What would you guys like to read about in the future? Specific questions are easier to grapple with than general topics, though I will take topics under advisement.
« Request: The Dollar | Main | The Poverty/Bus Nexus »
Requests Thread
13 Jun 2008 12:09 pm
Comments (62)
Ezra/Matt slash fan fic.
Veepstakes: Does Obama need a reassuring face on foreign policy?
First off, let me just that I am not of the mind that Obama NEEDS someone with military experience to be his VP. I think it highlights Obama's own lack of service and could fuel the impression that he needs training wheels, so to speak. Plus, the 'commander-in-chief test' is something that Obama needs to clear on his own with the voters, without anyone's help.
That being said, I'm coming back around on the idea of needing a military mind on the ticket. I am starting to envision the nightmare scenario of a terrorist attack plunging the country back into a state of fear and wonder - will people be able to look at a ticket of new faces (without military experience) and be reassured that the country will be safe? I don't know that answer to that, but I imagine having a general on the ticket would help Obama in such a case.
Hey Matt, I'd like it if you'd talk about how your own experiences moving from an independent blog to one under the banner of the Atlantic mirrors the larger way in which the supposedly democratizing force of the Web and blogs has been lost under the appropriation of the blogosphere by the traditional media. I would also be interested in your commenting on the fact that all of the bloggers under the Atlantic's banner are well-connected in old media, Ivy-league educated, etc., further undermines the notion that blogging is available to anyone, based on merit, egalitarian, etc.
I remember reading in the runup to the 2000 presidential campaign that GWB had sewn up the Republican nomination very early through consolidating a small group of key Republican power brokers. Who were those people, and to what extent are they being held accountable (even w/in the Republican party)?
If not now, when?
If I am not for myself, who am I for?
Obama v. McCain on the lack of voting representation in both the House and Senate for DC residents.
I would like to read a long-form essay (perhaps in the Atlantic proper) that puts your various domestic pet issues (public transportation, health care, jobs, etc.) in the context of an optimism about what a smart, accountable, efficiently regulating government can achieve. It is important to rebut the conservative argument that these are just liberal big government spending programs that have never worked and can't work because government is somehow fundamentally unable to run them. (You hear this already in McCain's "second term of the Carter administration" line). We need to (and you can) demonstrate that the past and present failures of these programs are traceable not to some inherent flaw in government but to specific flaws in the way these programs have been run (especially by Republican administrations) - underfunding, no-bid sweetheart contracts, lobbies writing the legislation, revolving public/private employee doors, etc. The alternative to big government is not no government (e.g., Katrina), but smart government.
Please explain the difference between the left, right and liberal outlooks, with particular emphasis on the reasons and the beneficiaries of the common tendency to conflate liberals and leftists.
Can (and should) Obama make a case for universal healthcare by tying it to the decreased job security that American have come to expect?
Americans already believe that no politician can, or will, stop offshoring and free trade. They rightly believe their livelihoods aren't as secure as the jobs of 20-30 years ago. Given the prevelance of this belief, and the fact that McCain can't stop telling people that their jobs won't come back, shouldn't Obama make a pitch for universal healthcare on the basis the loss of a job shouldn't also cause your loved ones to lose medical care?
How about the lowdown on exactly when we can expect internal combustion engine driven transport to go defunct because the liquid fuel supply became too scarce, what may happen as a consequence, and who is working on implementing / thinking about whatever we have to do about it?
I recently wrote something on this that was based in good part on my own speculation, and read a little about after I'd written about it, and I discovered the situation sounds a little more dire and pressing than I'd thought it was.
For example, how do we know there is a lot of oil left? Just the say-so of the Saudis and the Kuwaitis and other OPEC nations?
In moving from Illinois/Wisconsin to New York, I'm noticing that Amtrak has much more service on the east coast than on the midwest. Why is this, and what, if anything, can be done to get our national rail service serving such potentially useful routes as Chicago/St. Louis or Indianapolis/Kansas City?
The Hirsch Report from 2005 said that if we're going to respond to oil peaking the best, we've got to start preparing at least 20 years before peaking, and if we're going to make an incredible rush but still get everything done, we've got to do it at least 10 years before.
