768 lines
105 KiB
HTML
768 lines
105 KiB
HTML
|
<!DOCTYPE html>
|
|||
|
|
<html lang="" xml:lang="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
|
|||
|
|
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta content="pandoc" name="generator"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes" name="viewport"/>
|
|||
|
|
<title>27 November, 2023</title>
|
|||
|
|
<style>
|
|||
|
|
code{white-space: pre-wrap;}
|
|||
|
|
span.smallcaps{font-variant: small-caps;}
|
|||
|
|
span.underline{text-decoration: underline;}
|
|||
|
|
div.column{display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: 50%;}
|
|||
|
|
div.hanging-indent{margin-left: 1.5em; text-indent: -1.5em;}
|
|||
|
|
ul.task-list{list-style: none;}
|
|||
|
|
</style>
|
|||
|
|
<title>Daily-Dose</title><meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport"/><link href="styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><link href="../styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><style>*{overflow-x:hidden;}</style><link href="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.css" rel="stylesheet"/><script src="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.js"></script></head>
|
|||
|
|
<body>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-down" id="daily-dose">Daily-Dose</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" data-aos-anchor-placement="top-bottom" id="contents">Contents</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-vox">From Vox</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><a href="#from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</a></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>One Family’s Perilous Escape from Gaza City</strong> - When Israel invaded Kamal Al-Mashharawi’s neighborhood, he crowded into a basement with his extended family. “The world is closing in on us,” he wrote on WhatsApp. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/one-familys-perilous-escape-from-gaza-city">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Free-Market Fundamentalism of Argentina’s Javier Milei</strong> - The President-elect, a right-wing populist with authoritarian instincts, has been compared to Donald Trump, but his radical views on the economy set him apart. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-free-market-fundamentalism-of-argentinas-javier-milei">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Next Power Plant Is on the Roof and in the Basement</strong> - A Department of Energy report promotes a new system that could remake the energy grid. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-next-power-plant-is-on-the-roof-and-in-the-basement">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>When Your Own Book Gets Caught Up in the Censorship Wars</strong> - I had envisioned book bans as modern morality plays—but the reality was far more complicated. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/essay/when-your-own-book-gets-caught-up-in-the-censorship-wars">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Death of a Relic Hunter</strong> - Bill Erquitt was an unforgettable character among Georgia’s many Civil War enthusiasts. After he died, his secrets came to light. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-the-south/the-death-of-a-relic-hunter">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-vox">From Vox</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>The Supreme Court case seeking to shut down wealth taxes before they even exist</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="A cartoon duck with a top hat in hand, with money spilling out of the hat and across the background." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/GR-M17fpgnWmW7N5ly6dHNJ2W5Q=/335x0:5684x4012/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72905242/shutterstock_2293691925.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Shutterstock
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
A SCOTUS case aiming to protect rich people from taxes could lead to chaos for the federal government’s finances.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3QXCB8">
|
|||
|
|
The Supreme Court will soon hear a lawsuit that seeks to kill a leading proposal to reduce wealth inequality in the United States, even before that proposal becomes reality.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="sPY25k">
|
|||
|
|
During her 2020 presidential campaign, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/24/18196275/elizabeth-warren-wealth-tax">proposed a 2 percent wealth tax</a> on Americans worth over $50 million. The idea was that, rather than merely taxing very wealthy people’s income and leaving their accumulated capital intact, the new tax would gradually chip away at massive fortunes and start to bring wealth inequality under control.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="f5LAAq">
|
|||
|
|
Warren, of course, did not become president. And congressional Republicans <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/6/20950010/elizabeth-warren-wealth-tax-conservatives">would endorse appointing Lucifer to lead the Treasury Department</a> before they would allow such a tax to become law. So the idea of a wealth tax remains a pipe dream — shared by many in the Democratic Party, but with no chance of becoming law anytime soon.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FhZIE6">
|
|||
|
|
Nevertheless, on December 5, the Supreme Court will hear a preemptive strike on the very concept of wealth taxes.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ihejrT">
|
|||
|
|
The plaintiffs’ arguments in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/moore-v-united-states-3/"><em>Moore v. United States</em></a> have little basis in law — unless you think that a list of long-ago-discarded laissez-faire decisions from the early 20th century remain good law. And a decision favoring these plaintiffs could blow a huge hole in the federal budget. While no Warren-style wealth tax is on the books, the <em>Moore </em>plaintiffs do challenge an existing tax that is <a href="https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-tcja-repatriation-tax-and-how-does-it-work">expected to raise $340 billion over the course of a decade</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Hu70po">
|
|||
|
|
But Republicans also hold six seats on the nation’s highest Court, so there is some risk that a majority of the justices will accept the plaintiffs’ dubious legal arguments. And if they do so, they could do considerable damage to the government’s ability to fund itself.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="zum5Pf">
|
|||
|
|
“Realization,” briefly explained
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="aGYKL5">
|
|||
|
|
<em>Moore </em>involves a fairly basic tax accounting concept: realization. Ordinarily, the federal government does not tax income until it has been “realized,” which most of the time means that someone purchased an asset, sold it at a profit, and now must pay income taxes on those profits.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0WCs8t">
|
|||
|
|
As a general rule, investors are not taxed right away when their assets gain value. If an investor buys $1,000 worth of stock in Company X, and that stock increases in value to $1,500, they pay no taxes on that gain until after they sell or otherwise dispose of the stock and earn a profit. If this investor does sell their stock for $1,500, they will pay income taxes on the $500 in profit.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="puVVBW">
|
|||
|
|
This rule, the Supreme Court explained in <a href="https://casetext.com/case/helvering-v-horst#p116"><em>Helvering v. Horst</em></a> (1940), is “founded on administrative convenience.” It is often difficult to determine how much an asset is actually worth until the asset is sold, especially if that asset is anything other than stock in a publicly traded company. So the requirement that profits ordinarily must be realized before they are taxed prevents a situation where an investor cannot figure out how much they owe in taxes, because they don’t know the specific value of all their assets.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="feY2YN">
|
|||
|
|
Additionally, the realization requirement helps prevent a situation where a taxpayer owes a significant amount of taxes on assets they cannot easily sell, and doesn’t have any other source of cash they can use to pay the taxes.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7XlhAf">
|
|||
|
|
But, while no-taxation-without-realization is typically the rule in federal taxation, it is not always the rule. Partial owners of some kinds of businesses — <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-800/285200/20231016195041390_22-800bsUnited%20States.pdf">including partnerships, S corporations, and some foreign corporations</a> — are often taxed on the company’s profits before they sell their stake in the company (or otherwise receive any of those profits in the form of a distribution or dividend). Securities dealers are also sometimes <a href="https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/prospects-moore-damage-our-tax-code">taxed on unrealized investments</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KYJVkt">
|
|||
|
|
For most of the last century, Congress has been allowed to determine when unrealized gains are taxed, and when taxation of these gains will be delayed until after the asset is sold or the investor otherwise realizes those gains. In most cases, Congress has chosen to delay taxing appreciated assets until realization — again, this rule makes sense because it is often difficult to determine how much an asset is worth until it is sold — but the Constitution does not prevent Congress from taxing unrealized gains if it chooses to do so.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZHEcds">
|
|||
|
|
The plaintiffs in <em>Moore</em>, however, claim that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to tax profits before those profits are realized. This case is widely viewed as a <a href="https://www.vox.com/scotus/23845702/supreme-court-fifth-circuit-term-cfpb-guns-voting-chevron">stalking horse against Warren-style wealth taxes</a>, as it would be impossible to tax wealth (as opposed to merely taxing the income generated by wealth) if the Constitution were to prohibit taxation of unrealized gains on the very assets that Warren-style proposals target. But a sweeping decision in favor of these plaintiffs could also endanger numerous other, existing taxes — forcing the entire government to scramble as hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of anticipated tax revenue is suddenly declared unconstitutional.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="h9VFHV">
|
|||
|
|
So what, specifically, is <em>Moore</em> about?
