Stidmatt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rican_government-debt_crisis

Puerto Rico experienced a debt crisis in 2014, and there are some major misunderstandings about its causes.

First of all, the triple tax-exempt bonds made the situation better, not worse. By being triple-subsidized Puerto Rico was able to offer a lower interest rate compared to competitors which saved the commonwealth money. The debt crisis would have been worse without the triple tax-exemption.

The increase in the debt burden restriction made the situation worse in the long run.

The cessation of federal subsidies made the situation in Puerto Rico worse. Puerto Rico has to deal with the Jones Act which increases shipping costs. Removing the federal subsidies means companies have to deal with higher shipping costs and no major benefits to doing business in Puerto Rico compared to the rest of the country. The cessation of federal subsidies with the elimination of the Jones Act might have been sustainable, but no subsidies with the massive increase of costs from the Jones Act was a death sentence to the economy.

On top of this, local newspapers have reported the commonwealth has had trouble collecting tax revenue, causing a deficit.

If this wasn’t bad enough, the federal government does not give Puerto Rico the same level of funding for their Medicaid program as states do per capita. This leads to doctors fleeing the island and increases strain on the territorial budget.

If that wasn’t enough, out of a $13 billion budget, $3.7 billion are going to “Custody Accounts” held by the OMB and Department of the Treasury.  Source

All of this has led to Puerto Rico having a larger budget than one would expect creating a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.

If Puerto Rico prioritized raising tax revenue during a recession, that will be a pro-cyclical policy and only make the recession worse. They have been given no choice given how they cannot default on their debt and do not control their currency.

If Puerto Rico prioritized cutting government expenditure that will reduce expenses in health care and education, putting the territory further into poverty, creating a debt spiral.

Neither of these will solve the problem.

The real solution to Puerto Rico’s crisis is the following:

1. Repeal the Jones Act so manufacturing from Puerto Rico is competitive.
2. The cessation of Federal subsidies while maintaining the Jones Act is what put Puerto Rico into the situation they are in. The federal government needs to absolve Puerto Rico of their debt.
3. Puerto Rico needs to improve tax collection so they can cover future expenditures.
4. For purposes of Medicaid, Puerto Rico needs to be treated as a state, even if they are not granted statehood.

It’s pretty obvious to me that the major point of Trump’s agenda is to ensure Russia colonizes Ukraine again.
NATO has traditionally waited for America’s lead on security issues since we are the largest member. However, we comprise less than 50% of NATO’s population and less than 50% of NATO’s military expenditure.
It looks to me like Canada is handling this right by rightfully dismissing my government and if Ukraine gets large arms deals with no strings attached from the other 31 member states of NATO, then Putin’s attack on our alliance will fail.
Once the US has a good president again we will be forced to examine our relationship with the rest of our alliances it forces it to the front of the debate for the first time since the 1940s.
Once we start thinking about it again Americans will have to consider who we ally ourselves with
The Bush administration turned my generation to the left overall. Trump is now doing it for people born during Bush’s administration without passing any major laws short of a tax cut for billionaires, Trump’s impact in the long term will be insignificant.
That’s what I’m seeing so far.

Trump will end up being far less damaging than Bush has been for the last quarter century when all is said and done.

Trump will not last forever and in 4 years America will have a new president. The next president will have almost 30 years of damage to reverse regarding our relationships with all our allies.

• Clarify that we are a NATO member and a Rio Pact member. These alliances are central to American security and irreplacable.
• Rescind visa policies towards democracies and reinstate visa-free travel to the United States.
• Make a clear and irrefutable statement that we support the accession of Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia into NATO.
• Continue the policy of constraint through trade towards China. Make China utterly dependent on trade to ensure they will not step out of line without seeing an immediate and severe economic depression.
• Reinstate and reinforce American aid efforts around the world. These are successful and improving people’s lives and are effective counter-terrorism.
• Reinstate work visas for foreign farm workers in the United States.

There is a lot of work to be done to not just rescind the damage of the last two Republican presidents but also to move forward toward deeper integration.

