Kevin Drum

I see that cats and dogs are living together and have produced a bipartisan infrastructure bill. I figure they did this just to annoy me, but I hold no grudges. I just want to know how they're going to pay for it:

The new agreement also included significant changes to how the infrastructure spending will be paid for, after Republicans resisted supporting a pillar of the original framework: increased revenues from an I.R.S. crackdown on tax cheats, which was to have supplied nearly one-fifth of the funding for the plan.

In place of those lost revenues, negotiators agreed to repurpose more than $250 billion from previous pandemic aid legislation, including $50 billion from expanded unemployment benefits that have been canceled prematurely this summer by two dozen Republican governors, according to a fact sheet reviewed by The New York Times. That is more than double the repurposed money in the original deal.

As I recall, the previous version of this "$1 trillion" bill actually represented $600 billion in new spending. With this new funding in place, it looks like the $1 trillion bill is now a $350 billion bill. In other words, starting with the very first proposal from the Biden administration, the amount of new spending has gone from $2 trillion to $1 trillion to $600 billion to $350 billion. I think. This gets kind of tricky. In any case, it sure seems like Republicans got a helluva good deal here.

And there's this:

“We still have a long way to go before we get to the finish line, but this was a vitally important first step,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the lawmakers who helped broker the deal, at a press conference after a vote.

That sounds mighty familiar, doesn't it? For one thing, it turns out there's still no actual legislative text. I'm sure that's not a problem, though. Stay tuned.

POSTSCRIPT: Of course, coming up next is the gazillion-dollar Democratic bill that, among other things, will sweep up anything that Republicans refused to agree to in the bipartisan bill. That should be fun.

Once again, I'm on vacation, this time for a week or so. But where am I? The two pictures below are your clue.

For those of you stuck under our latest heat dome, here is photographic evidence of cool weather. Someday it will be back.

How accurate are inflation expectations? The literature says two things:

• Any measure based on consumer expectations is pretty worthless. This is no surprise since consumers don't really know much of anything.
• Market-based measures, such as the breakeven rate, are reasonably accurate, generally within a percentage point or two of reality.

So let's take a look at the 5-year breakeven rate, which forecasts the inflation rate five years in the future:

As you can see, inflation over the past 20 years has been running at roughly 2% and the breakeven rate has also been at about 2%. This means that the breakeven forecast is pretty good when inflation is steady.

It's also no problem that the forecast didn't predict the big temporary spikes in 2009 and 2021. There's no way it could do that.

But there is a problem here: the predicted plummet for 2014. What happened here is that actual inflation in 2009 went negative (red line), so the bond markets mindlessly predicted that five years later in 2014 it would also be negative (blue line). Needless to say, this makes no sense and it didn't happen.

Conclusion: market forecasts of inflation may be better than consumer forecasts, but the "market" basically just figures that inflation in five years will be about the same as it is today. As long as inflation is steady, this works OK. But then again, as long as inflation is steady, who needs forecasts?

I see that the implosion of the American Olympic team continues. Donovan Brazier. Katie Ledecky. The men's basketball team. Nyjah Huston. Simone Biles. The women's soccer team. Naomi Osaka.¹ Alexis Sablone. Who's next?

On the other hand, at least we didn't lose track of the competition completely, as the Dutch women's road racing team did. Being upset is one thing. It happens. But crossing the finishing line and throwing up your hands because you didn't know the actual winner had finished more than a minute earlier? That's an embarrassment that will live forever.

¹Yes, yes, I know that she's "Japanese."

The Washington Post ran quite a story over the weekend. It's datelined from Traverse City, Michigan, where a bunch of white high school kids decided a few months ago that it would be fun to hold a Snapchat "slave auction" in which they traded Black kids for money:

The Snapchat group, titled “slave trade,” also saw a student share the messages “all blacks should die” and “let’s start another holocaust,” according to screenshots obtained by The Washington Post. It spurred the fast-tracking of a school equity resolution that condemned racism and vowed Traverse City Area Public Schools would better educate its overwhelmingly White student body and teaching staff on how to live in a diverse country.

....But White parents say their hometown was never racist — at least not until an obsession with race began infecting the school system through its embrace of CRT, an allegation school officials have denied. Now, these parents say, their children are coming home from school feeling ostracized for their conservatism and worried they must adhere to a liberal agenda to earn good grades on their assignments.

Basically, in the face of irrefutable evidence that their hometown does indeed harbor white racist sentiment, conservative white parents insisted that racism never existed until a bunch of Black and liberal white folks imported it.

But there's more. Here's a brief timeline of how things unfolded:

Last summer: In the wake of the George Floyd murder, the school district creates a social equity task force.

Late April: The task force meanders along until the Snapchat incident, at which point school administrators ask if an anti-racism resolution can be sped up.

May 24: Indeed it can! At the end of May a draft resolution is unveiled to the public.

June 14: The resolution is discussed at a school board meeting. It is widely supported, which is no surprise since it's pretty standard fare. It basically says that the school district condemns racism; promises to support staff training; will review curriculum to provide opportunities for students to learn about "diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging issues"; and will continue to buy more diverse books for school libraries. The resolution is here if you want to make sure I've described it fairly.