If oil scarcity is going to start making food too expensive for people to but in 10 or 20 years, and we haven't started preparing to switch to electric vehicles already, it would be nice if we could look forward to less Bush/Katrina/Iraq-style bungling going into it.
This is not to mention coal, which provides a majority of the U.S.' electricity, but is also due to run out in 160-some years at current levels of production. So if population and demand keep increasing (as they are wont to do without legally mandated caps on immigration and child-birth) our electricity-producing resource is also due to run out soon enough for us to need to come up with viable replacements.
Can Obama create an opening with young evangelicals?
The youngest generation of American evangelicals sees more to their mission than the criminalization of abortion and the banning of gay marriage. If this is the case (I have no idea), can Obama make a genuine in roads with evangelicals in the 18-29 range? Appeal to areas of agreement, but also have an honest dialogue with them about disagreements. Its not that liberals love abortion, its just that we don't believe criminalizing it is the right answer. While they don't realize it, neither do a lot of evangelicals.
Case in point: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk6t_tdOkwo)
If they don't want to send women and doctors to jail, aren't they pro-choice, albeit very reluctantly? Its like this argument is stuck on point A, where liberals and evangelicals disagree. However, we both agree on point Z, i.e sending people to jail isn't the solution. It seems like Obama is the kind of candidate who can push this battle beyond the almost irrelevant point A and engage evangelicals on the actual end results. Same for other issues.
Let's talk about the actual impact on consumers from specific regulatory collapse. Alex Tabarrok rightly bashes Krugman for complaining about the FDA in the wake of the latest tomato recall (Here).
What I think would be helpful is a look at some of the outcomes from these changes. Most of the regulatory agencies face low probability, high cost scenarios for failure, so data will be (and should be) scarce in any robust system (in other words, even if some FAA offices abrogate their duties in the face of airline pressure, the structure will bear them out), but there have to be some points to look at. E.g. we know that the MHSA was gutted by political appointees then later faced embarrassment as some mines collapsed, but was the increase in mine failures statistically significant? Was it even an increase, or did we just presume causation?
I think if this got TOO complicated, it might be a job for a researcher rather than a numbers minded columnist, but I'm also sure that someone out there has actually done some research on it.
Just a thought.
I would like you to try and make sense out of the conflicting opinions about the rise of oil prices. It looks to most informed commentators like a price bubble, not (just quite yet anyway) the result of a peak oil plateau or downslope. Some blame increasing consumption in developing economies, particularly China. Others say it's part of a more general increase in commodity prices. Still others (like the Economist magazine) say commodities trading can't be it, because most of that is conducted on paper, and so does not depend on deliveries of actual barrels of oil. Other things I've read directly contradict this. Then there's the fall of the dollar, which is certainly a factor, but cannot account for the huge price increases. So what's going on?
making food too expensive for people to but
Sorry, should have been "to buy."
And, here's another thing-- if we switch to electric cars, that's a huge new demand for the (coal driven) power industry. That means that we will be running out of coal a lot quicker (absent new non-coal driven generators) and a lot of generators that aren't there already will have to be built, too, just to power the new fleet of vehicles- regardless of what powers the new electricity-generators.
As far as I can tell, the Cheneys and the Condis are so cynical that they don't care what happens to the country in the future-- they just care about themselves. We can't keep waiting for The Big Daddy archetype that sits as an illusion in all of our sub-consciouses to take care of our problems for us. We need to get the transition going ourselves + to make sure it is actually going to happen. I definitely do not want to spend my old age in a world that has become something more and more like Dune or Mad Max.
What about transhumanism or theodicy.
How about a better name than "Request Thread?"
Let's see:
"Ask, Matt." No, taken by Jeeves.
"Take it to the Matt."- lame
"Things that 'Matt'er."- Oy!
Ok- I am stumped. Stay with Request Thread.
There's a very large amount of derelict trackage and unused rights-of-way in this country, particularly in the east and midwest, but even in newer cities in the south and west.
Notwithstanding the Rails-to-Trails program, have any programs been prosposed to revitalize these tracks for passenger or freight service where such service is currently provided by road-based vehicles?
