I'd call China a rival, not an adversary - at least for now. We're competing against them for market share and influence, and we should use them as an impetus to improve ourselves.
On the topic of penning ourselves in, we can lay much blame on protectionist policies - for shipbuilding the Jones Act, for automakers our tariffs or outright blocking of imports - and the longshoreman unions in much of the US (with the exception of the West Coast's union, the ILWU, which agreed to some port automation in their recent contract). Besides limiting innovation, it also makes our ships, cars, and import/export shipping more expensive all around.
The ILA union president stated on video last year that he could bring our entire economy to a halt. We'll likely need to buy out a lot of longshoremen in order to get automation put in place while keeping our economy flowing - 'cause there will be a permanent loss of jobs involved.
The Jones Act requires all shipping between US ports to occur on US flagged and operated vessels, creating a captive market - and that means no need to compete in order for them to profit. They get profits, and we pay higher prices for goods.
One thing that came from the 2008-2010 automotive crisis (aka the Carpocalypse) was automakers making more global platforms and smaller more economical vehicles to compete with Toyota/Honda/etc... (at least for a while). Prior, we had a lot of US-only versions of vehicles that were very different - and frankly much worse - than the versions sold internationally. We've seen many improvements, but there's still more we could do.
One other thing that affects US automaking is our gas/oil subsidies: removing those and exposing consumers to the real cost of gas would lead to consumer demands changing, and automakers would have to respond accordingly. (This would also likely result in the ethanol industry collapsing, forcing ethanol corn growers to switch to profitable crops - which could also reduce food prices, as the corn grown for ethanol is not consumed by humans).
One other suggestion - remove the incentives to purchase SUVs. It's a dead-end market that keeps American automakers from being more competitive overseas. We should be making the most technologically-advanced vehicles that meet global fuel and emissions standards, not backtracking because of Boomer nostalgia.[1]
Closing the SUV/truck fuel efficiency loopholes likely would help a it. Removing standards as the Trump admin has done likely won't reduce prices much - and I have some doubts it will do much at all, considering we are already making more efficent engines (again, thank you Carpocalypse). Are automakers really gonna change their production lines and designs to make worse engines again?
Part of it is just consumer demand, unfortunately - bigger SUVs are viewed as being more safe, but really it just makes one more of a danger to everyone else. I don't know how to counter the anti-soccer mom aspect of it all (e.g. station wagons leading to minivans leading to SUVs), but if gas costs were at their real levels then it likely would help change that a bit more.
The lack of a basic trim level that does not include non-required equipment - e.g. seat warmers, fancy infotainment systems, etc... - is probably a more significant driver of cost inflation of vehicles. Active safety systems also contribute, but that's a bit of a different argument to have as they actually do affect safety...
Good ideas. I am curious about the subsidies which are mainly tax deductions. I know about intangibles and direct costs and depletion allowances, and they all seem to be legitimate. Should all business expenses be disallowed? Why not disallow the cost of renovating a building for a restaurant so that customers will be exposed to the true cost of dining out? All buyers of goods and services should be exposed to the true cost.
On the site - I'd be happy to pay for a subscription (most likely an annual one) that keeps you guys afloat, even if it's optional.
On the bigger changes - if you're looking at something as large as a rebrand, I'd suggest taking a look at other newsletter platforms such as Ghost[1]. While Substack continues to raise the walls of their own walled garden, these similar platforms are doing a stellar job implementing the infrastructure for a POSSE strategy (Post on Own Site, Syndicate Everywhere)[2] with Fediverse integration (Mastodon, Bluesky)[3]. This gives you more control over your content and gives you an "out" for when the social networks chasing engagement (including Substack) downrank your content for more inflammatory or AI-generated "takes". Happy to share more thoughts if interested, as I've been playing with this software for a while.
As for the name, I don't have any decent suggestions, but something that leans into your Georgia and New Hampshire homes might be fun.
Typical value proposition. I find some value in reading and comparing to other sources and would consider a once a year donation/subscription so I could evaluate annually.
I'd call China a rival, not an adversary - at least for now. We're competing against them for market share and influence, and we should use them as an impetus to improve ourselves.
On the topic of penning ourselves in, we can lay much blame on protectionist policies - for shipbuilding the Jones Act, for automakers our tariffs or outright blocking of imports - and the longshoreman unions in much of the US (with the exception of the West Coast's union, the ILWU, which agreed to some port automation in their recent contract). Besides limiting innovation, it also makes our ships, cars, and import/export shipping more expensive all around.
