We Give Value To The Worthless

I am currently reading a book by Michael Lewis called Going Infinite: The Rise and Fall of A New Tycoon. A story about Samuel Bankman Fried and his FTX crypto-exchange, it is a fascinating tale of how we humans give value to things that are essentially worthless, while turning our backs on the things that should matter to all of humanity. As you probably know, it does not end well for Bankman-Fried and his too-trusting investors, just as it is not ending well for the rest of us as the world collapses around us.

What is the connection between crypto and climate collapse? The fact is that mining bitcoins (I really can't explain it beyond this) requires tremendous amounts of energy, and as we know, energy-production in most of the world is carbon-intensive. But what is a little terra degradation compared to the possibility of massive profits, eh?

Fortunately, it does matter.to some. The Globe and Mail's editorial board writes about

a power-hungry source with little discernible societal value: so-calling mining for cryptocurrencies.

Provinces such as Quebec, Manitoba and New Brunswick have limited or flat-out said no to crypto. British Columbia has joined them. In late 2022, B.C. paused new grid connections for crypto, facing power requests of greater than two Site C dams (a $16-billion, 1,100-megawatt project). This spring, B.C. passed legislation that allows the government to prohibit such connections.

However, that massive power requirement is only part of something even larger:

Crypto sucks up a lot of power – but so do data centres (think of Netflix and all your pictures in the cloud). Now, think of AI. Data centres and AI make a lot more sense as broadly worthwhile for the economy, but the reality is their power demands are dizzying. At extremes, such as in Ireland, data centres in 2022 consumed almost one-fifth of the country’s power. That’s in part because of companies such as Google. AI will only intensify this. The investment bank Goldman Sachs in May predicted data centres and AI could account for 3.5 per cent of worldwide power usage by 2030, up from about 1.5 per cent today. 

 The list of demands goes on. Turn attention to green hydrogen, a clean fuel, yet its potential power needs are extreme. A proposed $2-billion project in B.C. would require almost all of the Site C dam’s output. This puts the choices governments will have to make in sharp relief. In this case, it seems to make little sense, given competing demands.

Liquefied natural gas is another challenge. B.C. wants to slash emissions from LNG, and the upstart Cedar LNG project will be electrified, requiring power equivalent to about one-sixth of Site C’s output. That’s modest compared with Royal Dutch Shell’s LNG Canada near Kitimat, B.C., whose potential expansion would double the project’s export volume but would also suck up well more than half the power of Site C, along with $3-billion of new transmission.

As Canadians and as citizens of the world, we all have a responsibility for this ever-warming planet, and while there are solutions (solar and wind power are now cheaper than fossil fuels), we seem reluctant to make the expenditures necessary to wean ourselves off traditional sources of power.

That's human nature in a nutshell: shortsighted and self-centred, we care only about the immediate future, not the long-term consequences of our folly.

 

Nix The Fix

I have written previously about Pierre Poilievre's fondness for aphorisms, phrases that encapsulate a simplistic solution to complex problems. While reading this morning's paper, I came upon his 'solution' to our opioid crisis: forced rehabilitation- another aphoristic fix that, at least in Ontario, has its doubters.

Ontario Health Minister Sylvia Jones is taking issue with federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s talk of forcing people with drug addictions into treatment as the country grapples with a deadly opioid crisis.

In another sign of tensions between the provincial and federal Tories, with polls suggesting Poilievre is poised to become Canada’s next prime minister, Jones said mandatory rehab is the wrong path.

“I have concerns that involuntary treatment would not lead to the outcomes that we want,” Jones said Wednesday at Mount Sinai Hospital. 

“But having said that, when we see the opportunity and the need for intervention, and people are willing to take on those treatments to make a difference, that’s when we can show them our government is committed.”

Already worried enough about a Poilievre victory in the next federal election that would mean nothing good for the provinces (reduced transfer payments, ending the Trudeau strategy on EV production, etc.), Doug Ford is said to be contemplating an early Ontario election to get ahead of the fiscal bloodshed that will ensue with a Poilievre victory. It is therefore crucial for him to distinguish his government from the federal one-in-waiting, without alienating his right-wing supporters.

Jones said the province, where Premier Doug Ford has expressed reservations about safe consumption sites, has a new addictions plan coming in which “treatment is a very large portion.”

No further details were made available, but it is clear Ford sees the danger in too close an alignment with the kinds of draconian measures being proposed by Poilievre. But he will also have to face the fact that even more than his own government, Poilievre is very good at dumbing down important public policy issues to mere soundbites. Indeed, I would not be surprised if, along with his other facile pronouncements like axe the tax,  spike the hike, jail, not bail and hard time for hard crime, PP's braintrust comes up with something like nix the fix!

Has a bit of a ring, doncha think?

Just Keep Talking

While there is much discussion in the media as to whether Kamala Harris can sustain her momentum after the "honeymoon phase" is over, one element that will undoubtedly help is for unhinged Republicans to keep up their ridiculous rhetoric. The more 'trash' they talk, the more obvious will be their unfitness to govern, something that should have been obvious years ago. 

Here is just one example of what I am talking about. I double-checked that this video was not part of an elaborate satire, and it is not. Apparently there is a show on Fox called The Five, hosted by Jesse Watters, who offers a weird view of those who would vote for Harris.

Eugenics 101

 While this is shocking, it is somehow not surprising:

Trump's nephew Fred Trump III alleges that when his disabled son's medical fund was running low Donald Trump said to him:

“Your son doesn't recognize you. Let him die and move to Florida....But that is what he has become. It's sad.”

Feels So Fine

H/t de Adder

The NYT correctly observes that Kamala Harris's rise in popularity is the honeymoon phase of her pending nomination as the Democratic candidate for president, The challenge will be to ensure the momentum continues, and I have a feeling that will not be hard to do.

