Hal Singer

5.3K posts

Hal Singer banner
Hal Singer

Hal Singer

@HalSinger

MD @ EconOne | Prof @EconUofU | ED @ UtahProject | NYTimes: "one expert for the plaintiffs" | Prospect:"preeminent watchdog of The Economist's most wrong takes"

Washington, D.C. Katılım Aralık 2011
2.9K Takip Edilen16.9K Takipçiler
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
The Abundance Grifters can’t figure out why their deregulation policies aren’t welcome in the progressive coalition. Exhibit A is Trump’s granting a favor to the tobacco industry (flavored e-cigs for kids) in return for campaign contributions—the ultimate grift. You can’t coherently distinguish your philosophy from your rival’s by saying “Our corporate contributors—developers and their investors—aren’t as shady as the tobacco industry.” The message instead must be “We will never place corporate interests over the public welfare.”
Hal Singer tweet mediaHal Singer tweet media
English
1
10
45
1.4K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
Trump obviously cares about the stock market, which reflects the financial situation of upper-income households. So the more accurate statement would be "I don't care about *low-income* Americans' financial situation, like those who have to reduce spending on basic necessities when the price of gas spikes."
English
2
2
8
537
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
The Dems should play this quote on a repeated loop before the mid-terms
Hal Singer tweet media
English
2
2
15
661
Hal Singer retweetledi
David Sirota
David Sirota@davidsirota·
“Corporate centrism” = siding with big corporations & oligarchy on every issue typically because one is being remunerated by big corporations & oligarchs — and then pretending siding with corporate power & oligarchy reflects the center of public opinion when it is actually loathed by the public
Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesias

@davidsirota What is “corporate centrism”? How come none of your interventions in these arguments ever involve the use of clear, comprehensible language?

English
11
105
742
23.8K
Hal Singer retweetledi
Bharat Ramamurti
Bharat Ramamurti@BharatRamamurti·
“But a settlement payment even a fraction of the size of Mr. Trump’s requested $10 billion could be much larger than his other attempts at private gain, potentially doubling his net worth.” This is a massive scam—much worse than the ballroom—and Dems should raise hell over it.
The New York Times@nytimes

Breaking News: The Justice Department is said to be considering settling a lawsuit President Trump filed against the IRS over the release of his tax returns. nyti.ms/4wl9069

English
20
403
1.4K
55.3K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
@tolles I’m all in favor of more supply. The San Fran Fed study was focused on something related but different—whether less onerous zoning rules affected housing growth. They think not. Can we still be friends?
English
1
0
0
8
Chris Tolles
Chris Tolles@tolles·
@HalSinger it’s honestly puzzling to me that you want to grasp at anything that will deny that supply and demand are as close to physical laws that exist in behavioral science. Increasing supply works to decrease costs and (like in SF) you just need to build more to lower prices
M. Nolan Gray 🥑@mnolangray

For 45 years, Berkeley built virtually no new housing. By the mid-2010s, it was the most expensive college town in America. Shortly thereafter, YIMBYs took over and kicked off a building boom. Today, nominal rents are below 2018 rates—remarkable progress on affordability.

English
1
0
2
94
Hal Singer retweetledi
Laurel
Laurel@BalanceCrafting·
House GOP lawmakers are reportedly pushing amendments to bipartisan ROAD to Housing Act (which passed Senate by 89-10) that would 1) water down limits on ability of private equity to buy up homes & 2) remove restrictions on "build-to-rent" developments backed by Wall Street 🧵
Laurel tweet media
English
2
15
11
3.3K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
Wait. Trump reads The Sling?
Hal Singer tweet mediaHal Singer tweet mediaHal Singer tweet media
English
1
1
3
969
Hal Singer retweetledi
David Sirota
David Sirota@davidsirota·
The Abundance Institute just sent out an email touting AI data centers by telling us they use less water than golf courses and a major piece of the agricultural system that feeds the planet. Is this really the best argument these people have? Really?
David Sirota tweet media
English
38
67
416
33.3K
Hal Singer retweetledi
Lawprofblawg
Lawprofblawg@lawprofblawg·
On behalf of @brian_callaci and @musharbash_b, allow me to wish your mother a happy mother's day. Your ad hominem post clearly and proudly reflects her values. If you would like to engage on ideas, feel free to provide links to your published works.
Antitruster@AntitrustEcon

@lawprofblawg @brian_callaci You and Brian and Basel should write a paper together. It would be like “The Highwaymen” of hilariously bad economics.