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="tSYnBN">
|
|||
|
|
The specific tax challenged by the <em>Moore</em> plaintiffs is a provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the law signed by former President Donald Trump in 2017, which imposed a one-time tax on certain investors in foreign corporations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GCO67G">
|
|||
|
|
Before the Trump tax bill became law, the United States attempted to tax US corporations’ overseas income. Under the old regime, however, corporations could <a href="https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-tcja-repatriation-tax-and-how-does-it-work">defer taxation of their foreign profits indefinitely</a> by creating a foreign subsidiary. Income earned by these foreign subsidiaries would not be taxed until it was repatriated into the United States, giving companies a strong incentive to hoard money overseas and away from US tax collectors.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="h3z4wG">
|
|||
|
|
By 2015, US corporations were <a href="https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-tcja-repatriation-tax-and-how-does-it-work">keeping an estimated $2.6 trillion overseas</a> to prevent this money from being taxed in the United States.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UTht8V">
|
|||
|
|
The Trump tax bill largely gave up on taxing US companies’ foreign assets in the future — corporate money kept overseas is now generally immune from taxation, even if it is brought into the United States. But the Trump tax bill also imposed a one-time tax on US investors in foreign corporations in order to offset some of the lost revenue resulting from the new tax regime.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="k1f5s4">
|
|||
|
|
Under this one-time tax, certain investors in foreign corporations must pay a percentage of the money that the corporation has kept overseas, even though the investor has not sold their stock or received any of that money as a dividend. This one-time tax, which investors may pay in installments over eight years, is expected to raise $340 billion by 2027.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rmc5tN">
|
|||
|
|
The plaintiffs in <em>Moore</em> are US investors in a company that provides supplies to farmers in India. In 2017, these investors <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-800/285200/20231016195041390_22-800bsUnited%20States.pdf">paid $14,729 in additional taxes</a> due to the one-time tax provision in the Trump tax bill. They then sued to get this money back.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8AKc1I">
|
|||
|
|
The specific details of this very complicated change to the US tax code are not especially important — although, for reasons discussed below, they could matter a great deal if the <em>Moore</em> plaintiffs prevail. The most important detail to understand, if you want to get your head around the <em>Moore</em> case, is that the plaintiffs and their lawyers successfully identified a tax on unrealized gains. And that gives them a vehicle they can use to claim that taxes on such gains are unconstitutional.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="Hy2UG6">
|
|||
|
|
<em>Moore</em> is simultaneously a case about slavery and a case about robber barons
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qEz76g">
|
|||
|
|
In order to understand the legal arguments in the <em>Moore </em>case, one must first understand two dark periods in American history — the 1787 debates over how to form a durable Union between slave and free states, and the Supreme Court’s <em>Lochner e</em>ra, a period when the justices frequently <a href="https://www.vox.com/2022/6/25/23181976/case-against-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states">embraced far-fetched interpretations of the Constitution</a> that benefited entrenched wealth and capital.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qDLZiU">
|
|||
|
|
The <em>Moore</em> plaintiffs claim that taxes on unrealized income violate a provision of the Constitution that states that “direct taxes” must be “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei">apportioned among the several states</a>.” This meant that, if, say, the state of Maryland contained 6 percent of the US population, then any “direct” tax enacted by Congress must collect exactly 6 percent of its total receipts from people in Maryland.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VXQIVo">
|
|||
|
|
This direct tax clause also incorporated the Constitution’s infamous three-fifths compromise. So enslaved people were counted as three-fifths of a person whenever Congress had to calculate how much money it could raise from each individual state.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="zkJOEW">
|
|||
|
|
Of course, this clause raises one fairly obvious question: What on earth is a “direct” tax? The unsatisfying answer to this question is that no one knows, and the framers themselves had <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1123596?read-now=1&seq=11#page_scan_tab_contents">wildly divergent views</a> on what this vague phrase might mean. As legal scholar Bruce Ackerman wrote in a <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1123596?read-now=1&seq=11#page_scan_tab_contents">1999 law review article</a>, this provision was included in the Constitution largely to offer “symbolic satisfaction” to constitutional delegates concerned with the slavery question.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="96rrih">
|
|||
|
|
Among other things, the direct tax clause “served as a fig-leaf for anti-slavery Northerners opposed to the explicit grant of extra representation for Southern slaves,” because it also suggested that white residents of slave states would pay higher federal taxes than residents of free states. According to Ackerman, the framers largely avoided discussing what the word “direct” actually means because “more debate on the meaning of ‘direct taxation’ might destroy” any hope of a deal that could bring Northern and Southern states together in a single Union.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Kpz1D7">
|
|||
|
|
For much of American history, the direct tax clause lay dormant — and it certainly wasn’t understood to prevent taxation of unrealized income. Indeed, in <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11242064637331858030&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr"><em>Collector v. Hubbard</em></a> (1871), the Supreme Court held that “it is as competent for Congress to tax annual gains and profits before they are divided among the holders of the stock as afterwards.” That’s an explicit declaration that taxes on unrealized income are permitted.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9nuZDG">
|
|||
|
|
But then the Supreme Court reversed course in <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/157/429/"><em>Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan & Trust</em></a> (1895), holding that a tax on investment income is a “direct” tax that must be apportioned among the states. As a practical matter, <em>Pollock</em> made it impossible to tax investment income, because taxable investments are not evenly distributed among the residents of the many states.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="D2zE8q">
|
|||
|
|
The <em>Pollock</em> decision was widely criticized, poorly reasoned, and eventually sparked an entire constitutional amendment — the 16th Amendment, which was enacted in 1909 in order to overrule <em>Pollock</em>. That amendment provides that Congress may tax incomes “<a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-16/#:~:text=Constitution%20of%20the%20United%20States,-Sixteenth%20Amendment&text=The%20Congress%20shall%20have%20power,to%20any%20census%20or%20enumeration.">from whatever source derived</a>,” thus abolishing <em>Pollock</em>’s ban on taxing the proceeds from investments.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JVEpRS">
|
|||
|
|
Indeed, <em>Pollock</em> is best understood as part of a wide-ranging effort by conservative justices to impose strict limits on the government’s power to disturb the interests of capital, while simultaneously giving the courts unprecedented power to protect capital’s interests.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="U1SiV9">
|
|||
|
|
In the first six months of 1895, the Court handed down three cases, which destroyed Congress’s ability to tax the rich (<em>Pollock</em>), <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/156/1/">gutted Congress’s power to regulate business</a>, and <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/158/564">gave the Supreme Court’s blessing to “labor injunctions,”</a> court orders requiring unions to end strikes and similar labor actions. These three cases arguably mark the dawn of the <em>Lochner e</em>ra, which is named for a 1905 Supreme Court decision that imposed strict limits on both the federal government and the states’ power to enact laws seeking to <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/198/45/">improve workplace conditions for workers</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="heIRNj">
|
|||
|
|
The <em>Lochner </em>era <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/300/379/">ended in 1937</a>, after a <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23219138/supreme-court-roe-wade-substantive-due-process-samuel-alito">four-year fight between President Franklin Roosevelt</a> and far-right justices who relied on cases like <em>Lochner</em> to strike down New Deal programs. Many <em>Lochner</em>-era cases are now taught to law students as examples of how judges should never behave.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="rO8AQo">
|
|||
|
|
So what does all of this dark history have to do with the <em>Moore </em>case?
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vZxLbD">
|
|||
|
|
The plaintiffs in <em>Moore</em> are represented by Andrew Grossman, an <a href="https://www.bakerlaw.com/professionals/andrew-m-grossman/">adjunct scholar at the right-libertarian Cato Institute</a>, and David Rivkin, a Republican lawyer known for <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124018665408933455">defending torture during the George W. Bush administration</a>, and for filing one of the first lawsuits <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/the-manipulative-way-obamacare-opponents-made-their-lawsuit-look-legitimate-7b984baad711/">claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uOXtKN">
|
|||
|
|
Grossman and Rivkin’s brief is a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-800/278464/20230830102536217_22-800%20Brief%20for%20Petitioners.pdf">love letter to the <em>Lochner</em> era</a>. Their argument rests largely upon decisions that were handed down between 1895 and 1937, and the linchpin of their argument is <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/252/189/"><em>Eisner v. Macomber</em></a><em> </em>(1920), a <em>Lochner-</em>era case interpreting the 16th Amendment that has repeatedly been repudiated by more recent Supreme Court decisions.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Nr5bmH">
|
|||
|
|
Indeed, an early section of their brief opens with a quote from Justice Stephen Field’s concurring opinion in <em>Pollock</em>, an anti-tax jeremiad that claimed that, if Congress were allowed to enact an income tax, then it would inevitably lead to “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/157/429">a war of the poor against the rich</a>.” Field was arguably the <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/the-five-worst-supreme-court-justices-in-american-history-ranked-f725000b59e8/">most strident proponent of laissez-faire social Darwinism</a> in the Supreme Court’s history. So opening a brief with a Stephen Field quotation is a bit like beginning a political speech by citing <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul">Ron Paul</a>, or opening an economics paper with a quote from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises">Ludwig von Mises</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="iGxC7S">
|
|||
|
|
In any event, if the <em>Moore </em>case were being argued during the <em>Lochner</em> era, then Grossman and Rivkin would have a very strong argument that their client should prevail. <em>Macomber</em>, a 5-4 decision mostly joined by pro-<em>Lochner</em> justices, said that “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/252/189/">enrichment through increase in value of capital investment is not income in any proper meaning of the term</a>.” That conclusion closely tracks the reasoning of <em>Pollock</em>, which was supposed to have been overruled by the 16th Amendment. It also mirrors the <em>Moore</em> plaintiffs’ claim that unrealized gains may not be taxed.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="S5alCh">
|
|||
|
|
But, as legal scholars Ackerman, Joseph Fishkin, and William Forbath argue in an <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-800/285682/20231020135857418_Amicus%20Curiae%20Brief%20of%20Ackerman%20Fishkin%20Forbath.pdf">amicus brief</a>, this language in <em>Macomber</em> is best understood as “short-lived judicial resistance to the Sixteenth Amendment” which “exhumed the logic of <em>Pollock</em>.” And, regardless of why these <em>Lochner-</em>era justices handed down such a confused decision, <em>Macomber</em> has repeatedly been repudiated by the post-<em>Lochner</em> Supreme Court.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EWV7bF">
|
|||
|
|
Thus, in <em>Horst</em>, the Court said that “the rule that income is not taxable until realized” is “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/311/112/">founded on administrative convenience</a>,” instead of in the Constitution. In <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7052438898729227666&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47&as_vis=1"><em>Helvering v. Griffiths</em></a> (1943), the Court said that <em>Macomber</em>’s reasoning is “limited” to “the kind of dividend there dealt with” (<em>Macomber </em>held that an investor who benefits from a <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stocksplit.asp">stock split</a> — an event that does not change the value of the investment itself — may not be taxed because of this split). And in <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/348/426/"><em>Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass</em></a> (1955), the Court said that <em>Macomber’</em>s narrow definition of “income” was “not meant to provide a touchstone to all future gross income questions.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="cyMOMk">
|
|||
|
|
As one federal appeals court explained in 1954, “even as to income derived from capital <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8265135916057990131&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">the <em>Eisner </em>[<em>v. Macomber</em>] case has been limited to its specific facts</a>.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9yRJvw">
|
|||
|
|
So <em>Moore</em> should not be a difficult case. Its plaintiffs rest their suit upon a nebulous provision of the Constitution that is a relic of an age when the United States enslaved people. And they rely on discredited Supreme Court opinions that have been repudiated by the Court itself — or by a whole damn constitutional amendment!