June 28: The resolution, which had prompted only a few dissenters two weeks before, is now the subject of a massive backlash. At a packed board meeting, the speakers were almost all white parents outraged about the resolution:

By that time, school board members — wary of the building backlash — had already reworked the document. The second version lacks the line about applying a “social equity and diversity lens” to the curriculum. It also no longer suggests the district will add “marginalized” authors to their libraries, nor that Traverse City schools will give students more opportunities to learn about “diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging issues.” Officials furthermore deleted the terms “racism” and “racial violence” from a list of things the school district condemns. Also deleted is a passage that stated “racism and hate have no place in our schools or in our society.”

The board had already decided it was too risky to condemn "racism" and "racial violence"! Nor did they want to boldly stand up for the proposition that "racism and hate have no place in our school." As for the libraries, forget it. They're fine as is. Nor did the revised resolution include any lefty talk about diversity.

Needless to say, there's not much left except for a bit of pabulum. Nevertheless, the white parents group became convinced that the whole thing was just Critical Race Theory with a thin veneer over it. This despite the obvious fact that nothing even remotely related to CRT is in this resolution. So where could they have gotten this idea?

Hmmm. Where indeed?

This is my sister-in-law on her birthday, busily scratching scratchers to find out if she's our newest millionaire. In sad news, it turned out she wasn't.

Oh please, Republicans said last week, just give us until Monday. Please please please. We promise to have all the loose ends tied up by Monday.

Well, it's Monday:

The bipartisan infrastructure negotiations entered their darkest phase in more than a month on Monday, with the parties openly feuding over policy and former President Donald Trump urging Republicans to drop the effort altogether.

....The talks seem in danger of collapse given the public acrimony and finger-pointing on Monday, after a fruitless weekend of discussions. The group of 10 senators leading the talks will huddle again on Monday evening, in an attempt to rescue the fragile negotiations.

The bipartisan group of lawmakers hoped to reach a final agreement by early this week after a vote to advance undrafted legislation failed last week. But that appears unlikely, with several issues outstanding. Among the biggest sticking points is transit, but broadband has also become a point of contention. The bill’s finances are also viewed as shaky.

That's it? Just transit, broadband, and how to pay for it? Golly, that's—

Practically the entire damn bill. I accept that a sincere effort to push for a bipartisan deal was probably necessary, but come on. For six months Republicans have been unwilling to come up with an acceptable way to pay for anything, and apparently they still haven't. And since infrastructure isn't free, that pretty much kills the whole thing.

Of course, sometimes stories like this are leaked just before everyone comes to a miraculous agreement. I suppose it might happen this time. But I sure wouldn't bet on it.

YES, kids should go back to school in person next month, with temporary exceptions during serious outbreaks. The risks of infection are far lower than the risk of yet another year of remote "learning."

YES, kids should wear masks in school. Some extra caution is a good idea.

YES, vaccinations should be mandated for all health professionals who work with the public. This is really a no-brainer.

YES, we should accept help from wherever we can get it. If Alex Jones is willing to hype vaccinations by inventing a story that liberals have been secretly promoting vaccine fear in order to kill off conservatives, that's fine. Whatever.

YES, vaccination mandates should be as widespread as possible. Corporations should put them in place for their own workers; businesses should put them in place for customers; and states should put them in place for everyone. They are legal, constitutional, and sensible. Enforce them via tax credits available only to those who have been vaccinated.

NO, mask mandates shouldn't include most outdoor areas. The point here is not to put in place the maximum possible regime. It's to put in place a regime that truly provides the most bang for the buck.

I've seen some chatter on my Twitter timeline about whether Sean Hannity really told his audience to get vaccinated last week. Here's what he said last Monday:

Please take COVID seriously, I can't say it enough. Enough people have died, we don't need more deaths. Research like crazy, talk to your doctor, your doctors, medical professionals you trust based on your unique medical history, your current medical condition and you and your doctor make a very important decision for your own safety. Take it seriously. You also have a right to medical privacy, doctor-patient confidentiality is also important and it absolutely makes sense for many Americans to get vaccinated. I believe in science and I believe in the science of vaccination.

For what it's worth, there's less here than meets the eye. "Research like crazy" is the giveaway. It's the fundamental dogma of redpillers who are forever claiming that they've "done the research," which is why they believe in QAnon or pizzagate or the Deep State or whatever. This is not even subtle enough to be called a dog whistle. It's right out there. "Do the research" is all but a demand to start googling every vaccine conspiracy theory out there.

As for the rest, Hannity spends most of his time talking about doctors and "your unique medical history," concluding with his advice that it makes sense for "many" people to get vaccinated. This is pretty thin gruel.

In fairness, Hannity is walking a tightrope. He knows that vaccines work and are a good idea for nearly everyone, but he also needs to maintain his cred with the nutball crowd. If they think he's caved in to the establishment, they'll tune him out instantly.

And apparently even the timid advice he gave on Monday was enough to endanger his standing as a true believer. On Thursday, after being denounced/praised for his unexpected statement, he hit back, telling his radio audience in no uncertain terms, "I'm not urging people to get the COVID-19 vaccine." All he had done, he said, was tell them to do the research and talk to their doctor and consider their unique medical condition. Presumably he is now back in the good graces of the wingnuts.