English
1
3
6
1.9K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
Of course the data center that is draining 30 million gallons of water from an Atlanta suburb is owned by a private equity firm. We don't have to live this way.
Hal Singer tweet mediaHal Singer tweet media
English
5
130
393
5.8K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
I’m glad we’ve moved from *whether* AI would destroy jobs to *which* jobs AI will destroy. When you guys are ready to talk policy interventions in response to AI-induced job dislocations—e.g., a massive federal jobs program—just hit me up.
Hal Singer tweet media
English
9
5
20
1.5K
Lawprofblawg
Lawprofblawg@lawprofblawg·
And just like that, @HalSinger had an abundance Bro troll for a bit, accuse me of being the troll, and attempt to put words in my mouth. Quite amazing and fortuitous timing!
Hal Singer@HalSinger

By the way, I posted something to this effect about Dems rejecting Abundance (aka deregulation) as a key pillar of their platform, and the venom I received from the Abundance Grifters was off the charts. It’s impossible to coherently combat fascism/oligarchy while simultaneously defending the rights of big developers and investors to escape environmental regulations or zoning rules.

English
1
0
1
721
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
By the way, I posted something to this effect about Dems rejecting Abundance (aka deregulation) as a key pillar of their platform, and the venom I received from the Abundance Grifters was off the charts. It’s impossible to coherently combat fascism/oligarchy while simultaneously defending the rights of big developers and investors to escape environmental regulations or zoning rules.
Hal Singer@HalSinger

“For the Democratic Party to continue to exist, for it to have any hope in the future in my opinion, it needs to excise from itself corporate power and a relationship with neoliberalism, quite frankly. What we need to be doing now is getting that way of thinking, getting that ideology out of the party. I’m all for a big tent … If people want to have an argument about themselves about whether their progressive social ideas are more important than protecting billionaires’ taxes or lack of taxes, go have that fight in the Republican party.” — Graham Platner Amen.

English
4
10
60
3.8K
Hal Singer
Hal Singer@HalSinger·
“For the Democratic Party to continue to exist, for it to have any hope in the future in my opinion, it needs to excise from itself corporate power and a relationship with neoliberalism, quite frankly. What we need to be doing now is getting that way of thinking, getting that ideology out of the party. I’m all for a big tent … If people want to have an argument about themselves about whether their progressive social ideas are more important than protecting billionaires’ taxes or lack of taxes, go have that fight in the Republican party.” — Graham Platner Amen.
The Lever@LeverNews

How did America go from Obama to Trump? Maine Senate candidate @grahamformaine tells @davidsirota it wasn’t some great mystery: Democrats bailed out banks, abandoned working people, and let corporate power keep running the party. Go and listen to the full episode over on The Lever's Youtube channel.

English
3
53
354
18.1K
Hal Singer retweetledi
Sandeep Vaheesan
Sandeep Vaheesan@sandeepvaheesan·
The point was actually quite different: Figma's IPO, which followed successful DOJ (not FTC) pressure against its merger with Adobe, showed that there is an attractive exit option for entrepreneurs besides being bought out by a large firm
Derek Thompson@DKThomp

When Lina Khan blocked the Figma-Adobe merger, and Figma later IPO'd‚—making lots of people very rich and even minting a few billionaires in the process—the left praised Khan's policies for creating all that value. Khan herself called it "a win" for investors. But now we're also hearing that wealth is inherently unethical and extractive. So, I guess I'm confused. Is it inherently evil to create billions of dollars of value as part of an enterprise in which you retain equity ownership? Or is it ... sometimes good? Or is it mostly only good when it's downstream of anti-monopoly measures?

English
0
11
36
3.8K

Keşfet

@LeverNews @lukewgoldstein @tolles @brian_callaci @musharbash_b @lawprofblawg @elonmusk @BarackObama