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QdQpKE">
|
|||
|
|
Regardless of whether it is a good idea or a bad idea for Congress to tax unrealized income — or to tax wealth itself, for that matter — the Constitution primarily leaves it up to Congress to decide what America’s tax policy should be. The <em>Moore </em>plaintiffs’ approach will be familiar to anyone who has studied the <em>Lochner</em> era, the age when the Court routinely struck down laws, not because they violated the Constitution, but because five justices deemed them “<a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17779134010247423421&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr">unwise, improvident, or out of harmony with a particular school of thought</a>.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="ffAmp1">
|
|||
|
|
A victory for the plaintiffs in the <em>Moore</em> case invites chaos
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="RUF2JA">
|
|||
|
|
If the <em>Moore</em> plaintiffs prevail, the immediate impact is likely to be a huge hole in the federal budget. Again, they challenge a tax that is supposed to raise $340 billion in revenue.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="T8eDps">
|
|||
|
|
Such a decision would also produce a wave of new litigation. As the Justice Department warns in its brief, a decision for the <em>Moore </em>plaintiffs would “require the government to adjudicate a flood of … refund claims” brought by other taxpayers who paid the Trump tax bill’s one-time tax. And these claims would “raise complex statute-of-limitations” and similar questions because the tax in question was first paid in 2017.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="c9R00c">
|
|||
|
|
And then there’s the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/18/20858157/fifth-circuit-obamacare-texas-united-states">problem of severability</a>. When a court strikes down one provision of a broader statute, it must ask whether the remainder of the law can be “severed” from the unconstitutional provision — and thus remain in effect — or whether Congress would have preferred for other provisions of the broader law to fall along with the unconstitutional provision.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="aF3fWF">
|
|||
|
|
The Supreme Court typically applies a strong presumption in favor of severability. As the Supreme Court held in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf"><em>Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association</em></a> (2018), “in order for other … provisions to fall, it must be ‘evident that [Congress] would not have enacted those provisions which are within its power, independently of [those] which [are] not.’”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ykWgpN">
|
|||
|
|
But there’s a very strong argument that Congress would not have enacted at least some parts of the Trump tax bill if it knew that the one-time tax at issue in <em>Moore</em> would fall. After all, the whole purpose of this one-time tax was to offset some of the costs of no longer taxing US corporations’ overseas income.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="U7zavs">
|
|||
|
|
And, if the old regime governing taxation of foreign corporate income must be reinstated, that will trigger countless other lawsuits. The government will likely attempt to collect taxes that were outlawed by the Trump tax bill, but that would suddenly become mandated by law once again. And numerous businesses will suddenly be hit with unexpected tax bills that could severely harm their operations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="cDcFSt">
|
|||
|
|
Indeed, the severability inquiry may be even more complicated. When Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, it used a process that <a href="https://www.vox.com/22242476/senate-filibuster-budget-reconciliation-process">imposed a $1 trillion cap</a> on how much the bill could add to the budget deficit over the next decade. So there’s a decent argument that, if Congress had known that the bill would increase the deficit by an additional $340 billion, it would have chosen not to enact any tax law at all.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QHTgrH">
|
|||
|
|
But if the entire Trump tax bill is struck down, that would mean that millions of taxpayers would potentially need to litigate whether they paid the right amount of income taxes between 2018 and 2023. Some of these taxpayers would be hit with surprising new taxes that could seriously harm their finances. Others would receive unexpected windfalls that they did nothing to earn. And the federal government would potentially be thrust into an extended period of uncertainty over how much money it could keep, how much it could collect in back taxes, and how much money it had to pay for its obligations.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qdJYVn">
|
|||
|
|
There are very good reasons, in other words, why the post-<em>Lochner</em> Supreme Court has historically been cautious about mucking around with tax policy. Federal budgeting is a complicated and politically fraught process that literally has implications for every single American.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="viJ8VP">
|
|||
|
|
This is the very sort of process that should be conducted by elected officials, and not by black-robed lawyers with a vendetta against Elizabeth Warren.
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>Is Biden doomed in 2024? 3 theories about the president’s bad polls.</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="US President Joe Biden standing in front of a blue curtain and orange background." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Hu6cljll1IPHdJahUWG19l6q4Qs=/107x0:1814x1280/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72905173/GettyImages_1787942881.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Is he blowing it? Will he bounce back? Or something in between?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SC77CX">
|
|||
|
|
Just how dire are <a href="https://www.vox.com/joe-biden">President Joe Biden</a>’s poll numbers looking for Democrats?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="F9SSyx">
|
|||
|
|
The president is currently registering a 38.9 percent approval rating <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">on average</a>. He’s <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html">trailing</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a> in national polls by 2.3 percentage points. And he’s also <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/">trailing Trump</a> in five of the six key Electoral College swing states.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qWW4bf">
|
|||
|
|
If we take all this at face value, the natural conclusion is that Biden’s reelection bid is in deep trouble — indeed, that he is currently on track to lose to likely Republican nominee Donald Trump.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8Nb5kg">
|
|||
|
|
So now, Democrats and political commentators are embroiled in a <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/13/obama-2012-campaign-manager-advice-00126736">fierce</a><a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/10/biden-candidate-primary-challenge-democrats-election-nominee-2024-whitmer-polls.html"> debate</a> about whether to take them at face value — and about just how much panic about Biden is currently called for.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="WSoYhl">
|
|||
|
|
Like nearly every new president, Biden started out with far more Americans approving than disapproving of his job performance, due to what’s known as the “honeymoon” period. But in the latter half of his first year in office, amid the chaotic withdrawal from <a href="https://www.vox.com/afghanistan">Afghanistan</a>, rising inflation, and a resurgent Covid pandemic, his approval plunged. In the two years since, it hasn’t recovered.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="xdxM0b">
|
|||
|
|
Indeed, Biden’s numbers have been remarkably stable — since the end of 2021, <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">FiveThirtyEight’s polling average</a> has shown between 38 percent and 43 percent of poll respondents approving. But by the same metric, the recent presidents who won reelection all had approval in the high 40s or above in their election years.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="TiOxyp">
|
|||
|
|
Polls pitting Biden against Trump also look grim for the president right now. RealClearPolitics’ polling averages currently show Biden trailing Trump<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html"> by 2 points nationally</a>, by about 2 points in<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/mi/michigan_trump_vs_biden-7953.html"> Michigan</a> and<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/pa/pennsylvania_trump_vs_biden-7892.html"> Pennsylvania</a>, and by 4 to 5 points in <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/nv/nevada_trump_vs_biden-7826.html">Nevada</a>, <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/ga/georgia_trump_vs_biden-7747.html">Georgia</a>, and <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/az/arizona_trump_vs_biden-7907.html">Arizona</a>. (Biden is only leading one swing state, <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/wi/wisconsin_trump_vs_biden-7398.html">Wisconsin</a>, by about 1 point.)