I used to live on Long Island, and I was continually amazed at how many abandoned rail corridors exist there, even now after dozens have ultimately disappeared over the years. Seems like this is a real opportunity, maybe even for a private sector venture.
Hmmm..... clearly this is going to be a productive day for me in the lab. I guess I know what I'm doing this weekend.
What are conditions needed for the economy to experience a 'green boom', like the internet boom of the 90s?
We all like to believe, and politicians like to promise, that we're on the cusp of another tech boom, this time on the alternate energy front. Are we? Do we see any signs of it? The first sign of the tech boom clearly wasn't the rise of dotcoms and the e-commerce revolution. It was small businesses recognizing that they didn't need huge financial resources to invest in technology that could assist with data management and the computerization of office tasks (like invoice generation, etc...). What is the analogous sign for an alternative energy boom? Do we have to wait for the development of the holy grail, i.e the next dominant energy source? Or is it going to be people beginning to design their lives and habits around being more energy efficient?
Finishing up Weiner's Legacy of Ashes and have not read Matthew yet on foreign affairs but the Ashes book leaves me with the sense that CIA & U S foreign policy (so called) since WWII has killed millions. The insanity, irrationality of U S Foreign policy and power of CIA show us more than a Boschian nightmare (only imagery of the surreal can begin to state what we have done in name of national security) so am extremely sceptical that Matthew's book can be of much worth given fundamental moral depravity of the horrors we have inflicted on the innocent since 1945. Forget the high minded analyses of policy when it is the nightmare that endures and just so in last seven years. Give us the brief of the psychopathology that takes over every administration and help us to define the why of our insanities while the pretty little books that pretend there is a rational process at work roll off the presses.
"ambivalentmaybe" wrote:
I would like you to try and make sense out of the conflicting opinions about the rise of oil prices. It looks to most informed commentators like a price bubble, not (just quite yet anyway) the result of a peak oil plateau or downslope.
And then there's this-- Kevin Drum reportin on a report by the IEA a few weeks ago:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013767.php
Whether this is related to peak oil or just to a bubble, it doesn't do anything to take away the inevitable necessity of preparing for the inevitable end of the supplies. This is despite any comments written on the Internet by trolls, who are just Republican political fanatics loyally following orders they are given, and who don't really know anything about or care about the energy/oil issues they write about. They certainly don't care about anything more than mindlessly obeying someone else's orders and their mindless war against blacks and homsexuals.
Sometimes "informed commentators" are owned, in-the-pocket commentators, anyway, as a lot of talk about global warming, health effects of tobacco, etc., over the years have shown us.
Actually, I like reading broad denunciations of the evil of the Republican Party. I loved your post about the Republican Party being fundamentally malign.
Something I've always wondered:
We've got Senators and Reps not doing their duty toward us - what can we do about it?
Say, we all want to impeach the President - he deserves it, he earned it - but Pelosi says, nope, I don't care what you want, we're not doing it. A lot of Senators act that way.
Can we impeach THEM for not defending the constitution like they're sworn to do?
Of course, the most grevious example of this is Smoking Joe Leiberman, who made all sorts of wild promises when running for Senator (and got Obama to stump for him) and now he's campaigning for the Republican nominee . . . I'm certain many CT residents feel betrayed . . . what are their options? Can they recall him?
What options do we have when our elected reps aren't doing right by us and we don't want to wait another two or three years to dump their skeevy asses?
I would like you to learn a little bit more about the Middle East in general, and the Gulf states in particular. While I generally agree with your position regarding liberal internationalism, you seem to have a weak grasp of the successful development models that already exist in the Arab world. The Gulf monarchies are not hated by their people; rather they're very much respected. In addition, the fuzzy line between public and private sector is, in my opinion, a real strength in a region where oil can provide a huge boost to development, or sink a country into the resource curse.
I don't think such a study would change the general point you make, rather it would strengthen your arguments in HITS.
I cringe every time you talk about the UAE as a petty dictatorship. Only someone who doesn't know much about the country could make such a generalized and false sweeping claim.
I like it when you write about public transportation, mass transportation.
Please go on with that topic.
Topic: Ways of getting FOX News off the air.
