand it and have adopted if even if anger at spiked pricing during a high volume time like after a sporting event is largely taken out on the driver with decreased or eliminated tips) now routinely "discounts" rides during "non peak" hours when in reality the base (non-discounted) ride has stealthily been increased and the "discounted" ride is really the old base-line. Again, marketing! Protections from blatant price-gouging obviously needed to be in place, such as the show shovel scenario or a better example would be bottled water sales at Woodstock '99, but "surge" or "dynamic pricing" is neither new or going away anytime soon.
The idea that Donald Trump cannot get a fair jury in NYC (or DC) because they are democratic strongholds is patently dishonest. First, we *never* hear that a Dem can't get a fair trial in a red state, so it is apparently only democrats who are unable to set aside their personal preferences to do a job. The thing is, people are generally quite good at doing just that and judges, attorneys, cops, election workers, and others routinely do *exactly* that. Sure, there are some who allow their personal biases to inform their work, but my experience is they are the exception. Also, the fact that half of the jury pool was dismissed because they could not review the evidence fairly is an example of the system working as it should (I suspect many of them saw this as an easy button to get out of jury duty).
I personally believe Donald Trump to be manifestly unfit for office. I also believe that he doesn't deserve to be convicted if the evidence does not support a conviction. The Trump trial presents some unique circumstances, but I think most people are able to make that distinction.
Regarding on-demand pricing, as the story was unfolding about Wendy's, it made me think about airlines. I doubt hardly anyone pays the same price for a seat in coach; or a seat in first class, for that matter. No one can definitively say "It costs X to fly from NY to LA" because "X" does not exist. The price of your ticket depends on demand; when you buy the ticket; if you use money, points, a "special" credit card; etc. And we as the consumer decide if the ticket price is fair or if we want to go down the 'online road' and price it out elsewhere. Same with Wendy's -- either the convenience and timing work for you to pay the higher price, or go down the road to McDonalds, or Burger King, or Five Guys, or In-N-Out Burger, or Shake Shack, or Smashburger . . . I don't know . . . maybe something has changed since I got my Economics degree all those years ago, but I thought that is how competition was supposed to work???
Just learning that, as a consumer , I should despise economists.
In the early 1990s, I was a contractor on a DISA project that involved on-site coordination with U.S. Central Command, USAF Space Command, and U.S. Space Command (a Joint Command). The CENTCOM staff with whom I worked consistently impressed me (a former Navy Chief) by their intelligent approach to issues, dedication, and principles. The other two commands were organizationally at each other's throats more often than not, despite the fact that both were led by the same Flag officer and their staff members were, individually, very good.
"They are watching to see if America will stand up for its Allies and it's own interests around the globe, and we will." - Mike Johnson, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, 15 April 2024.
The Speaker favors consideration of four separate appropriations bills but is apparently open to a single bill with four elements (... as the Chamber decides).
The specter of the Hastert Rule threatens each approach thanks to the whole-hearted advocacy of anti-U.S. misinformation promulgated by the foreign axis-of-evil facing us that the so-called "Freedom" Caucus has bought. Additionally, Members could (probably would) attach amendments that would force the approved legislation back to the Senate for negotiations, further delaying an already deadly delay.
Resolution of this crap depends on a bipartisan discharge petition brought to the House - perhaps two such petitions - to pass the $96B USD foreign assistance and the Lankford border security bills approved by the Senate.
Do this NOW.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kZolk9EoMA - Right-wing event in Brussels told to shut down by police | BBC News farage today and orban tommorow :(