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gJDAjU">
|
|||
|
|
In conversations with pollsters and political scientists, I’ve heard three separate theories of how to interpret these numbers.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9qUa2k">
|
|||
|
|
One theory: Biden is blowing it — the polls are a clear warning sign that the president has unique flaws as a candidate, and another Democrat would likely be doing better.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="OyJF49">
|
|||
|
|
A second theory: Biden’s facing a tough environment — voters have decided they don’t like the <a href="https://www.vox.com/economy">economy</a> or the state of the world, and, fairly or not, he’s taking the brunt of it.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9wC6Ir">
|
|||
|
|
And a third theory: Biden’s bad numbers will get better — voters aren’t even paying much attention yet, and as the campaign gears up, the president will bounce back.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VczcQW">
|
|||
|
|
Which theory you believe has major implications for Democrats’ strategy next year — and for how comfortable the party should be with Biden running again at all. The stakes of the <a href="https://www.vox.com/2024-elections">2024 election</a> are immense, so it’s worth digging into the arguments about what, exactly, is at the root of Biden’s bad numbers.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="VPeWVV">
|
|||
|
|
Theory 1: Biden is blowing it — and another Democrat wouldn’t be
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9i3dW2">
|
|||
|
|
One notable feature of Biden-era elections, particularly starting in 2022, is that Democrats have done reasonably well even as the president’s numbers have been poor. The party won most key swing states’ governor and Senate races in the midterms, and it did well in this November’s elections, too.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZQ3fXe">
|
|||
|
|
Yet for the past two years, those bad numbers for Biden have been basically constant. Though you can try to blame various events in his first year in office for Biden’s initial popularity drop, little that’s happened since appears to have budged his approval in either direction. It’s as if perceptions of Biden became fixed in amber.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="bm56tA">
|
|||
|
|
That has led some to conclude that the reason for Biden’s bad numbers is, well, Biden.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="zjN5PE">
|
|||
|
|
As you may have noticed, Biden is rather advanced in years. He’s also never been the most effective communicator, or the most inspiring of politicians. He may have succeeded despite those limitations when so many Americans had the burning desire to get Trump out of office. But now, in the glare of the presidential spotlight, maybe all this has caught up with him.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Ughj9t">
|
|||
|
|
As <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/30/upshot/biden-voters-midterms-2024.html">Nate Cohn has written</a>, polls currently show Biden performing weakly among less politically engaged and less ideological Americans who don’t frequently vote — many of whom are young. Perhaps these voters are less issue-driven and would be more likely to make up their minds based on Biden’s personal traits, such as age. Perhaps they think Biden simply isn’t inspiring enough to bother voting for.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KmAtZF">
|
|||
|
|
Could another Democrat do better? Some polls do indeed find that a “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/06/an-ominous-poll-democrats-what-it-says-about-biden-alternative/">generic Democrat</a>” would handily outpoll Trump. The problem there, though, is that generic Democrat can’t run. When actual Democratic alternatives are tested, they don’t tend to do <a href="https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1724934414520516666">dramatically better than Biden</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vOkJ7p">
|
|||
|
|
Some of those alternatives don’t yet have national name recognition, so perhaps voters are hesitant to support them. But those other Democrats also haven’t yet been subject to months of attacks from Trump and the right-wing media, who will inevitably find negative narratives to push that will make any politician appear less likable. Think of how <a href="https://www.vox.com/hillary-clinton">Hillary Clinton</a> <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/243242/snapshot-hillary-clinton-favorable-rating-low.aspx">was quite popular</a> when she was secretary of state — but, when she ran for president afterward and became Republicans’ number one target, she became <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/08/31/poll-clinton-trump-most-unfavorable-candidates-ever/89644296/">one of the least popular</a> presidential nominees ever.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QwrR2f">
|
|||
|
|
The age issue, mentioned constantly by voters in polls and focus groups, is particularly glaring. Biden is the oldest president ever. Unfortunately for him, this is a problem he can’t solve. Maybe swing voters just don’t believe such an old candidate could be up to the task. “On the specific question of Biden’s age, voters are sending about as clear a message as they can,” Nate Silver <a href="https://www.natesilver.net/p/160-million-americans-are-eligible">recently wrote</a>. Would a younger Democrat be better positioned to win?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gXT1NI">
|
|||
|
|
Yet here’s my doubt. In 2021, Biden was also very old — but, for most of that year, he was popular. He’s gotten older since then (as have we all). But it clearly wasn’t the case that voters two and a half years ago were intractably opposed to the concept of an old president. And I’m skeptical that his age has become that much more glaring to the general public in the two years since.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="df1OiD">
|
|||
|
|
More likely, in my view, is that voters have come to doubt Biden’s <em>competence</em>, and many are attributing that perceived lack of competence to his age. But would simply swapping in another Democrat solve that problem — or is it the results of Democrats’ governance that these poll respondents dislike? If it’s the latter, that would be harder for a new Democratic nominee to shake off. Which brings us to the next theory.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="xwFtq8">
|
|||
|
|
Theory 2: Biden is being hurt by a tough environment for incumbents — and other Democrats would be, too
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="pZHFZM">
|
|||
|
|
Biden’s low approval rating seems less like an aberration when we look overseas. Notably, many leaders of developed democracies are<a href="https://pro.morningconsult.com/trackers/global-leader-approval"> wildly unpopular right now</a>, spanning the ideological spectrum — including Justin Trudeau of Canada, Rishi Sunak of the UK, Emmanuel Macron of France, and Olaf Scholz of Germany. (Indeed, Biden is significantly more popular than any of those four, even though they’re all decades younger than him.) This suggests it’s simply a tough time for an incumbent to be in power.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="bxxdZd">
|
|||
|
|
So what if Biden’s unpopularity is driven instead by bigger, broader factors than his own personal traits? What if many voters, in the US and these other countries, are simply pissed off about the state of the world — about how the post-pandemic return to not-quite-normal has gone?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dLBkgf">
|
|||
|
|
The state of the economy looms large in this theory. In survey after survey, large majorities of respondents <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/06/us/elections/times-siena-battlegrounds-registered-voters.html">say</a> both that the economy is terrible and that Biden is doing a bad job managing it. For months, American economists and policy wonks have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/05/opinion/will-voters-send-in-the-clowns.html">expressed puzzlement</a> about these results, pointing to <a href="https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gross-domestic-product">strong GDP growth</a>,<a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm"> low unemployment</a>, the lack of a recession in the US, and <a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-prices-costs-economy-federal-reserve-rates-67149484e11abd8d0d18e0fdd69ec256">cooling inflation rates</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="HRVHh7">
|
|||
|
|
But after a two-year period featuring the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/us-inflation-june-2022-consumer-price-index-11657664129">highest inflation in decades</a>, prices are still <a href="https://www.semafor.com/article/11/07/2023/reid-hoffman-funded-group-bidens-jobs-message-isnt-working">a whole lot</a> higher than they were four years ago — and voters seem not to have forgiven that just yet. (This has been a global phenomenon, worse in Europe than in the US, that could be dragging down many incumbents.) And governments’ chief inflation-fighting tool, <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/11/3-reasons-bidens-strong-economy-is-unpopular.html">high interest rates</a>, may also be painful to many people, making it harder to get credit. Stock markets have stagnated or fallen since early 2022 (after many years of continuous upward expansion in the US). Some Americans could also see their incomes taking a hit due to the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/01/politics/food-stamps-who-is-affected/index.html">expiration</a> of generous pandemic aid.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="L60DhT">
|
|||
|
|
Another problem that could be dragging down incumbents across the Western world is the perception of a world on fire. Biden’s <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">own approval</a> dropped significantly after the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, in the clearest example of a specific real-world event affecting his polls. (Though Americans had regularly said that they wanted to end the Afghanistan war, the actual withdrawal was portrayed in <a href="https://www.vox.com/media">the media</a>, and taken by Americans, as a debacle and humiliation, calling into question Biden’s competence.)
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CIVu6T">
|
|||
|
|
Then came <a href="https://www.vox.com/russia">Russia</a>’s invasion of Ukraine, which became the biggest land war in Europe since World War II, led to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/ukraine-russia-war-casualties.html">more than 100,000 deaths</a>, and threw the global economy into turmoil (including by sending food and fuel prices surging). Biden’s approval did not significantly drop since the war began — it was already low — but it didn’t rebound, either.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="z10yWP">
|
|||
|
|
The <a href="https://www.vox.com/2023/10/7/23907683/israel-hamas-war-news-updates-october-2023">Israel-Hamas war</a> is the newest global crisis to capture the world’s attention. Like with Ukraine, it does not seem to have driven Biden’s approval lower — per <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">FiveThirtyEight’s average</a>, Biden’s approval was at 39.1 percent the day before <a href="https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/10/10/23911661/hamas-israel-war-gaza-palestine-explainer">Hamas</a>’s October 7 attack and it’s at 38.9 percent now. But it’s an awkward issue that splits Democrats’ political coalition, with younger and progressive voters <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/11/16/palestinians-israelis-us-voters-poll">more likely to be sympathetic</a> to the <a href="https://www.vox.com/palestine">Palestinians</a>, and could play out electorally and in swing states in an unpredictable fashion. It may reinforce the sense among some voters that the world is falling to pieces, and that Biden hasn’t managed to put those pieces back together.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ryQWqZ">
|
|||
|
|
The theory that Biden’s bad numbers are driven by real-world problems also implies that his numbers would improve if those problems were alleviated. Americans’ economic sentiment<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-30/us-consumer-sentiment-improves-further-michigan-report-shows?embedded-checkout=true"> has been improving</a> through much of this year, and the latest <a href="https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/traders-see-no-more-fed-rate-increases-cuts-start-may-2023-11-14/">headlines suggest</a> inflation is cooling and the Fed could start cutting interest rates next year. And today’s foreign crises might be out of the headlines a year from now.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="YxqMuG">
|
|||
|
|
Yet this doesn’t perfectly fit what we know either. Notably, though Americans’ economic perceptions have improved somewhat this year, Biden’s approval has not improved with them. And if Americans are blaming incumbent Democrats for problems in the world, why do Democrats and incumbents keep doing reasonably well in down-ballot elections?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="24VRxb">
