California has a special election this year, and I’m following my routine of discussing my choices, with the intent of normalizing the voting process. It won’t be too long this time, because there’s just one proposition. Well, there’s also a local measure, but I tend not to discuss those.
Proposition 50: Yes
This is pro-gerrymandering legislation, and counterintuitively, I’m in favor of it!
I just came back from the No Kings protest. Last time, we went to the San Francisco protest, which was the largest crowd I’ve ever seen. This time, we went to a more local protest. Every one of the suburbs seems to have its own separate one. Our resistance is fractal.
Where the San Francisco protest blocked off a whole street for a mile and a half, the Fremont protest occupied the sidewalks for about 5 blocks. I’d estimate there were several hundred people. You could stand at a corner and basically stay stationary the whole time, but we walked back and forth several times. Because we weren’t blocking the road, cars were driving past us, and constantly honking in support.
Like before, we brought our big US flag. My husband wore a shirt with a rainbow US flag, and I borrowed one of his shirts that said “Make Treason Wrong Again”. We met up with another friend and took the opportunity to socialize–not just talking about politics, but also the usual.
All sorts of signs, ranging from the simple “NO 👑”, down to more specific fuck-yous to ICE or RFK Jr. There was not one but two bands–one small brass band, and one saxaphone quartet.
If you google “how to prepare for a protest”, I think the advice is overly cautious, preparing for the worst. But the median protest is entirely safe. I recommend bringing a bottle of water, sun tan lotion, and a friend. These protests are an environment of joyful resistance. People are angry, but there’s an inherent optimism in the activity, seeing all the popular opposition. I fully recommend participating.
Hell is Us is a recent action adventure video game, with an emphasis on puzzles and exploration. I really like the game, but this is not a review. See other sites for reviews. I am here to discuss story and themes.
Hell is Us is about war. But it’s not some high fantasy war, disconnected from reality. It’s a flat out genocide.
It takes place in the fictional country of Hadea, geographically isolated from the rest of the world. There are two religious groups, the Paloms and Sabinians. After years of forced resettlement, racist propaganda, a vote for Sabinian indendence, and so much more, the country has erupted into violence. The Sabinian army now is attempting to eradicate the Paloms. Even otherwise sympathetic characters, even young children, often express hatred for the other side, viewing them as less than human.
Paloms and Sabinians have a history that deliberately evokes Catholics and Protestants. But whether intentional or not, there is ~another~ genocide that very strongly comes to mind.
The player character is Rémi, who was born in Hadea but escaped as a small child. He never fights any humans, instead only fighting the demonic invasion that the war seems to have provoked. He is a heroic character, often helping civilians, and even saving lives. But as for the war itself, he mostly gives it the silent protagonist treatment, giving space to the player to have their own emotional reaction.
I just came back from the San Francisco No Kings protest.
I went with my husband, who is very much more of a protestor than I am. He’s been attending protests on a regular basis for months. He has a bunch of protest shirts, and a big US flag. Normally he flips the flag upside-down, symbolizing distress. Today, he flipped the flag right-side up, saying he wanted to dial up the visible patriotism. At the protest, there were of course lots of people with US flags, and other flags as well.
In contrast, I’m the type of person that goes outside once a week. I freely admit that I do not like being at protests. But I showed up in my everyday clothes and a backpack. I enjoyed seeing the immense popular support for democracy, and opposition to everything Trump stands for.
Boots theory
Boots theory is the idea that being poor is expensive. It comes from a Discworld novel, where a character observes that being poor, he can’t afford a good pair of boots. Instead he buys cheap boots that don’t last nearly as long. The cheap boots cost less money upfront, but are ultimately more expensive since they frequently need replacement.
Taken literally, I’m not sure how accurate the story is. Is it really true that cheap boots are less efficient in durability than expensive boots? It could be, but the cost of boots might also be driven by characteristics besides durability, such as comfort or appearance. Hard to say, since I don’t wear boots.
But if we forget about the boots, then boots theory is obviously true. The boots represent capital. Capital is anything that costs resources now, and provides value later. Capital costs money. If you can’t afford to buy capital, then you ultimately lose out on the value of capital. Being unable to afford capital is therefore expensive.
Back when I started working in finance in 2020, I remarked to a colleague that I felt pretty ignorant about all this finance stuff. So they suggested a basic online course in macroeconomics. That course: “The Power of Macroeconomics: Economic Principles in the Real World” taught by Dr. Peter Navarro.
In case the name doesn’t ring a bell, Dr. Navarro is currently the senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, in the Trump administration. He is seemingly the only economist in the world who thinks universal tariffs are a good idea. That guy. Even at the time I took the course, Navarro had been the director of the White House National Trade Council during the first Trump administration. But I swear, I didn’t realize who he was until 2022, when he was arrested in relation to the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
No deep dive here–I’m not going back through the course to sift for oddities. This is just storytime, recalling what I can about Dr. Peter Navarro from several years ago.
Working in the finance industry has given me a great deal of appreciation for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Created in response to the 2008 recession, it protects consumers from unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices by financial institutions.
Recently, the Trump administration ordered the CFPB to halt all work, and cease its own funding. It’s a disaster, but more low key and less visible than all the other disasters. So, in mourning the CFPB, I’d like to review what it actually did.
The general case for the CFPB
The finance industry is fairly opaque to the average consumer. This creates an information asymmetry, where consumers can’t tell if a financial institution is being fair and honest. So, if consumers can’t even see when an institution is being fair and honest, it’s a competitive disadvantage to even bother.