Personally, I'm all for getting the cable company to drop FOX from their channel list otherwise I'm dropping the whole service. I can live without Cartoon Network and ESPN.
I've been fuming over the infantile, overly-opinionated, poorly informed and unresearched crap on that channel for years. This Baby Mama junk is the last straw.
Oh, and I'm with Joshua James about doing something about the unresponsive elected leadership. There ought to be a Recall system in place to make Congress pay attention and do their jobs.
Matt, is Barack Obama's policy for ending the Cuban embargo contingent on human rights progress (in specific, freeing the political prisoners) a good policy? Would it be better to end the embargo without any requests?
szr - are you employed as a lobbyist for the government of Dubai or something? It's fairly well known, I think, that ~85% of residents of the UAE are noncitizen guest workers, with few rights, frequently facing an intense degree of exploitation. Do you dispute this? Or is this what you describe as a successful model of development and democracy? Perhaps by asserting that the Gulf monarchies are "very much respected" by "their people" you mean that the Arab ruling elite is quite happy being on top?
One, I would be interested to see someone be very diligent in tracking this kind of thing:
http://www.thesockobama.com/index.html
To the extent the nominally GWOT based racism (i.e. the Muslim Manchurian candidate attacks) give way to more direct and nakedly racist appeals, it would be good to have a central clearing house. But even more important would be a useful analysis of how/why this goes on, what could be done to stop it, how it might hurt/help McCain or Obama, to what extent the press ignores or indulges these sentiments.
Two, I think it would be useful to have someone watching what are the effects, both nagative and positive, of moving so much of the DNC's operation out of D.C. I think generally the mood of the blogs is going to favor it instinctively, but actual observed data points that are uniquelt available to MY as a D.C. blogger would be an interesting contribution to this story.
Three, I think Obama doesn't get enough credit for being so head and shoulders above all the other major candidates (including especially Hillary) on the web. I think a series that made this difference more concrete and real for people would be useful. This isn't really in your wheel house, but maybe like a rundown of the web-based businesses and/or commercial capabilities that would benefit from having a President who favors greater broadband access, net neutrality, etc. I feel like you do a lot of posts that go "hey, they have this cool public transport in europe--we should get that." But maybe something that takes it a step further--"hey, they have this/ are talking about doing this in a foreign country. We can't right now b/c we don't have enough broadband, but we could once Obama is Pres. And this U.S. company would make a mint instead of its foreign counterpart." This was the Clintonian genius that is the biggest hoel in Obama's game. He doesn't take his policy pronouncements and translate them into concrete terms that people can grasp. He excels at the soaring oratory, but he's not nearly as nod-inducing as vintage Bill.
How much do we know about how the black voting population in Louisiana and Mississippi has been affected by Katrina?
Will good carbon policy -- a price on carbon with concomitant strengthened efficiency standards and large investments in clean energy and infrastructure -- be a net job creator or a net job destroyer, or neither, or is there no way of knowing?
Your domestic policy-related posts are gems (see: Bus/Poverty nexus). More, please.
Matt I think you should post your thoughts on portions of the band Sparks' discography after having listened to them.
If I may request reviews of "Kimono My House," "No. 1 In Heaven," "Angst In My Pants," and the english version of "Hello Young Lovers".
Here's a song I think you should be talking about:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GsVohCEaNnk&feature=related
Best anti-war song of Iraq War version 2.0.
ps: the video is inconsequential.
what are your feelings on the band MGMT?
p.s. do you remember walking down the stairs of The Strand last night around, let's say, 8:45 and having to pass a slovenly dressed, long-haired, 22 year-old who smelt of Scotch and cigarettes? THAT WAS ME!!
Kalkin:
3 points:
(1) I'm not paid by the government of Dubai, but I did live in the UAE for an extended period of time. I continue to follow events there and have many friends, both Emirati and expatriots, who live there.
(2) It is true that, according to latest figures, about 20% of the country's people are Emirati citizens, the rest are legal residents and citizens of other countries (mostly Indian and Pakistani). All residents of the UAE must have a work visa - which means every expatriot who lives there has a job. This is changing a bit on the margins as some Emirates open themselves up to foreign ownership of land. And there's a very good reason people come to the UAE to work; they can get wages in excess of 10x what they could at home. Whatever else you may think about the country, the vast majority of the expatiots population enjoys a much higher standard of living then the countries from which they came. Is the country perfect? Absolutely not, but compared to the alternatives, it is an attractive destination for expatriots.