|
|||
|
|
Theory 3: Biden’s polls look bad now — but they’ll get better next year
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="eKIt8w">
|
|||
|
|
But there’s another theory about what’s going on, which basically posits that maybe polls about Biden right now just aren’t so useful at predicting how things will go in 2024.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JMdkLB">
|
|||
|
|
After all, it’s true that, historically, presidential general election polls this far out haven’t matched the final outcome very well. “History’s lesson is clear: Don’t pay attention to general election polls a year before the election,” <a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-year-out-ignore-general-election-polls/">Harry Enten wrote at FiveThirtyEight in 2015</a>. Part of that may be because voters simply didn’t know that much about prior presidential nominees this early — something that may not hold true this year, with the all-too-familiar Trump expected to be the GOP nominee.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="mkQDAK">
|
|||
|
|
But another reason is that the campaign season, which hasn’t really started yet, matters for framing the choice to voters. Pretty much the entire political world will spend a lot of time next year making arguments for how people should vote in 2024. The media will also shift to covering the election as a choice between two candidates — the Democratic and Republican nominees.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rXSYKn">
|
|||
|
|
Per this theory, Biden is starting off looking weak in polls because of two groups of voters — disgruntled Democrats and tuned-out independents — who may well come back to Biden as the campaign continues. These voters aren’t yet fully yet grappling with the likely choice between Biden and Trump as the two major nominees. But over the next year, that choice will become clear, and as they’re reminded about how terrible Trump is, many of those voters will likely end up backing Biden.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="hG1xVK">
|
|||
|
|
Because Trump has been playing a relatively minor (for him) role in the news cycle of late, voters may not yet be focused on how plausible it is that he’d return to the White House. Voters who might have rosy memories about how “things were better” in the pre-pandemic Trump years may think twice once they’re exposed to Trump’s bizarre and disturbing behavior again. And he is set to have at least one, and potentially more than one, criminal trial next year that could well make him a convicted felon. Once the nation’s attention is again focused on Trump’s many controversies and weaknesses, he may not seem like such an appealing candidate.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="mhww9P">
|
|||
|
|
What’s the evidence that this might actually happen? Some <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/13/obama-2012-campaign-manager-advice-00126736">point to the 2012 election</a>, where President Barack Obama faced similar mediocre polls and pundit second-guessing for parts of 2011, but recovered the following year. There’s also the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23357154/2022-midterm-elections-guide">2022 midterms</a> — where voters <a href="https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/democrats-winning-over-meh-voter">who were unhappy with Biden</a> often <a href="https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/old-metrics-no-longer-silver-bullet-predicting-presidency">ended up voting</a> for Democratic candidates, particularly in high-profile races with a MAGA Republican nominee.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ch4XnP">
|
|||
|
|
Still, even if we expect a Biden rebound, we can’t know for sure whether Biden’s numbers will improve by <em>enough</em> to win. Notably, his polls now are worse than Obama’s were in 2011, and they’ve been worse for longer. They’re also<a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html"> far worse than</a> Biden’s own polls against Trump were at this point in 2019.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Gp4W7q">
|
|||
|
|
A presidential recovery during the election year is hardly a guarantee. Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush, for instance, <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/">saw their approval drop</a> precipitously as the election loomed. There’s also the worrying possibility for Democrats that this ebbing support for Biden isn’t just a blip, but rather a realignment. Sometimes “your” voters won’t “come home” — sometimes they stop voting, or decide the other party is the home they now prefer.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZHtmvg">
|
|||
|
|
So Biden may not be able to take for granted that less engaged young and nonwhite voters will come back to him, rather than staying home or even switching to Trump — he will have to work to win their support.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="6fU5Vj">
|
|||
|
|
Which theory is the strongest?
|
|||
|
|
</h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Fo9hdw">
|
|||
|
|
All of these theories have decent arguments in their favor, and we can’t know for sure which is right.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="pxbx1O">
|
|||
|
|
Here’s my view: I do expect Biden’s numbers to recover somewhat from where they are now. But I think how much they recover will depend on events — specifically, on what happens in the economy and in the world over the next year. So I’d subscribe to a kind of combination of theory 2 and theory 3.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9D3rgM">
|
|||
|
|
I’m skeptical of the idea that Democrats’ problems would be solved by swapping out Biden. I’m not convinced that Biden’s age or lack of charisma are the true root of his polling difficulties. I suspect a more fresh-faced Democrat would face similar challenges as the nominee, once they’ve gotten the demonization that now regularly comes along with being the head of one of the two national parties.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KBjkd9">
|
|||
|
|
There’s certainly a risk that a health- or age-related crisis could end up derailing Biden’s campaign <em>later. </em>But I think his current polling woes can be explained by a combination of real-world conditions like the economy, plus the fact that the campaign hasn’t really started yet.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="wsAoC8">
|
|||
|
|
If Biden’s governing record is the problem, I don’t think it would be so easy for another Democrat to turn the page. Of course it is possible that a different nominee would do a point or two better than Biden, and that that could make a difference in a close race — but that’s impossible to know with precision. A candidate untested on the national stage could also do worse.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="eWwWfO">
|
|||
|
|
I do expect Biden’s numbers to rebound as the campaign gears up in 2024, and for the race to get close. But again, I don’t know whether Biden will rebound enough. Anyone predicting confidently who would win the 2016 or <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020-presidential-election">2020 elections</a> was, in retrospect, wrong, since both were decided by tiny margins in just a few key states that could have easily shifted.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="QSJEXQ">
|
|||
|
|
And here’s my other caveat: If the economy takes a turn for the worse again, or the global situation ends up getting more dire — well, I’d expect Biden to end up like Jimmy Carter, and Americans to learn what havoc a second Trump term will bring.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="jN1JT1">
|
|||
|
|
But I do think it’s too early to say that Biden is doomed. A year is a long time; we had no idea at this point in 2019, for instance, that a global pandemic was about to emerge. All sorts of surprises could lie ahead.
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><strong>The future of the planet hinges on understanding these 5 key phrases</strong> -
|
|||
|
|
<figure>
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="An illustration of a man holding a map in the middle of overwhelming greenery. Half-hidden in the greenery are the words “Loss &amp; Damage.”" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/aFPGQLLjmOXHVhZVy82oORl0Jzg=/240x0:1680x1080/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72905096/KarlottaFreier_glossary.0.jpg"/>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Karlotta Freier for Vox
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The controversial concepts shaping climate action, defined.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3F1T0J">
|
|||
|
|
Often, the highest-stake decisions impacting the planet come down to the simplest phrases. The importance of words plays out every year as world leaders and diplomats gather at the United Nations climate change conference, also known as the Conference of the Parties (COP), where they adopt a new climate agreement. Consider one especially foundational one: whether countries agree that they voluntarily “<a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/11/02/paris-climate-deal-legally-binding-not/">should</a>” slash climate pollution or phase out <a href="https://www.vox.com/fossil-fuels">fossil fuel</a> subsidies or contribute to international funds, or whether they “must.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="N86dQL">
|
|||
|
|
Climate action includes vast, sometimes elusive concepts, which is what makes precise language so important.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0gNhcA">
|
|||
|
|
To really boil it down, there are two broad courses of action we need to take at once: reducing emissions to limit global warming and reducing the harm from the warming we’ve already caused. The longer we wait to slash emissions from the fossil fuel industry, which has disproportionately caused the crisis, the more we’ll pay to adapt to the harms of climate change.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="O6ERmN">
|
|||
|
|
To help clarify the most important debates that underscore our current moment, there are five concepts to keep in mind. Together they help make sense of what needs to be done about supercharged heat waves, hurricanes, and other troubling thresholds on the horizon. Ongoing efforts in the climate movement hinge on these concepts, but they will also take center stage in Dubai at <a href="https://www.cop28.com/">COP28</a>, the 28th United Nations climate conference, which begins this week.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="g0J7lj">
|
|||
|
|
<ol type="1">
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">Net zero
|
|||
|
|
</li></ol></h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fnxtN5">
|
|||
|
|
As long as we continue to put more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than we remove, the planet will continue to overheat. The sooner we reach a balance of these, the less drastic warming the world will have to contend with.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="P58PBv">
|
|||
|
|
Because of one little word — “net” — the phrase “net zero” inherently allows <a href="https://www.vox.com/22737140/un-cop26-climate-change-net-zero-emissions-carbon-offsets">wiggle room</a> for activities that are hardest to clean up, like producing steel and meat, which emit harmful greenhouse gasses. Since phasing those out completely isn’t currently feasible, countries must find another way to reach an equilibrium. For that we need more ways to absorb carbon. Nature already soaks up about <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/2019/08/08/land-is-a-critical-resource_srccl/">one-third</a> of carbon pollution, so one way to curb the impacts of climate change is to plant more trees, restore wetlands, and grow algae. But there are also mechanical methods of taking carbon dioxide out of the air, using machines (more on that later).
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="a1Rze6">
|
|||
|
|
During the 21st international climate conference in Paris in 2015, businesses and governments embraced <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-coalition">net zero pledges</a> after nearly 200 countries signed an agreement — now known as the Paris Agreement — to balance emissions in the “second half of this century,” thereby creating the first broad framework for tackling ever-rising emissions. The year 2050 signifies the earliest possible date that politicians think we can manage to balance emissions and avoid the worst-case scenarios for global warming.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<figure class="e-image">
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="Vendors line a flooded street in Dhaka, Bangladesh. " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/fozVwXuZYpQKQe1Ck1MvOW0QDe4=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25101877/GettyImages_1789084373__1_.jpg"/> <cite>NurPhoto via Getty Images</cite>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Climate finance through multilateral funds like the Green Climate Fund are meant to help vulnerable nations adapt to worsening climate impacts. Low-lying Bangladesh will be one of the hardest-hit countries.