The ILA union president stated on video last year that he could bring our entire economy to a halt. We'll likely need to buy out a lot of longshoremen in order to get automation put in place while keeping our economy flowing - 'cause there will be a permanent loss of jobs involved.
The Jones Act requires all shipping between US ports to occur on US flagged and operated vessels, creating a captive market - and that means no need to compete in order for them to profit. They get profits, and we pay higher prices for goods.
One thing that came from the 2008-2010 automotive crisis (aka the Carpocalypse) was automakers making more global platforms and smaller more economical vehicles to compete with Toyota/Honda/etc... (at least for a while). Prior, we had a lot of US-only versions of vehicles that were very different - and frankly much worse - than the versions sold internationally. We've seen many improvements, but there's still more we could do.
One other thing that affects US automaking is our gas/oil subsidies: removing those and exposing consumers to the real cost of gas would lead to consumer demands changing, and automakers would have to respond accordingly. (This would also likely result in the ethanol industry collapsing, forcing ethanol corn growers to switch to profitable crops - which could also reduce food prices, as the corn grown for ethanol is not consumed by humans).
Competition is good. Stagnancy is death.
One other suggestion - remove the incentives to purchase SUVs. It's a dead-end market that keeps American automakers from being more competitive overseas. We should be making the most technologically-advanced vehicles that meet global fuel and emissions standards, not backtracking because of Boomer nostalgia.[1]
[1] https://www.npr.org/2025/12/03/nx-s1-5630389/trump-administration-rolls-back-fuel-economy-standards
Closing the SUV/truck fuel efficiency loopholes likely would help a it. Removing standards as the Trump admin has done likely won't reduce prices much - and I have some doubts it will do much at all, considering we are already making more efficent engines (again, thank you Carpocalypse). Are automakers really gonna change their production lines and designs to make worse engines again?
Part of it is just consumer demand, unfortunately - bigger SUVs are viewed as being more safe, but really it just makes one more of a danger to everyone else. I don't know how to counter the anti-soccer mom aspect of it all (e.g. station wagons leading to minivans leading to SUVs), but if gas costs were at their real levels then it likely would help change that a bit more.
The lack of a basic trim level that does not include non-required equipment - e.g. seat warmers, fancy infotainment systems, etc... - is probably a more significant driver of cost inflation of vehicles. Active safety systems also contribute, but that's a bit of a different argument to have as they actually do affect safety...
Good ideas. I am curious about the subsidies which are mainly tax deductions. I know about intangibles and direct costs and depletion allowances, and they all seem to be legitimate. Should all business expenses be disallowed? Why not disallow the cost of renovating a building for a restaurant so that customers will be exposed to the true cost of dining out? All buyers of goods and services should be exposed to the true cost.
There's also low-interest loans and below-market-rate for leasing public lands to take into account.
In general, it depends on what we want to incentivize within our tax code.
Annual subscription would be best. $84 is my suggestion. Your tolerance for opposing views exceeds mine but without them, what's the point?
On the site - I'd be happy to pay for a subscription (most likely an annual one) that keeps you guys afloat, even if it's optional.
On the bigger changes - if you're looking at something as large as a rebrand, I'd suggest taking a look at other newsletter platforms such as Ghost[1]. While Substack continues to raise the walls of their own walled garden, these similar platforms are doing a stellar job implementing the infrastructure for a POSSE strategy (Post on Own Site, Syndicate Everywhere)[2] with Fediverse integration (Mastodon, Bluesky)[3]. This gives you more control over your content and gives you an "out" for when the social networks chasing engagement (including Substack) downrank your content for more inflammatory or AI-generated "takes". Happy to share more thoughts if interested, as I've been playing with this software for a while.
As for the name, I don't have any decent suggestions, but something that leans into your Georgia and New Hampshire homes might be fun.
[1] https://ghost.org/
[2] https://alexn.org/blog/2023/09/21/post-once-syndicate-everywhere-pose/
[3] https://activitypub.ghost.org/
A shame this site isn't bigger, otherwise I'd say sue Taibbi for infringing on the name.
Typical value proposition. I find some value in reading and comparing to other sources and would consider a once a year donation/subscription so I could evaluate annually.