The best way to counter the extreme Republican party is not to seek unity with it but to move the Overton window away from their extreme views.

We tried moderate policies and to approach the Republicans under the Biden administration. The policy not only failed but led to the best performance for a Republican candidate under a Democratic President since 1980. Unity as a value does not work.

The path forward is a clear policy moving America towards a brighter future, away from the failed Republican policies, and implementing more complex effective treaties that bind us to our allies and make it politically impossible for a candidate like George Bush to ever be elected again.

There are several steps to designing. your system of government and most countries use a unique form of government. Out of 136 democracies listed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electoral_systems_by_country 106 countries use a completely unique system used by no other country.

So using only the features currently used by a government, and only considering democracies, here are the questions you need to ask:

Federal or Unitary

How much power are you going to give to regions versus held by the central government of the country? This usually correlates with population, you can be very democratic with either system.

Head of State and government

Who will your head of state be? President, constitutional monarch, or someone else?

Will your head of government be a prime minister or held by a president who is also head of state?

This leaves you with three options:

• Parliamentary (prime minister selected by parliament)
• President
• Constitutional monarchy
• Semi-presidential

Election system

How will the head of state be elected if they are not a constitutional monarch?

How will parliament be elected?

Popular options:

• Ranked voting (instant runoff or single transferable vote)
• Mixed-member proportional
• Party-list
• Two-round system
• First-past-the-post
• Appointed by state legislature
• Appointed by monarch

Total possibilities

Using only these factors, how many possible unique government structures are there?

2 * 4 * 8 * 8 = 512 possible combinations of election and government systems.

With Donald Trump as President effectively allying himself as president, it gives the world a very different global political structure for the next 4 years.

The first impact of this is US alliances, which expand across 5 continents and the US is the cornerstone of the global democratic world. As I described on Wednesday, there are a few potential candidates who would almost certainly be successful with allying themselves with the United States if they desired to form an alliance, but Israel already receives more military aid than any other country except Ukraine, and Mauritius is not a target for any invasion.

Without the United States as the cornerstone of the global bloc of democracies, there are a few obvious candidates to replace us. I’m comparing across population, GDP, GDP per capita, military expenditure, and surface area. I then calculate the percentile of each of these 5 metrics and take the simple average of them together.

The European Union acting as a bloc is obviously the only close comparison to the United States in the world. China is still significantly worse off in terms of GDP per capita, and the EU scores well across corruption, democracy, economics, and size. Acting as a bloc they can mostly replace the United States. The European Union however is not a country and this limits its ability to work as cohesively as a state does.

The next most powerful country is Canada. It scores over the 90th percentile across every metric I am controlling for except population, where it is in the 79th percentile. Canada is a powerful friend.

China ranks right behind Canada. However, they are an authoritarian regime with a GDP per capita of around 62%.

Australia is next, with an even larger disadvantage to Canada due to its even smaller population.

Next up is Brazil, which is above the 90th percentile in everything except GDP per capita. As Brazil keeps increasing their mean years of schooling and their economy grows their position in the world will only increase.

Russia ranks after Brazil, suffering from a low GDP per capita and is undemocratic.

Japan scores over the 90th percentile on GDP, population, and military expenditure. Their GDP per capita is under the 90th percentile however at the 88th percentile and their area is at 67th percentile.

France and Germany are tied as the highest-rated EU member states, both are under the 90th percentile for area and France is at the 89th percentile for population. Germany is the only country aside from the United States to score above the 90th percentile for population, GDP, GDP per capita, and military expenditure.

We now have Canada, France, and Germany representing NATO, Brazil representing the Rio Pact, and major allies Australia and Japan in the Pacific.

The reality is that most powerful countries in the world are democracies. Here are some stats of the democratic world today, based on countries with a democracy score of at least 5:

• 60% of the world’s population are in democracies.
• 93% of the world’s GDP is in countries with a democracy score over 5.
• 86% of the world’s military expenditure is in democracies.
• Democracies have a GDP per capita of around $15,700 versus around $5,600 in authoritarian regimes.