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gJZJvB">
|
|||
|
|
Since the Paris Agreement, more than <a href="https://www.iea.org/news/seven-key-principles-for-implementing-net-zero#:~:text=Over%20120%20countries%20have%20so,goals%20of%20the%20Paris%20Agreement.">120 countries</a>, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01245-w">800 cities</a>, and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-climate-carbon-business-trfn/net-zero-emissions-targets-adopted-by-one-fifth-of-worlds-largest-companies-idUSKBN2BF2ZX/">one in five</a> Fortune Global 2000 companies have adopted their own net zero targets in the same timeframe. But how that translates into policy or planning really varies. An article penned by more than a dozen climate scientists in the journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01245-w"><em>Nature Climate Change</em></a> in 2021 pointed out that most of these plans lack details, are overly optimistic, and face inadequate accountability: “Long-term ambition is often not backed up by sufficient near-term action.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6FJmn1">
|
|||
|
|
You can think of net zero as a balancing equation, with endless ways to get there. Many countries and companies are putting a lot of faith in the carbon removal side of the equation, which affords them with a budget — albeit an increasingly scrutinized one — to pollute.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="sRHvIi">
|
|||
|
|
“We need the whole planet to get to zero and ultimately to get to negative, where you’re using forests, wetlands, and other natural systems absorbing carbon that we put up in the atmosphere, not as an offset or a way of allowing continued emissions from industry or power plants,” said <a href="https://www.e3g.org/people/alden-meyer/">Alden Meyer</a>, a veteran of international climate conferences, who works at the climate think tank E3G.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="R0TyPy">
|
|||
|
|
Another wrinkle is that too many of these pledges are <a href="https://www.vox.com/climate/23864312/climate-change-stocktake-cop28-dubai">moving too slowly</a> to hit net zero by 2050. If the richest countries and companies in the world are waiting until the last possible year to reach net zero, that leaves poorer nations and more difficult-to-decarbonize industries in a bind.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="pT2U8X">
|
|||
|
|
Every part of the <a href="https://www.vox.com/economy">economy</a>, and every part of the world, has to move as fast as possible to slash emissions to nearly zero, and <em>then </em>rely on other methods for removing the remainder of the emissions from the atmosphere. The risk otherwise is running a “shell game,” said Meyer, when the reality is “everyone has to get out of carbon, full stop.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="VFT3ps">
|
|||
|
|
<ol start="2" type="1">
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">An “unabated” fossil fuels phasedown
|
|||
|
|
</li></ol></h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="tOwVYh">
|
|||
|
|
This one is complex and there’s quite a lot to tease out here, so bear with us. Once you wrap your head around this concept, the rest will feel easy.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="dsut1h">
|
|||
|
|
First, some background: Fossil fuels consumption — the oil, gas, coal, and petrochemicals we use to power our buildings, run our cars, and create plastics — is responsible for over <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change#:~:text=Fossil%20fuels%20%E2%80%93%20coal%2C%20oil%20and,they%20trap%20the%20sun's%20heat.">75 percent</a> of global warming. Addressing climate change means we must transition away from running the economy on fossil fuels. And with every passing year, there’s been more pressure coming from vulnerable nations, activists, and climate scientists to name the problem directly — fossil fuel combustion — and call for an explicit end to more extraction.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GEZ3g6">
|
|||
|
|
Fossil fuel industries, and the economies and politicians dependent on them, sidestep this basic reality. And more often than not, powerful nations with vested interests in fossil fuels (the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and China, all among them) push back on the mere mention of fossil fuels in international agreements.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UlpaYY">
|
|||
|
|
Two years ago, this began to change. Negotiators battled over inserting an acknowledgment about the need to phase out coal use when the world gathered for COP26 in Glasgow in 2021. Talks almost broke down over differences in wording, or whether it would be included at all. Ultimately, the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cop27_auv_2_cover%20decision.pdf">final text </a>included the “phasedown of unabated coal power.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7NmJeP">
|
|||
|
|
There are two things to tease apart here. “Phasedown” is careful phrasing — it implies we will reduce coal use, but not necessarily abandon it altogether. The other qualifier “unabated” literally means allowing something to continue “without any reduction in intensity or strength.” That sends a strong signal that “by 2050 we’ll still have fossil fuels in the pipeline — the question is how much,” European Climate Foundation CEO<em> </em>Laurence Tubiana, who helped negotiate the Paris agreement, said <a href="https://www.vox.com/climate/23864312/climate-change-stocktake-cop28-dubai">this fall</a>.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="LMG2Oe">
|
|||
|
|
Clearly, there’s some room for interpretation here.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="TMO504">
|
|||
|
|
To count as abated, a fossil fuel-reliant plant would need to use technology that captures carbon emissions before they escape into the atmosphere. This is called carbon capture and storage (CCS).
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<figure class="e-image">
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="Environmental activists from Just Stop Oil march from Trafalgar Square in central London as they continue their latest round of protest actions against fossil fuels in London, United Kingdom on November 20, 2023. They hold orange banners that read “JUST STOP OIL” next to an image of a skull." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/q6_2PQJ_BQtJNEwbNP-lCP43j0U=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25101754/GettyImages_1793474021.jpg"/> <cite>Wiktor Szymanowicz/Future Publishing via Getty Image</cite>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Climate activists, like Just Stop Oil in the United Kingdom, have increasingly demanded that governments fully phase out all fossil fuel subsidies and infrastructure, but at global climate conferences, leaders have settled on vaguer language.
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Tsxw2l">
|
|||
|
|
There’s no universal agreement among policymakers and scientists on how efficient CCS would need to be at the grand scale. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the largest climate scientific body, just addressed this in a footnote of a report, saying abatement <em>could </em>involve capturing more than 90 percent of carbon dioxide at power plants.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1xX79q">
|
|||
|
|
The acceptance of “abated emissions” ends up being a better deal for the oil and gas industry than for the planet. Major oil companies, which will have a heavy presence at this year’s UN climate conference, like to tout that the technology is feasible and already in wide use today. (Spoiler: It’s not.)
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0rLYRA">
|
|||
|
|
“The fear is if the language is phrased around phasing out unabated fossil fuels, that gives an open license to just put [carbon capture and storage] on as many facilities as you can and then just perpetuate the harm that fossil fuels cause — not just combustion, but environmental and social impacts,” said <a href="https://www.wri.org/profile/katie-lebling">Katie Lebling</a>, a research association at the World Resources Institute.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="TIuO02">
|
|||
|
|
<ol start="3" type="1">
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">Carbon removal
|
|||
|
|
</li></ol></h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VY6Umu">
|
|||
|
|
Let’s return to the idea of balancing our climate equation. To counteract the carbon emissions from our polluting lifestyles and societies, we have a few options to remove them through direct air capture.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="tsgORP">
|
|||
|
|
It’s easy to confuse CCS with direct air capture, but think of it in terms of when the intervention happens. Carbon capture and storage helps industries <em>avoid </em>pumping as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as they would otherwise, while <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/4/20829431/climate-change-carbon-capture-utilization-sequestration-ccu-ccs">direct air capture </a><em>removes</em> the greenhouse gas from the air. It’s a subtle but pretty important difference, because CCS could be used to prolong the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/10/25/enhanced-oil-recovery-carbon-capture/">life of fossil fuel plants</a> that might otherwise transition to cleaner technology, while direct air capture could reduce pollution that is absolutely unavoidable in the first place.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<figure class="e-image">
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="Collector containers at a direct air capture and storage facility, which look like large metal boxes peppered with fans and pipes. " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/GqUigHww0QwEc9LPN18UyxiBoKY=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25101822/GettyImages_1235138673.jpg"/> <cite>Bloomberg via Getty Images</cite>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Removing carbon dioxide from the air is one of the strategies for achieving net zero. A mechanical way of doing this is called direct air capture. The startup Climeworks has operations in Iceland, but to make a true dent these machines would need to work overtime around the world.
