Improve efficiency at ports of entry on the southern border so that the legitimate flow of goods and people can cross more quickly.
A bit of an anecdote here: I am a born and bred San Diegan. I cross into Tijuana on a semi-regular basis and my wife crosses several days a week to study medicine in Tijuana. Last Friday I waited 90 minutes to cross back into San Diego in the pedestrian line. 90 minutes! A lot of this has to do with CBP being understaffed but it also seems like there are so many paths to reducing inefficiencies at the border such as increasing automation. I understand that this issue is more acute in border regions since a large percentage of our labor force consists of dual citizens that cross regularly but I can only imagine this contributes to supply side shortages nationally as well. Any thoughts on this Josh? It doesn't get as much airtime as I wish it would (most pundits tend to be a bit East Coast-centric) but I think it should!
Thanks for the gin drink recommendation. And, I may need to find some Continental drinking glasses. It was the first airline I was loyal to when I began my consulting career 25 years ago!
It's about both. Easing permitting will allow for more climate friendly energy projects to move forward, increasing the supply of energy while simultaneously addressing climate change.
This is what annoys me about progressives on the climate, on one hand they claim to want to reduce carbon emissions, while making any kind of construction as difficult as possible. I think the contradiction comes from two motivations:
1. Climate change is seen as a new opportunity to reorder society in a manner in which they prefer, i.e. socialism. They tried to move some collectivism through under cover of COVID in a similar way. If you have an unpopular idea, crisis is the best way to advance it. Thus they do not want to separate the issues of addressing climate change from the rest of the progressive wish list so they block anything that can potentially address climate change while not enacting their agenda thus opposition to permitting and nuclear energy.
2. Climate change is also being used to cover for some misanthropic neo-malthusianism in which all human growth is bad because it soils the "purity" of mother earth. These are the clowns who argue that having children is immoral and that the world would be better off with far fewer people and productivity.
I do hope the debt forgiveness doesn't cause quite the mess that's being forecast, though it's hard to imagine there won't be some kind of repercussions.
P.S. New subscriber here: I haven't missed a podcast, have I? Last one I see was Aug. 3.
Thank you for this very straightforward analysis. This is why I subscribe . Very Seriously, worth every dime.
Is that a grill I see in the background? Gasp.
it came with the house
Here to compliment you on your glassware.
Is that a grill in the background?
Improve efficiency at ports of entry on the southern border so that the legitimate flow of goods and people can cross more quickly.
A bit of an anecdote here: I am a born and bred San Diegan. I cross into Tijuana on a semi-regular basis and my wife crosses several days a week to study medicine in Tijuana. Last Friday I waited 90 minutes to cross back into San Diego in the pedestrian line. 90 minutes! A lot of this has to do with CBP being understaffed but it also seems like there are so many paths to reducing inefficiencies at the border such as increasing automation. I understand that this issue is more acute in border regions since a large percentage of our labor force consists of dual citizens that cross regularly but I can only imagine this contributes to supply side shortages nationally as well. Any thoughts on this Josh? It doesn't get as much airtime as I wish it would (most pundits tend to be a bit East Coast-centric) but I think it should!
Thanks for the gin drink recommendation. And, I may need to find some Continental drinking glasses. It was the first airline I was loyal to when I began my consulting career 25 years ago!
Very interested in this comment "..... press down on inflation by making energy cheaper .....".
Missed how this is going to occur.
More explanation please.
Thought the energy issue was about climate?
This messaging is much better.
I've noted for awhile the message is right, but the messaging is wrong.
It's about both. Easing permitting will allow for more climate friendly energy projects to move forward, increasing the supply of energy while simultaneously addressing climate change.
This is what annoys me about progressives on the climate, on one hand they claim to want to reduce carbon emissions, while making any kind of construction as difficult as possible. I think the contradiction comes from two motivations:
1. Climate change is seen as a new opportunity to reorder society in a manner in which they prefer, i.e. socialism. They tried to move some collectivism through under cover of COVID in a similar way. If you have an unpopular idea, crisis is the best way to advance it. Thus they do not want to separate the issues of addressing climate change from the rest of the progressive wish list so they block anything that can potentially address climate change while not enacting their agenda thus opposition to permitting and nuclear energy.
2. Climate change is also being used to cover for some misanthropic neo-malthusianism in which all human growth is bad because it soils the "purity" of mother earth. These are the clowns who argue that having children is immoral and that the world would be better off with far fewer people and productivity.
I do hope the debt forgiveness doesn't cause quite the mess that's being forecast, though it's hard to imagine there won't be some kind of repercussions.
P.S. New subscriber here: I haven't missed a podcast, have I? Last one I see was Aug. 3.
You haven't missed one — we're taking a summer break.
Thank you! :-)