(3) The Emirati citizens are, as a whole, very satisfied with their lives and respect their country. Think about it this way - if you meet an Emirati over 40 years of age, chances are, he or she was born in a tent. They've experienced 200 years worth of economic growth in the last 3 decades - going from an impoverished group of Bedouin tribes to what they are today. They've made this transition largely peacefully and successfully. Why disrespect them?
I'd like to see an article or post looking back at 1993, the first year of the Clinton administration, and how infighting among Democrats set the stage for the 1994 "revolution." My memory of that period was that small fights about single-issue politics (notoriously the "don't ask/don't tell" policy about gays in the military) so divided the Democratic majority in Congress that by the time it the big issue (health care) came up, Clinton couldn't rally the party to support it, and in 1994 the GOP capitalized on the public disenchantment over Democratic squabbling. Am I remembering right? Could that happen with Obama if he's not careful? What small, divisive issues have the potential to derail the bigger policy initiatives now?
I'd like to see an article or post looking back at 1993, the first year of the Clinton administration, and how infighting among Democrats set the stage for the 1994 "revolution." My memory of that period was that small fights about single-issue politics (notoriously the "don't ask/don't tell" policy about gays in the military) so divided the Democratic majority in Congress that by the time it the big issue (health care) came up, Clinton couldn't rally the party to support it, and in 1994 the GOP capitalized on the public disenchantment over Democratic squabbling. Am I remembering right? Could that happen with Obama if he's not careful? What small, divisive issues have the potential to derail the bigger policy initiatives now?
The 2008 UEFA European Football Championship!
Why is it important that the US make a firm commitment to success in Afghanistan? What would success look like, and is it reasonable to think that the chances of achieving it are worth the likely cost?
(This is in response to offhand assertions you've made here several times in the past -- to the effect that the US must commit itself to success in Afgh -- but which, as far as I've seen, you've never justified.)
Western Sahara: What do Barack Obama and Matt Yglesias think about it?
I haven't seen any good Trevino mockery for a while.
More in-depth pieces about Obama vs McCain on Supreme Court appointments and executive power.
Hannah Montana. Malign influence or harmless fun?
Liberal fascism. On the march? Or has the threat receded?
R. Kelly, not guilty.
WTF....
Could you provide a list of various research sites used by yourself and others? Topics like the debates within Congress, etc.
thanks
The 2008 UEFA European Football Championship!
what are your feelings on the band MGMT?
Ezra/Matt slash fan fic.
Win. Though this should clearly be written by one of the flopmates.
Peter K.
http://www.oliverwillis.com/index.php/2008/06/13/the-hannah-montana-program/
okay for real i'm gone now
Actually, Matt, you know what I'd really like to read about? Your thoughts on beer. Mainstream brands, imports, microbrews--whaddya like? Whaddya hate? What can your recommend?
This might be a good topic for a slow weekend.
And no, I'm not drunk right now.
Is there any evidence that Obama is opposed to the military industrial complex and imperialism? I've looked really hard but I haven't found anything which indicates that Obama would NOT invade a country or kill foreigners if he believed it was in the US's interest to do so (eg Pakistan, killing Al Qaida).
And Obama wants to significantly expand our military. Why would he do that unless he planned on using it? I don't buy the argument that Iraq has decimated our military and so therefore we need to expand our military. Our military is decimated because we are in Iraq. If we leave Iraq our military will be just fine.
Is there any evidence that Obama is opposed to the military industrial complex and imperialism? I've looked really hard but I haven't found anything which indicates that Obama would NOT invade a country or kill foreigners if he believed it was in the US's interest to do so (eg Pakistan, killing Al Qaida).
And Obama wants to significantly expand our military. Why would he do that unless he planned on using it? I don't buy the argument that Iraq has decimated our military and so therefore we need to expand our military. Our military is decimated because we are in Iraq. If we leave Iraq our military will be just fine.