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1aEbb9">
|
|||
|
|
Direct air capture can sound like a get-out-of-jail-free card for climate change, and that’s why climate experts warn <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90943444/climate-doomerism-is-dangerous-climate-optimism-is-even-worse">not to be overly optimistic</a> about a technology that still has a lot of hurdles ahead of it. For starters, billions of machines would have to be up and running over the course of decades, to really make a dent in the climate. And, once captured, we will have to put the carbon somewhere. Current methods of injecting it into bedrock require a lot of <a href="https://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/2023/10/18/permitting-co2-pipelines-overcoming-state-and-federal-barriers-to-co2-pipeline-networks/">permitting and infrastructure </a>before direct air capture becomes a reality.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CTQMuT">
|
|||
|
|
All this is really expensive to scale up, which is why governments play a key role in guiding investments in carbon removal. Activists <a href="https://grist.org/protest/inside-climate-activists-uneasy-relationship-with-net-zero/">worry</a> if companies and countries put too much stock in expensive, finicky carbon removal, they will be less concerned with moving off of fossil fuels in the first place.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="VJxvNR">
|
|||
|
|
<ol start="4" type="1">
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">Climate finance
|
|||
|
|
</li></ol></h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Cvzc8o">
|
|||
|
|
Climate finance covers the bill for efforts to mitigate or adapt to climate change and to address the pain already occurring as a result of the crisis. There are multitudes here — “like layers of the onion,” says Meyer. He puts the cost of that onion at <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/raising-ambition/climate-finance">trillions</a> of dollars, which includes paying for the transition from fossil fuels to <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy">clean energy</a> and changing land use and agricultural practices, as well as investing in resilient infrastructure and <a href="https://www.vox.com/health-care">health care</a> or providing more support for vulnerable countries in the Global South that experience the brunt of climate change’s worst impacts.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Alkbcg">
|
|||
|
|
This type of spending is increasing, but governments and the private sector are failing to keep up with what’s needed to align with how fast the climate is changing. “For every $1 banks are spending on fossil fuels, they are spending <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2023/overview-and-key-findings">$1.7 </a>on renewable and emerging technologies,” Ceres’s managing director for sustainable capital markets <a href="https://www.ceres.org/about-us/staff/rothstein?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAmNeqBhD4ARIsADsYfTctjowaJuaPyG_0HSF-g0A6vakmZ-vCNHh_7krEU8MdZ9Y9PuSXD_EaAonoEALw_wcB">Steven Rothstein</a> said. It’s a big deal for renewable investment to finally outpace fossil fuels, but at this point, banks should not be funding any new fossil fuel infrastructure. The world already has <a href="https://unfccc.int/news/most-fossil-fuels-must-stay-in-the-ground-new-study#:~:text=A%20study%20published%20this%20week,Celsius%20global%20average%20temperature%20rise.">too much coal, oil, and gas</a> in reserve that would burn the planet well past the 2 degrees Celsius increase in global average temperatures.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7TB6g3">
|
|||
|
|
Once you start to peel back all the different layers of climate finance, you can understand how different global, bilateral, and private financing are all supposed to add up to the impossibly large number that’s needed. Here are a few ways that this is happening:
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1Kmj0J">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Green Climate Fund: </strong>One key layer is the international goal of reaching $100 billion annually through public and private investments.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yQ5dCh">
|
|||
|
|
The world is falling far short of hitting that $100 billion goal, but we are (<a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/un-green-climate-fund-pledges-reach-93-bln-second-replenishment-round-2023-10-05/">barely</a>) hitting some smaller targets. One of those is the <a href="https://www.greenclimate.fund/">Green Climate Fund</a>, a multilateral fund meant to help developing nations make the renewable transition. The fund has started to make distributions, like a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-25/world-s-biggest-climate-fund-seeks-to-restore-rwanda-s-forests?sref=qYiz2hd0">$39 million project</a> to restore Rwanda’s rainforests.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ip72SU">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Carbon markets:</strong> The idea of a carbon market is that you’re trading carbon offsets, a credit that any person or business or entity can buy to reduce its carbon footprint. For example, a livestock farmer who wants to cut methane emissions could make up for it by paying to restore a wetland. The same can be done on a much larger national scale, with countries trading emissions.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ZaheQt">
|
|||
|
|
Problems abound in today’s voluntary carbon markets, like<a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/2/27/21154553/carbon-offsets-explained-climate-change"> double-counting</a> and failing to reduce absolute emissions. Some see carbon markets as <a href="https://www.vox.com/23817575/carbon-offsets-credits-financialization-ecologi-solutions-scam">a capitalist sham</a>, others as an <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/what-carbon-pricing">elegant solution</a> to the biggest roadblocks to decarbonization.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="YODZRn">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Loss and damage (a.k.a. climate reparations): </strong>Climate change isn’t just about slashing pollution, and making a jump to clean energy and zero-emission technology. The world is already <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/10/30/1208241783/its-unlikely-but-not-impossible-to-limit-global-warming-to-1-5-celsius-study-fin">well on its way</a> to 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, and we need to be adapting to the irreversible impacts.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KYlJSS">
|
|||
|
|
Climate change is causing harms across the world that fall unequally on poorer communities least responsible for creating this mess. The official phrase for this is “loss and damage,” sometimes also called <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/10/10/case-for-climate-reparations-crisis-migration-refugees-inequality/">reparations</a>. Global leaders have reaffirmed the principle that rich countries should help poorer nations repeatedly in UN texts since then, but many key questions remain at a stalemate: Who should be paying into funds to help vulnerable nations? What counts as a particularly vulnerable country? And are affluent countries obligated to pay or should they do it of their own volition?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="G2omiV">
|
|||
|
|
Last year at the UN climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, countries <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01032023/cop27-loss-damage-deal-developing-nations/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAmNeqBhD4ARIsADsYfTfC4doI_cI74Eg1tvFUwKfo3UOK2chdRb8ere98b6ACXv_jEr1PlssaAvBzEALw_wcB">officially adopted</a> a loss and damage fund — a key win for climate adaptation. But there are a few hurdles. Countries, including the United States, have been firmly against any language that requires countries to pay into the fund, preferring voluntary contributions instead.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<figure class="e-image">
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="Children on a roof throw water from a bucket on other children. " src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/gmle5Ay0xoMwcPRnqJ9OkT3XLdM=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25102072/GettyImages_1784036407__1_.jpg"/> <cite>Andre Lucas/Picture Alliance via Getty Images</cite>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
Children try to cool down during an extreme heat wave in Sao Paulo, Brazil in November, following a record hot winter in the Southern Hemisphere.
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<h3 id="ToNdJQ">
|
|||
|
|
<ol start="5" type="1">
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">Scope 3 emissions
|
|||
|
|
</li></ol></h3>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EkrrVi">
|
|||
|
|
Beyond the actions that national governments take, the private sector also has a key role to play here. There are three basic ways to think about a business’s impact on the climate, organized into three scopes that break down direct and indirect pollution.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="TCPGeH">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Scope 1: </strong>The first slice of its emissions, Scope 1, means the pollution produced directly from a company’s operations. So if you were, say, accounting for a car manufacturer, you would count any fossil fuels burned directly by the company for things like gas heating, delivery, or machinery.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="T7NygC">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Scope 2: </strong>Scope 2 is the category that measures <em>indirect</em> emissions from company operations that occur directly at a closely related facility or partner business. Consider a business’s electricity cost; those emissions would occur at the utility where the power is generated, not at the business that benefits from it. The key distinction here is that these emissions are indirectly caused by the company, but occur <em>directly</em> somewhere else.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="WKkAtS">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Scope 3: </strong>This one is the slipperiest.<strong> </strong>
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GAob0O">
|
|||
|
|
Scope 3 is the final, often biggest layer — and includes all of the indirect emissions coming from everything else, like using the products, third-party delivery, and their waste. Scope 3 refers to a company’s emissions coming from everything else not accounted for elsewhere, like how customers use their products, third-party delivery, and the waste.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2ebTi2">
|
|||
|
|
Companies have made bigger strides in reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. They’ve also set out goals for reducing those emissions. Over <a href="https://www.conference-board.org/press/press-release-GHG-emissions#:~:text=94%25%20of%20S%26P%20500%20companies,80%25%20disclose%20their%20climate%20risks.">80 percent</a> of <a href="https://www.vox.com/stock-market">S&P 500</a> companies already have some kind of climate disclosure but they rarely account for their biggest footprint, the final category of Scope 3 emissions.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="POaAyp">
|
|||
|
|
Attempts to regulate Scope 3 emissions have faced a lot of backlash. After all, a company’s Scope 3 emissions can be more than <a href="https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/transparency-to-transformation">11 times greater</a> than its direct emissions. The US Treasury has faced heavy pressure to withdraw proposed draft rules that would require companies to disclose their Scope 3 emissions to investors (the rules, now delayed, have still not been finalized). European regulators have <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/eu-finalises-new-corporate-sustainability-disclosure-rules-2023-07-31/">implemented</a> new Scope 3 reporting rules for large companies, with smaller companies to follow. And California has <a href="https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/esg/california-climate-reporting-law/">new legislation</a> that would mandate this kind of reporting for major companies based there.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<figure class="e-image">
|
|||
|
|
<img alt="An Iraqi-Kurdish man inspects solar panels installed atop the roof of a house in the Hazer Merd village near Sulaymaniyah in northern Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region on September 19, 2023." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/prNz-Q2vQyZOj4n72-PpsKK2kOA=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25101858/GettyImages_1758605518.jpg"/> <cite>Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP via Getty Images</cite>
|
|||
|
|
<figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
An Iraqi-Kurdish man inspects solar rooftop panels. Despite its vast oil wealth, Iraq struggles to provide enough electricity to its 43 million people. Transitioning all countries off of oil and gas, not just a few rich nations, has proven a difficult challenge of the global climate conferences.
|
|||
|
|
</figcaption>
|
|||
|
|
</figure>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="h0hUCt">
|
|||
|
|
Why does all this matter? First of all, we don’t even have great accounting for what companies’ impact on the climate is, and if companies plan to highlight their sustainability and climate commitments, we need a better understanding of their total impact first.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vBPvJB">
|
|||
|
|
The issue eventually can play an important role in the growing number of climate lawsuits around the world, providing more data that’s needed about the impact of climate change on business practices and vice versa.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SMjDVP">
|
|||
|
|
Data alone doesn’t fix the climate crisis, Rothstein said. “But the data, the disclosure, is a foundation,” he said. “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.”