First, thanks to a link sent to me by Trailblazer, there is this:

What is remarkable about this is that it is a poll of swing states conducted by Fox News, something sure to inflame the crazed right wing.

Fox released a swing state poll that showed Harris' favorability ratings ahead of Trump's in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Michigan.

The poll states that it included registered voters, and took place July 22-24.

Trump critics were quick to react online.

@acnewsitics simply said, "Uh oh."

@kinsellawarren said, "Better than the numbers is the fact that this is a Fox News poll."

Trump supporter @GioBruno1600 asked, "Do you believe this FOX NEWS poll?"

@joled16 said, "Without having had a convention yet! OMG! I just realized this is a FOX NEWS poll! Trump must be furious with FOX."

@TheNewsTrending wrote, "A new Fox News poll shows that Trump's significant lead over Biden in battleground states has disappeared when compared with Vice President Harris."

Former White House aide Keith Boykin had this to say:

"The ketchup is going to hit the wall in Mar-a-Lago after this new Fox News poll."

While favourability and voting intentions are not necessarily synonymous, this is encouraging news. And the fact is, what do the Republicans have to counter other than the same bile that they always spew? There really is nothing else in their political toolbox.

Reflecting upon how events in the political world can quickly change, Jamie Watts writes:

Clearly, the tide was coming in and the Republicans only needed to ride it.

And then, the axiom “whoever speaks first loses” reared its ugly head and “events” quickly illustrated Vance’s selection was a grave, potentially fatal, mistake.

I’ll leave it to other pundits to divine his eclectic, ideologically elastic biography. My point is much more straightforward. Simply put, he is the wrong tool for the job, the proverbial knife for what is now a gunfight.

This rather feeble performance illustrates Watts' point. 

Vance, suffice it to say, might well run-up the score in red states, but he will do next to nothing to turn the Trump-curious into Trump voters. People who support Vance already support Trump. His candidacy is not a growth proposition, it is a consolidation effort. Moreover, it’s worth noting that two white males at the top of the GOP ticket are woefully unsuited to take on a woman of colour.

Of course, anything can happen between now and election day. However, given the early signs, I think people on both sides of the border have reason for hope.

Time To Stock Up

I'm kind of busy lately and don't have time today for a lengthy post. However, one quick observation, and then a suggestion for the Republicans.

First, it is refreshing to see the Democrats in the United States taking the initiative by seizing a narrative that puts their opponents on the defensive. By defining the race in terms many can relate to, they offer a clear choice for the November elections. 

Here is that narrative:

Then there is this feeble, empty and predictable screed from Trump that should frighten no one:

My suggestion to those Republicans who have taken to wearing diapers is a simple one: stock up - I have a feeling you're going to need them.

Outmatched

H/t Moudakis

I'll readily admit that upon first learning that Kamala Harris would likely replace Joe Biden in this year's presidential race, I was somewhat dismayed. The history of vice-presidents going for the highest office in the U.S. after their presidents decided not to run for a second term is inauspicious. Adlai Stevenson, Harry Truman's VP, lost  to Dwight Eisenhower, and Hubert Humphrey, Lyndon Johnson's VP, lost to Richard Nixon.

However, I had a quick change of heart based on two things: the strength and confidence evident in Harriss's appearances as her party's presidential candidate, and the fact that the man and the party she is running against can be counted on to drive people away from their cause. They just won't be able to help themselves.

If you watched the short video I posted yesterday, you will see a woman projecting strength, a strength leavened by an almost impish quality as she talks about knowing Don Trump's type from her years as a prosecutor. It was a performance, in my view, designed to cut him down to the small size he really is. And, of course, there are few things that Don can stand less than being laughed at and ridiculed. Combined with all the facts she will have at her disposal, Harriss will make a very formidable opponent.

Which leads me to my second point: Neither Trump nor his many enablers and Kool-Aid drinkers will be able to remain calm and rational in the threat she poses for them. First of all, she is a woman, and we know that misogyny is bred in the bone when it comes to Don and many of his disciples. Secondly, she is a woman of colour, a fact that has already unleashed a torrent of racist abuse from those who occupy the darker corners of the internet.

Heidi Beirich, an expert on American far-right extremism and a co-founder of Gpahe, said: “Female politicians have been targeted with misogynistic language for years, and usually they are the recipients of far more hate and sexism than male candidates face.”

“Attacks on Harris for her racial background are skyrocketing online,” added Beirich, who gave testimony to the House select committee to investigate the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. “As bad as the racism targeting her is, the misogyny seems worse.

“She’s being attacked for supposedly sleeping her way to the top and with horrible sexist slurs. Sadly, this is how it goes nowadays, with racism and hate so prevalent online.”

Heather Mallick ponders the situation, quoting J.D Vance, Don's running mate:

“We are effectively run in this country … by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too. And it’s just a basic fact if you look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC — the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children.” 

The above represents just a small sampling of the kind of desperate nonsense being spewed, and obviously, the attacks will sharpen and increase as the campaign progresses. But as I said earlier, the Republicans just can't help themselves, and while such attacks may strengthen the resolve of their base, they will do nothing to bring new voters into the Republican fold. Indeed, they will inevitably drive away those voters who are undecided, sending them right into Kamala's camp, including  people without children and childless cat ladies. As well, both those attacks and the candidacy of an intelligent and biracial woman will see far less Democrats sitting out this election and an increase in new voter registrations.

It can be no surprise that racist and misogynistic impulses amongst the mentally, morally and intellectually unfit will continue and grow. The question for the rest of America to ask themselves, however, is whether they want to be part of that increasingly sorry and desperate lot.