Your comments on Hanna Rosin's 12 page article "American Murder Mystery" in the new Atlantic on how tearing down inner city housing projects and replacing them with yuppie housing just moves the criminal element, armed with Section 8 rental subsidy vouchers, out to the suburbs, where they wreak havoc there.
How about an analysis of the frequently repeated claim that the Israeli government needs the U.S. governments "permission" for all sorts of actions (e.g., cracking down in Gaza, attacking Iran.) These claims imply an extraordinary level of US control over Israel, and in a sense they are roughly the opposite of Meashimer and Walt's accusations. (In principle, though, both claims could be true. It would not be impossible to have a Jewish lobby controlling US policy while the US Government controls Israeli actions.)
I see comments about US "permission" tossed off in the press all the time, but have never seen any serious investigation of whether there is any actual evidence for them. It would seem to me that any analysis of the best US policy in Near East would start by deciding how much real influence we have. Did Olmert really have to call up George Bush to get permission to invade Lebanon?
How about diving into the atheist vs. deist vs. religious zealot debate? I always find it fascinating to discover what smart people who I respect think about god, the afterlife, etc. and how they defend their beliefs or lack thereof. Interesting insights into their psyche, IMHO.
Matt: "Specific questions are easier to grapple with than general topics..."
Nothing more specific than my two questions on Iran.
Asshole.
The potential role of transit in disaster scenarios like 9/11, Katrina, Iowa this weekend. Remember any major city on 9/11? EVERYBODY went home at once. And remember Ray Nagin pleading for buses? What if New Orleans had a bunch more than they do? Might be an interesting topic.
Here's an odd one: With the sad death of Tim Russert, I was reminded of how many Irish Catholics are pundits these days. It seems specific presidents have brought forth new faces that eventually became pundits.
There seem to be an unusually large number of Irish Catholics in punditry. I'm assuming most of them came about one way or another through the campaign and presidency of the first American Irish Catholic president, JFK.
I'd be curious to see how our discourse has been effected by the (then) new demographic, cult of personality around specific presidents and how it can effect the future, especially when the newest charismatic candidate (and most likely next president) is yet another new demographic for American presidency. Will a whole generation of mixed race or black, liberal pundits dominate our discourse in 30 years because of Barack Obama's run?
(Unfortunately, I kept expecting Ronald Reagan would have birthed a whole generation of actors as pundits but I underestimated and his All-American, non ethnic in any way persona only brought about hero worship the way most actors as movie heroes hope to generate.)
More Huey Lewis reviews.
Blogging about the weird mad-cow protests going on in Korea right now would be nice. There hasn't been nearly enough discussion about it in the American blogosphere.
I also like historical musing posts.
Since there is significant buzz in the blogosphere and the MSM about the floods in Iowa and elsewhere in the midwest, it would be nice to finally see a major blog explore the differing approaches to disaster preparedness and management offered by each candidate. Some have noted (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/14/11500/3418/66/535887) that Obama has been pretty good as a community advocate for disaster victims in the current mess and in the past with the aftermath of Katrina. Though national campaigns rarely if ever release any official policies on disaster planning, it is usually easy to pick out differing approaches based on a candidate's experience with state or local management agencies.
This is especially relevant given that the flip-flop of national disaster policy in the past several decades has closely paralleled party changes in the white house and their approaches to security issues. Reagan and Bush I made disaster planning all about preperation for nuclear war, which led to an incredible shortfall in basic planning for natural disasters and the catastrophe that was Hurricane Andrew in 1992. When Clinton came into the White House, he revamped FEMA, by installing a seasoned Arkansas emergency manager as director, which led to much more efficient and ultimately succesful disaster preparedness and recovery efforts during his two terms. After 9/11 and Bush II's reshuffling of FEMA under the control of DHS, most planning was focused on the potential for terrorist attack. This again led to an incredibly poor choice for director (the infamous Michael Brown) and the incompetent response to Katrina.
I think you ought to look at how Obama and McCain might approach federal disaster management as president.
Comments closed June 27, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
How about some thoughts on the gigantical Boston comeback last night to go up 3-1?
Posted by B. Minich | June 13, 2008 12:33 PM