|
|||
|
|
</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>India will be serious challenger for 2024 T20 World Cup title: Ravi Shastri</strong> - Shastri admitted that it still hurts to recall that India, who were the strongest team in the competition, did not deliver in the final.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Hardik Pandya traded to Mumbai Indians, Shubman Gill named Gujarat Titans captain for IPL 2024</strong> -</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Morning Digest | 100-hour vertical drilling target set to rescue workers trapped in Silkyara tunnel; Union Minister says CAA rules to be framed by March 2024, and more</strong> - Here is a select list of stories to start the day</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Beauty Blaze should score in main event</strong> -</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Indian doubles tennis is at its healthy best, and growing steadily</strong> - Before they rocketed to the top of the world in 1997, Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi had given a hint of their prowess by winning four Challenger titles as a pair in 1996; in the current scenario, Indian players have underlined their progress by winning six Challenger titles in as many weeks on the trot in Europe</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Nothing wrong in renaming Hyderabad to Bhagyanagar: Kishan Reddy</strong> -</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Here are the big stories from Karnataka today</strong> - Welcome to the Karnataka Today newsletter, your guide from The Hindu on the major news stories to follow today. Curated and written by Nalme Nachiyar.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Tripura starts survey to know status of plots exchanged with East Pakistanis after 1947 Partition</strong> - A large number of people on both sides of the international border had mutually exchanged properties in 1947</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Arrangements made to let out treated sewage into Phalguni river downstream the Maravoor vented dam: Mangaluru Mayor</strong> - About 2.5 MLD treated sewage from Pachchanadi sewage treatment plant was joining the Phalguni river upstream the vented dam hitherto</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Sandeep Reddy Vanga interview on ‘Animal’: Ranbir Kapoor is a great performer, will not let the audience relax for a second</strong> - Director Sandeep Reddy Vanga opens up on the origin of his film ‘Animal’, headlined by Ranbir Kapoor, its duration of more than three hours and what he thinks about glorifying troubled characters</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Samuel Paty: Six French teenagers on trial over teacher’s murder</strong> - The suspects are accused of inciting the murder and pointing out the teacher to the killer.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ukraine war: Fierce row erupts over 2024 election</strong> - Some right-wing US politicians want Ukraine to vote as scheduled next year. Ukrainians don’t.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Ukraine war: Kyiv hit by biggest drone attack since war began</strong> - Thousands of homes are without power after Russia bombarded the capital over six hours.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Elgin Marbles in UK ‘like cutting Mona Lisa in half’</strong> - The Greek prime minister calls for the reunification of the artefacts, also known as the Parthenon Sculptures.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Davis Cup final 2023: Italy beat Australia to win first title for 47 years</strong> - Jannik Sinner beats Alex de Minaur in straight sets to secure Italy’s first Davis Cup title for 47 years.</p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Black Friday 2023: The latest tech deals on Apple, Lenovo, Dyson, Vitamix, and more</strong> - The best savings on tech from laptops to headphones, TVs, Herman Miller chairs, and more. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1979608">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Do the Black Friday e-bike deals change the price/performance equation?</strong> - Some of the bikes we’ve looked at over the last couple of years are now on sale. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1984741">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Ars guide to time travel in the movies</strong> - We picked 20 time-travel movies and rated them by scientific logic and entertainment value. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1970934">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Porsche’s third-gen Panamera plug-in hybrid pairs V8 with a big battery</strong> - We also test out the optional—and slightly odd—active ride system. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1986109">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>These newest vacuums from 2023 clean up well, and they’re on sale</strong> - The best vacuums from Dyson, Roborock, and iRobot are on sale for Black Friday - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1986166">link</a></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</h1>
|
|||
|
|
<ul>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The day after his wife disappeared in a kayaking accident,</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
an Anchorage man answered his door to find two grim-faced Alaska State Troopers.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“We’re sorry Mr. Wilkens, but we have some information about your wife,” said one trooper…
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Tell me! Did you find her?” Wilkens shouted.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The troopers looked at each other. One said, “We have some bad news, some good news, and some really great news. Which do you want to hear first?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Fearing the worst, an ashen Mr. Wilkens said, “Give me the bad news first.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The trooper said, “I’m sorry to tell you, sir, but this morning we found your wife’s body in Kachemak Bay.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Oh my God!” exclaimed Wilkens. Swallowing hard, he asked, “What’s the good news?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The trooper continued, “When we pulled her up, she had 12 twenty-five pound king crabs and 6 good-size Dungeness crabs clinging to her and we feel you are entitled to a share in the catch.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Stunned, Mr. Wilkens demanded, “If that’s the good news, what’s the great news?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The trooper said, “We’re going to pull her up again tomorrow.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/ODaferio"> /u/ODaferio </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184ypng/the_day_after_his_wife_disappeared_in_a_kayaking/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184ypng/the_day_after_his_wife_disappeared_in_a_kayaking/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>God approaches Adam in the Garden of Eden.</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>God</strong>: Adam, I have some news for you. Actually, I’ve got two bits of good news, and one of bad news.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Adam</strong>: Sure, God, what are they?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>God</strong>: The first bit of good news is that I am going to give you an organ called “The Brain”. It is an organ that will allow you to learn more about the universe, to see its true beauty, to create wonderful things. With it, you shall tryly become the ruler of Earth to reign over it wisely.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Adam</strong>: That sounds like a marvelous gift, God, thank you. What next?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>God</strong>: The second bit of good news is that I am going to give you another organ, called “The Penis”. This is an organ that will allow you to reproduce, to make children that will spread all over the Earth. Also, that organ will be a source of great pleasure for you. Eve, likewise, will be very glad you have such an organ, and will love you all the more for it.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>Adam</strong>: Thank you, God, that, too, sounds like an amazing gift. But… what’s the bad news?
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
<strong>God</strong>: The bad news is that the amount of blood I gave will be insufficient to use both organs at the same time.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/Omeganian"> /u/Omeganian </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184s8kh/god_approaches_adam_in_the_garden_of_eden/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184s8kh/god_approaches_adam_in_the_garden_of_eden/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>So a guy has two buckets and goes to a farmer…</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The guy says, “Hey there, sir! I heard you had some honeysuckle in your pasture. Was wondering if you’d let me go back there and grab a few buckets of honey for myself?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Farmer says, “well that ain’t how that works, but you can try.” Few hours later, the man comes back through carrying 2 buckets full-up with honey.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Couple days later, the man comes back with 2 empty buckets. “Hey farmer, I heard you got some milkweed back there…mind if I go gather some milk?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
Farmer says, “well, that ain’t how that works, but you can go try.” Few hours later, the man walks back through carrying 2 buckets of milk. Farmer thinks, “well, I be danged!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
About a week later, the man comes back to the Farmer and says, “Sir, I heard you had some pussywillow back there behind your house, and–”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The Farmer cuts the man off mid-sentence and says, “OH, NOT THIS TIME! I’M COMIN WITH YA!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/skydriver13"> /u/skydriver13 </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184v5u7/so_a_guy_has_two_buckets_and_goes_to_a_farmer/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184v5u7/so_a_guy_has_two_buckets_and_goes_to_a_farmer/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Saul is working in his store when he hears a booming voice from above: “Saul, sell your business.” He ignores it. It goes on for days. “Saul, sell your business for $3 million.” After weeks of this, he relents, sells his store.</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The voice says ‘Saul, go to Las Vegas." He asks why. “Saul, take the $3 million to Las Vegas.” He obeys, goes to a casino. Voice says, “Saul , go to the blackjack table and put it down all on one hand.” He hesitates but knows he must. He’s dealt an 18. The dealer has a six showing. “Saul, take a card.” What? The dealer has – “Take a card!” He tells the dealer to hit him. Saul gets an ace. Nineteen. He breathes easy. “Saul, take another card.” What? “TAKE ANOTHER CARD!” He asks for another card. It’s another ace. He has twenty. “Saul, take another card,” the voice commands. I have twenty! Saul shouts. “TAKE ANOTHER CARD!!” booms the voice. Hit me,Saul says. He gets another ace. Twenty one. The booming voice goes: “un-fucking-believable!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/YZXFILE"> /u/YZXFILE </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184x735/saul_is_working_in_his_store_when_he_hears_a/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184x735/saul_is_working_in_his_store_when_he_hears_a/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>A guy sees a sign in front of a house that says "Talking Dog: $10:</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF --></p>
|
|||
|
|
<div class="md">
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
He walks up to the gate, and there’s a beautiful labrador retriever in the front yard.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Hello, how are you?” says the dog.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Oh my goodness. You really can talk!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Yep, sure can,” says the dog.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“So what’s your story?” he asks.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Well, I discovered I could talk when I was a puppy, so I contacted the local police to see if I could work for them undercover. They hired me to catch drug dealers. All I had to do was hang around and listen to them talk because no one suspects a dog of anything.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“That’s amazing,” the guy says.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Yeah, then the FBI heard about me so they hired me to catch terrorists. I uncovered a number of plots just by laying at the feet of the leaders and listening to them talk.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Wow! That’s incredible.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“After that INTERPOL called and I worked for a while catching spies. I exposed quite a number of them and protected our country.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“You’re really something!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Yeah, now I’m retired. I get to breed whenever I want, and I have a great life.”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The guy goes to the door and the owner answers.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“I saw your sign. I’d like to buy the dog,” he says.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
The owner nods.
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“But tell me, he has an incredible life story. Why are you selling him so cheap?”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
|||
|
|
“Because he’s a fucking liar. He never did any of that shit!”
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
|||
|
|
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/brother_p"> /u/brother_p </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184e3ec/a_guy_sees_a_sign_in_front_of_a_house_that_says/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/184e3ec/a_guy_sees_a_sign_in_front_of_a_house_that_says/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
|||
|
|
</ul>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
<script>AOS.init();</script></body></html>
|