Photo by SLT

Wednesday’s Forum

18

Comments

OTB relies on its readers to support it. Please consider helping by becoming a monthly contributor through Patreon or making a one-time contribution via PayPal. Thanks for your consideration.

18 responses to “Wednesday’s Forum”

    1. He doesn’t understand how anything works. Much of this climb is attributable to rising energy costs. He started a war with Iran, AND he’s forced the decommissioning of multiple clean energy programs, hurting supply from a number of fronts.

      Of course, he’s also going to squawk when interest rates climb in order to tamp down inflation.

      It’s all so VERY TIRESOME.

      3
    2. Charley in Cleveland Avatar
      Charley in Cleveland

      It’s almost as if he’s doing it on purpose.

      This is what happens when a guy who doesn’t understand economics – to wit, how tariffs work – is surrounded by people who are afraid to tell him the truth. He thinks his (illegal) tariffs are simply revenue generators for the Treasury rather than a tax on American importers and their customers, and a contributing factor to inflation. His illegal and unnecessary war in Iran has increased the price of oil, and thereby increased the cost of everything that is transported by planes, trains (diesel) and trucks, while also increasing the cost of gasoline. Higher prices for EVERYTHING is certainly inflationary. So Trump is making inflation worse, although he undoubtedly couldn’t be convinced he is “doing it on purpose,” because he can’t grasp cause and effect.

      2
      1. IIRC there was recently some discussion here of conservatives seeing the world as zero-sum while liberals see it as positive-sum. Examples: the ease with which cons can be convinced anything immigrants get comes at their expense. Or Trump’s view that giving people money in exchange for stuff is a net loss. At the Hayekian extreme, anything short of dog-eat-dog is collectivist and must not be allowed.

        I feel I’m being forced to the opinion their zero-sum thinking is a subset of conservatives generally, not just Trump, being unable to see cause and effect. Example: the inability to do simple cost-benefit analysis on masks and vaccination. At some subconscious level they believe that if we are virtuous by bombing brown people and punishing those dastardly Canadians, God will reward us with a good economy and low inflation and protect us from infection.

        My belief here is something of a restatement of George Lakoff’s view that conservatives are intellectually able to understand complex causation, but default to simple morality.

        1
  1. Our new press secretary may have been practicing law without a license in California.

    Which is against the law, which a real lawyer would know.

    1. Charley in Cleveland Avatar
      Charley in Cleveland

      Anthony Scaramucci knows his record shortest tenure as Press Secretary is in jeopardy. Katie struggled to read aloud all the Trump fluffery she was ordered to deliver yesterday, and holding herself out as a lawyer (in the ‘state of China’) may have been taking a good joke a step too far. She came across as exceedingly dumb (with a B).

      1
    2. Yeah but she passed the bar in, wait for it, China.

      1. Yeah, I heard that answer….

        She’d still have to sit for the California bar to practice there, I believe.

      2. She apparently lied about that bit too.

        No bar exam in the US.
        No bar exam in China.

        A JD from Pepperdine does not equal “I am an attorney.” To the surprise of utterly no one, she’s just another MAGA liar and fraud.

        1
  2. Suppose a habitable planet has high levels of arsenic in the topsoil. Would lifeforms evolving there:

    a) make use of it in their biochemistry
    b) evolve ways to render it harmless and expel it as waste
    c) all of the above

    If we got with a), would sentient lifeforms from this world coming to Earth bring along arsenic supplements? Or maybe carry containers of arsenic salts to sprinkle on the local food they consume?

    Diplomatic functions like state dinners would require careful management, seeing as how the distinguished visitors’ condiments could kill their counterparts in the host planet.

  3. Ukraine Says New Limits on Starlink Are Disrupting Its Military Operations

    Ukraine said Elon Musk’s SpaceX has imposed new limits on military-grade Starlink terminals without warning, hobbling Kyiv’s ability to conduct midrange drone attacks and intercept Russia’s new-generation of jet-powered drones.

    The limits on Starlink, which restrict the speed at which some of Ukraine’s weapons can travel and still connect to the internet, come as President Trump piles pressure on Ukraine, demanding that it stop hitting Russian oil refineries, blaming President Volodymyr Zelensky for continuing the war and calling for his removal.

    “I confirm that SpaceX implemented a speed limit for Starlink terminals operating in motion last night,” Serhii Beskrestnov, an adviser to Zelensky, wrote on the Telegram messaging platform. “Our defense forces received no warning about this restriction, and it has led to the disruption of a number of missions.”

    There is something very wrong and dangerous about a national asset vital to national defense being in the private hands of a powerful oligarch.

    Should Starlink be nationalized?

    1. Should Starlink be nationalized?

      It’s not that simple. you’d also need to take Xpaces to keep up the necessary launch cadence. Otherwise Adolf’s fantabulously cheaper launch systems will charge $10,000,000 per kilo to orbit.

      There are two issues. You need a lot of satellites. the satellites have relatively short lifespans of around 5 years or so before they run out of station keeping fuel and are brought down by atmospheric drag and burn up.

      Xtarship, for all of Adolf’s lofty promises*, is a Xtarlink satellite delivery tool.

      *Fully autonomous 100% safe self-driving is coming next year!

    2. The Defense Department still has something to do with it, since it has a contract for Ukraine’s use of Starlink. It appears that trump is lashing out at Zelensky, and of course his little bro musk is on board with the cutbacks in Starlink service.

      But restricting Starlink won’t keep Ukraine from hitting Russian oil refining and storage, since there was already no service available over Russian territory. It does, however, make Ukraine’s defense of its own territory more difficult, as 1) it reduces Ukraine’s effectiveness on the front line where it’s been mostly holding the line and even taking back its territory, and 2) the restrictions reduce their ability to intercept high-speed Russian drones over Ukrainian territory, which will result in more civilian destruction, death and suffering.

      2
      1. dazedandconfused Avatar
        dazedandconfused

        Perhaps worst if all is the boost to Russian morale. Ukraine’s master plan is for that to break.

  4. Received our first heating oil bill of the season, price per gallon a lofty $6.01, that fill was a neat $902.00. Thank you Mr. Trump. By my recollection, last winter oil vacillated between $3.90 and $4.50/gal.

    For us, this isn’t a problem, but I feel for others. The state reports that it has already received a spike in applicants for heating oil assistance. Maybe ole global warming will come through and grant us a mild winter.

    1. Frame of reference. The oil tank is 250 gal and was last filled in the March. Over the summer the boiler only runs to heat hot water, which is a couple or three times per day for ~15 minutes. In warmer seasons, I turn the boiler off if we’re gone overnight. In the winter we typically get a fill every six weeks or so.

    2. We use heating oil and will need a delivery around the first of the year — we will just have to pay whatever the price is at that time. I’ve been keeping track of home heating oil prices, which have risen rather sharply compared to gasoline. Our heating oil price is online, and for a minimum 150-gallon delivery, it’s been:
      $2.74 in early Dec 2025
      $4.65 on Mar 10 2026
      $5.50 less than a week ago
      $5.91 today

      It’s a big deal… an extra grand or more for some folks to heat their homes this winter.

  5. Well, that didn’t take long.

    Last Friday (Oct. 9th) I cancelled the one month free Audible subscription before I got charged for a month. Today I got an offer for three months at $0.99 per month, plus a $20 credit. That’s three book credits for $2.97, and possibly enough for one more book.

    The question is, if the terms permit cancelling after three months, how bad a deal is this for Amazon (Audible’s owner)?

    I may just go for it, after checking the terms and conditions that inevitably apply.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.