Let’s narrow the criteria to countries with a democracy score of at least 7. The most democratic countries in the world.

• 40% of the world’s population
• 83% of the world’s GDP
• 80% of the world’s military expenditure
• GDP per capita of $21,000

No matter how you look at it, if we unite all democracies, we are unbeatable.

If the United States abandons our role, here are how these numbers compare:

The United States is the most important country in the world, there is no reasonable doubt about it. This is why the US president is in the most important position in the world.

That being said, it is also clear that in our present reality of absent leadership from the United States that the remaining democracies in the world have enough population, GDP, and military expenditure to still be a significant force for good.

The Free World can stand on its own without the United States, but we are all better off when the United States is at the table.

Russia’s allies

Russia acts and talks like they have many allies around the world, and China has increased its sales of aid to Russia. Military support has also come from Belarus, Iran, and North Korea. But ultimately Russia’s list of allies is a short list. The only countries who voted with Russia in the United Nations were Belarus, Eritrea, North Korea, and Syria. The oft-portrayed villains of China and Iran abstained from the vote. Putin is so weak he can’t even get double-digit countries to back him up in a low-stakes vote!

This is while Ukraine is backed by almost every democracy in the world and has allies on every continent who have provided aid.

Ukraine is by far the favored country to win the war. If the United States fails in our commitment, Ukraine could still win given the development of a domestic military industrial complex and a surge of military aid from other countries. The United States should still provide Ukraine with aid because its the right thing to do and save lives, but Trump cannot guarantee a victory to Russia, he can only slow down their inevitable defeat.

Russia is an extremely isolated state. They will lose the war. Ukraine will win.

Proposal

In order to hasten Ukraine’s total victory and protect every democracy in the world, my proposal is this:

• The European Union and Rio Pact should reach out to each other to increase military cooperation.
• The European Union extends its mutual protection pacts to America’s allies in the West Pacific.
• The European Union further increases its aid to Ukraine.
• Ukraine seeks military aid from Japan, Australia, and the Rio Pact member states.
• Georgia seeks out unilateral defense pacts until their inevitable accession to NATO.

With these changes, Ukraine will have the equipment advantage that will allow them to defeat Russia and take back 100% of their territory.

Once we remove Trump from office the United States will resume our role as the leader of the free world in cooperation with our friends.

Read the text here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/22/text/ih78

Every system that determines citizenship is based on a chain of trust. Once a citizen has proven they are a citizen once to get a document, that document should be proof of citizenship. However, the law is no longer written to recognize this.

For starters, it is already a felony for people to register to vote. If you look at the registration form for basically every state, the voter registration form requires proof of citizenship already. This is usually provided by a driver’s license or a social security number. https://www.sos.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/VRF_English.pdf

A driver’s license usually includes a mark in the database on whether someone is a citizen. When applying for a driver’s license they determine if you are a citizen at that step. This allows the state government to know then if you are eligible to vote, and if you are you can then register right then and there because of the Motor Voter Act.

Non-citizens who get driver’s licenses cannot register to vote already.

So this brings up the question, if someone has already established they are a citizen once, and they keep that document, why require people to keep proving they are citizens with extra documentation again and again and again? They already have a document that proves they are a citizen! Let them use the proof of citizenship they have!

The Republican Party already made this more difficult with the Real ID Act. The main issue with the Real ID Act is it requires two proof of residency to get your document. Notice how this doesn’t do anything to enhance the citizenship status of someone’s document, that was never in question. It is designed to just make it more difficult to get the documents we need in order to get business done.

That is the entire point of the SAVE ACT. Non-citizen voting is a non-issue and already a felony. It doesn’t require more legislation, our laws on this are decent as is. The Real ID Act does nothing to fix this either, because it did not need to be fixed. The National Voter Registration Form is a simple document, with your name and address, and after the form it includes a list of the requirements to register to vote for every state. Every state requires some form of identification, usually a driver’s license or Social Security Number. Every state gives people the ability to prove their citizenship when they get their driver’s license, at which point you also are able to register to vote. Some states even let you pre-register if you get your driver’s license before your 18th birthday which is great because it reduces paperwork and ensures that 18 year olds have one less thing to worry about on top of finishing high school, applying to college, part-time jobs, and social life. There is no reason for 16 year olds getting their license to not be able to prove they are a citizen then and be able to vote automatically once they turn 18. It’s just common sense. It works fine and there is no reason to make it harder.

