sherpa

I really liked his music. Besides "Beautiful" and "The Wreck...." which are among my all time favorite songs, but he had many tunes that were not that well known that get the volume treatment if they come on a local oldies radio station. "Christian Island" is one: "She's a good old boat and she'll stay afloat Through the toughest gales and keep smiling But for one more day she would like to stay In the lee of Christian Island." I always like "Cotton Jenny" also.

Carter was horrible. The attempt to re-write his legacy based on his post presidency life is ineffectual. He was a horrible Commander in Chief, resulting in a massive loss of talented officers, and an absolute debacle in actual military operations, which he ran, see Desert One. On a less life-lost argument, his silly post service claim to verify elections in foreign countries, Venezuela and Cuba specifically, is preposterous. The Secret Service had a lot to say about him, and not good.

Regarding our industrial base, the ship building/repair facilities is a serious problem, especially as the Navy adds weight to the Pacific Fleet to counter Chinese expansion. F-22's are being retired. F-15's being replaced with newer F-15EX. Both Navy and Air Force are still evaluating designs for next generation air dominance fighter. The Navy's reliance on the F-18 platform in its' many designs and it's short legs continues to point to a serious organic tanker problem. So far, the Navy has responded to the problem with shorter flight time cycles which causes the carrier to be placed closer to dangerous weapons systems we have not shown an ability to defend against, ie., hypersonic missiles. As an aside regarding industrial capacity, in the recently gamed Taiwan conflict, the US ran out of its' more effective weapons, long range missiles and other "smart" munitions in two weeks. Not good.

US officials should refuse any contact with Russian "journalists" until they release the Journal's Gershkovich.

The issue is pretty grown up as well. Long term, Russia has exposed itself. Compose heap. The issue is whether China can form enough of a constituency to threaten the west. That has never happened, but short term, it can have massive economic and military consequences.

Ever done business in China?

Sadly, they've already got them.

All true. The wildcard is that the Chinese Communist Party probably understands that there is a timeline. They have lots of long range problems and their advantage is best between now and 2027. I think that their best option, if they truly intend to takeover Taiwan, is to do it between a Republican Presidential victory in the 2024 election and the inauguration. If a Democrat victory they can wait a bit.

Nope, but the current US stated position is that it would defend Taiwan against an invasion, so it makes sense to pre-emptively go after US' superior in range air power, so that was included in the scenario. The US has significant advantages in a number of areas, especially in submarine capability, but that isn't a game changer. The Chinese Navy is less capable, but huge, and has an incredible industrial base, ie replenishment, advantage. None of that includes what is unknown about cyber and satellite destruction/capability, but that is thought to be another significant component to Chinese capability and intent. It aint good.

This is a generationally complex question. First, Taiwan produces an amazing amount the the world's semiconductor output. If that supply line is blocked, we're into an immediate economic debacle. The military question is just as complex. A recent war game scenario, based on Biden's expressed promise to defend Taiwan, had the Chinese preemptively striking US air assets on Guam and Kadena, Okinawa. That is gloves off war. The Chinese have created a military production infrastructure that far surpasses the US. They can produce ships at one third the time it takes the US, as the US is now down to four such facilities. The US still has far more military capability, but that is diminished by the the close nature of Taiwan to mainland China. This is not a good scenario.

The New York Times economist is known as the perpetually wrong Paul Krugman. The same guy who stated the internet would be no more impactful than the fax machine, and that after electing Trump in 2016 the world would enter a recession we could not get out of. The man is a laughingstock.

You have made it to the "too stupid to respond to."

I'm getting it from the announcement that they were going to attempt it that was public information in the industry. It was laughed at from the beginning. The government does not simply change one word. They spend plenty of time and staff resources to eventually come up with this crap. That money, from their budget, could have been spent towards solutions to serious problems they have, but that's where we're, as companies cut flights into the New York area because of inadequate FAA resources. As an aside, the term "air missions," got considerable attention, since at least one major airline spent millions in training costs to eliminate the thought of "missions" from the thought process of what they do. This came as the result of a fatal crash. So.......the airlines spent a lot trying to eliminate that phrase/thought process, then the FAA hurls it out over the entire aviation industry, including drones. Great idea. Money well spent

What you have linked to, and made your point on, is the end result of a project that involved many, many hours of staff work and millions of dollars. Laughed at in the industry while they were considering it, but that's what you get. It is simply the publication of the new term ruling, not anything related to how much that brilliance cost, and it was totally unnecessary and wasteful.

Yet the FAA spent millions creating a 140+ page document explaining and promoting its program to change NOTAMS from meaning "Notice to Airmen," to "Notice to Air Missions" because their view was that "Airmen" was a sexist phrase. Ya. They spend their money wisely. Should be privatized.

I took over as Treasurer of our Volunteer Fire Dept. They were keeping their cash reserves in the checking account bank's proprietary money market fund, which was yielding about 1% at the the time, now 3%, but not competitive. I transferred half those reserves into a 6 month cd at 4.75% and a one year at 4.95%. The other half of the funds, which we desired to be more liquid, I moved into the Schwab Value Advantage Money Fund, (SWVXX), which has a current yield of 4.66%, completely liquid. That fund is also where I keep our personal family cash in our trading account. Yields have certainly moved up rapidly with the past many months of Fed hikes.

Not smart to put a timeline on how long to go after someone. Regarding Iraq, the US was going to stop committing to and supporting an endless no fly zone, so something had to happen.

Bullsnot.

Disney deserved to be challenged. The Republican Party did not call for any boycott. BudLight did that all on their own. Still, a far better option than the other.

I am fully aware of the status of this thing. I said it was "essentially" abolished since there is no question that the ceiling is not really a ceiling, since it's constantly changed. What it does do is provide a very minor speed bump that forces the branches to at least have a discussion during this mindless spending into oblivion.

The debt ceiling already is essentially abolished, and that should be apparent to any rational citizen. What the existing process does is force some minimal level of discussion on spending future taxpayer funds,

The debt ceiling will be increased. Elections have consequences, and there seems to be no end to writing checks that future taxpayers will have to cover. It is completely responsible for Congress to enforce spending limits. That is their job, among others. It is completely irresponsible to allow the Executive to write these checks way beyond it's Constitutional authority, ie, student loan elimination. It is time to get back to having our government's three branches doing what they were intended to do.

This was never going to end well. The original purpose of our involvement, which was to get a state sponsored terrorist out of a country, was important and well intentioned. Once that was done, we should have left them to their own. We tried to help them build a sustainable culture. The place is not a real country. Never has been. Nonetheless, the "withdrawal" was an unmitigated embarrassment and disgrace, and should have resulted in the removal of those responsible and those who lied about other options. Biden lying about not being presented with options by SecDef and Chaiirman Joint Chiefs, about keeping a minimal force and Bagram Air Base under US control until a reasonable withdrawal is inexcusable.

Typical Yahoo Finance nonsensical histrionics. The place where anyone can get anything online, and the more marketable the better. The only thing worse is their comments section, which is considered a totally contrarian indicator. In point of fact, the companies mentioned are not halfway to the mark in the headline.

No doubt the result of cowbell commissions.