The Republican Party has been trying to make it harder to vote for over 20 years now. This needs to end. If someone is a citizen, they need to be able to vote. Registration makes sense since it is so easy, but once you are in the system as a citizen, you need to not have extra regulatory hurdles which serve no useful purpose.

The most absurd thing which somehow still counts is that in Texas you can vote with a handgun license, but not with a college ID. https://www.votetexas.gov/mobile/id-faqs.htm

Compare this to Illinois where a student ID is acceptable, but they don’t count gun licenses. https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_ID_in_Illinois

While a passport or a driver’s license is always valid to prove who you are, the other requirements vary state by state. So its still easiest to just get a passport card for $30, and that lasts for a decade. There is no good reason not to have one. Or just do mail-in voting which every state allows, and signature verification works very well. Regardless, there are many other valid reasons to have multiple forms of valid ID and scan them into a secure digital location, in case one gets lost or stolen.

But ultimately the rules we have work fine, non-citizen voting is exceedingly rare, and are written by populist who don’t understand the issue.

The SAVE Act should not be passed. It doesn’t solve any problem and just adds an additional step for people who register via a voter registration form. It will essentially shut down voter registration at college campuses by forcing students to still have to go to an office to register to vote. This is an unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle. The student submitted their proof of citizenship when they got their drivers license. There is no reason to add an additional hurdle, they have already proven their citizenship.

The United States is the most defended country in the world, and not just because our military is the largest, but through our network of alliances we are protected by the militaries of all of our allies combined. We have mutual protection pacts with countries on every continent except Africa, and our alliances have overall only grown since the end of World War II.

This begs the question if we wanted to expand our alliances further, which countries are the top candidates?

I’m using GDP per capita, homicide rate, gay rights status, The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index, Press Freedom Index from Reporters Without Borders, and Corruption Perceptions Index from Transparency International to determine which countries are the best candidates for future mutual protection pacts with the United States.

When we filter out all of the countries in the world that have data, the only countries that exceed the worst score in the Schengen Area for these six factors are Israel and Mauritius.

Israel already received a gigantic amount of support from the United States, so the only real advantage to a formal mutual protection pact is that the President could then send them aid without going through Congress every time. The caveat is mutual protection pacts naturally come with restrictions on how the weapons can be used, so the conduct in Gaza of blowing up schools and hospitals would certainly get aid to Israel stopped by the courts in accordance with any mutual protection pact we might sign with them. It would certainly require a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. So I do not expect anything to change regarding their status.

Mauritius is isolated in the Indian Ocean with very little land and population. They are very unlikely to be invaded and already have excellent relations with the United States. It would likely go through Congress quickly if they choose to pursue a mutual protection pact with us.

That’s it, every other country that meets or exceeds these six factors compared to the Schengen Area already is a member of the Schengen Area, European Union, or has a mutual protection pact with us.

If we decide that null values for these six parameters are also qualifying, because those countries tend to be very small, we find that Andorra and Nauru become potential Schengen members. Andorra is of course an enclave of the Schengen Area and lacks flights outside of the region, so there is no way to get to Andorra without going through the Schengen Area. Nauru is like Mauritius but even smaller and even less significant on the global stage. They maintain close relations with Australia and are unlikely to ever be invaded.

The Schengen Area is however a very elite group of countries. If we expand our net of potential allies to instead be focused on NATO three more countries become likely candidates. Those three countries are Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, and Fiji.

Fiji is similar to Mauritius but even less likely. Fiji has suffered 3 coups since independence. There have been multiple times in the last 30 years where their relations with Australia and New Zealand have become incredibly strained and Fijian ambassadors have been expelled from the country. This is certainly why Fiji does not have a mutual protection pact with any country today. Relations are better now and if Fiji can continue to have a democratic government, they will likely join a mutual protection pact. However, they have the same advantage as Mauritius of being fairly small and very isolated, so an invasion is unlikely.

Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia were the sites of NATO interventions during the genocides of the 1990s. NATO is very unpopular in these countries as a result, but they are both candidates to join the European Union, and once they finish the accession they will be covered by the European Union mutual protection pact Article 42.7.

Finally, there is a litany of countries that do better than the worst performing metrics for the Rio Pact as well, leading to a fairly long list of countries that could potentially join the United States in a mutual protection pact.

So our map looks like the following:

Many countries could probably succeed in joining a mutual protection pact with the United States. Mexico, Ecuador, and Bolivia used to be members of the Rio Pact, so their rejoining would be quickly accepted by the rest of the hemisphere. Ukraine and Georgia are applicants to NATO. Mongolia would benefit since they are a small country bordering Russia.

I think expanding the countries we are allied with is good for American national security. It will show we cannot be bullied anymore. It will isolate tyrants and lift up democracies, leading to a more peaceful world.

Let’s think about the total impact on gas prices over the budget of the average household.

You have an average income of around $55,000, so let’s be pessimistic and say you make $50,000 per year because the math is easier.

You drive a car that gets around 30 miles per gallon, you live 10 miles away from where you work, and you drive into the office five days a week. You commute 200 miles per month to get to and from work and consume just under 7 gallons of gasoline for your commute. Your car has a 10-gallon tank and you fill your tank once per month.

At $2 per gallon which is where gas prices were in 2020, you are then spending around $14 per month on gasoline or as much as $28 per month on gasoline in 2024.

In a total year, gasoline will cost you around $350. It doesn’t even take 1% of your income.

For comparison nowadays, if you want to rent a one-bedroom apartment in most of the country you will be spending close to $1000 per month, or $12,000 per year. This is over 20% of your income. Most people spend closer to 30% of their income on housing.

The real reason behind inflation over the last few years is due primarily to housing prices.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1DKjO

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOUST

We have failed to build enough housing units to satisfy demand, which has led to inflation. You cannot fight supply-pull inflation by increasing interest rates. Increasing interest rates makes it more expensive to build housing units, reducing supply, and increasing the price. That is why the current policy of increasing interest rates to fight inflation is misguided.

Maps are taken from https://www.oldmapsonline.org

The Principality of Moldavia was the westernmost part of the Mongol Empire from 1241 to 1346. Events before then are not important for understanding how Moldova became an independent republic from Romania. Before then the region was occupied by Turkic peoples.

After independence, the Principality of Moldavia was formed in 1346, ruling the land between the Danube Delta, the Carpathian mountains, and the Dniester River. In 1812 the Treaty of Bucharest was signed, granting what is now the Republic of Moldova to the Russian Empire. This was the first time Russia controlled any part of the historic Principality of Moldavia.

The Principality of Moldavia merged with Wallachia in 1859, renaming themselves as Romania in 1862.

Moldova was briefly reunited with the Kingdom of Romania after World War I, and during the Second World War, the Soviet Union retook Moldova in 1940.

In 1991 Moldova declared independence during the ongoing Transnistria War. Ukrainians formed a plurality of the population of Transnistria during the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union dissolved Transnistria had a Romanian/Moldovan plurality. The Transnistria war saw Moldova fighting against Russian-backed rebels, leading to a stalemate. After the war, Transnistria has remained a pluralistic society split evenly between Russians, Moldovans, and Ukrainians.

Transnistria today has major restrictions on freedom of the press, and violations of civil liberties are reported by groups like Freedom House. Polling data is sparse on all issues. The last presidential election has no polling data available on its Wikipedia page. The latest parliamentary election was uncontested in a majority of districts. Even Russian papers declared Transnistrian elections as undemocratic. It is ranked as not free by Freedom in the World.

That is the status of Transnistria.

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Transnistria