Hmmm. There is a general drift downward since around the Great Recession, although confidence in small business didn’t fall until the pandemic crash. Confidence in big business took a hit after the 2001 dot-com recession, after which it remained fairly flat until 2018 when it fell further. Confidence in the presidency plunged during the second Bush II term, recovered and then fell again during the Obama years, actually going up during Trump, and falling once again with Biden. Congress hit a high point circa 2003-2004 (I’m guessing before disillusion with US wars set in) and basically hasn’t recovered since. As for confidence in higher education, the trend is obvious and rather alarming.
Mmm…pretty steady in the confidence department until around 2017, then a downward trend, accelerating since 2020. I put the “civil unrest” lines in the chart to see if confidence in police dipped after periods of anti-police civil unrest. No pattern there until 2020, when high confidence responses dipped 5 points over the period of 2020 - 2023.
Since 2012, the US violent crime rate has fluctuated a bit, but it’s still higher than in 1960, when the violent crime rate was 161 crimes per 100,000 population, compared to a rate of 381 per 100,000 in 2022 (the most recent year available).
“During the COVID-19 pandemic, Sweden was among the few countries that did not enforce strict lockdown measures but instead relied more on voluntary and sustainable mitigation recommendations. While supported by the majority of Swedes, this approach faced rapid and continuous criticism. Unfortunately, the respectful debate centered around scientific evidence often gave way to mudslinging. However, the available data on excess all-cause mortality rates indicate that Sweden experienced fewer deaths per population unit during the pandemic (2020–2022) than most high-income countries and was comparable to neighboring Nordic countries through the pandemic. An open, objective scientific dialogue is essential for learning and preparing for future outbreaks.” - The Swedish COVID-19 approach: a scientific dialogue on mitigation policies, Björkman et al, 2023
This all seems so counterintuitive. You don’t die of Covid unless you are infected with Covid, so why wouldn’t there be an association between infection and death rates?
A sense of panic rarely leads to thoughtful planning. More often panic leads to bad policies, rushed implementation, poor outcomes, and political backlash. Better to tread carefully and self-correct as necessary.
So what does that mean for humans and the planet? Some predictions: unpredictable weather, extreme heatwaves, heat stressed cities, increased wildfires, severe droughts, water scarcity, increased frequency, intensity and/or amount of heavy rain and flooding, loss of species/mass extinctions, deforestation, lower crop yields, reduced food security, and widespread economic hardship. These problems will vary by region and local preparedness. Worst off will be countries that lack the resources or political will to build resilience and adapt to the coming onslaught of troubles…What to do?
“Stop all grants to advocacy groups?” I’m assuming “advocacy groups” refers to environmental groups, many of which employ scientists and policy wonks with expertise directly relevant to EPA concerns…Why in the world should the EPA simply stop using these groups? It’s possible to have strong convictions about the environment (whether nature-or human-centered, whether left or right) and maintain a high level of professional integrity. Environmental activists can still provide high quality information and advice. The EPA doesn’t have to embrace their ideological convictions to benefit from their input.
There was a time when Republicans embraced the cause of environmental protection. Think Progress noted that “some of the greatest conservationists ever to take the oath of office were Republicans.” Both Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists rated Richard Nixon one of the greenest president ever. And we're not talking ancient history here: both Presidents Bush supported cap and trade policies to reduce pollution…So what happened?
“Abstraction is the enemy of personal empathy, but it’s essential for equitable elections. Villages are communal, but they aren’t truly democratic. A level of abstraction is necessary to imagine other citizens as equal agents with rights, not clan histories.” - Adam Gopnik, To Fix Democracy, First Figure Out What’s Broken
Excerpt from Plan for Trump Administration: “The next Administration should champion the elimination of the Conservation Reserve Program…The USDA should work with Congress to eliminate this overbroad program.”
Comment: Note that the Conservation Reserve program, established during the Reagan administration, already targets highly erodible land and areas with “significant adverse water quality, wildlife habitat, or other natural resource impacts related to activities of agricultural production”. Those are specific and concrete environmental harms – not overly broad at all.
From Chapter 10 of Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise , a project led by the Heritage Foundation that outlines policy goals for a second Trump term: “For a conservative USDA to become a reality, and for it to stay on course with the mission as outlined, the White House must strongly support these reforms and install strong USDA leaders… There would be strong opposition from environmental groups and others who want the federal government to transform American agriculture to meet their ideological objectives.”
Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise is a project led by the Heritage Foundation that outlines policy goals for a second Trump term. William Perry Pendley is the author of Chapter 16: Department of the Interior. Pendley was appointed to deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 2019 and later served in an unofficial capacity as acting director of the BLM for the remainder of the Trump administration. My intention for this series of posts is purely informational, so for now I’m keeping my opinions to myself.
Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise is a project led by the Heritage Foundation that outlines policy goals for a second Trump term. Mandy Gunasekara is the author of Chapter 13: The Environmental Protection Agency. Gunasekara was Chief of Staff to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler from March 2020 – January 2021. Here are excerpts from Chapter 13. Note that my intention in this series of posts in purely informational. For now, I’ll be keeping my opinions to myself.
Consumer sentiment measures are the best predictor of how Americans feel about the economy, especially the University of Michigan’s Consumer Sentiment Index (CSI). The CSI provides a composite consumer sentiment score, based on answers to the following 5 survey questions…
This post includes excerpts from a Campbell systematic review of surveys and studies on the impact of school-based law-enforcement strategies, followed by a few observations of my own.
Note how the violent crime rate tripled between 1965 and 1980, and although the violent crime rate has been falling since the mid-1990s, it is still close to double the 1965 rate.
First, the numbers for homicide, aggravated assault, robbery, burglary and motor vehicle theft…Next, a comparison of Oakland and U.S. crime rates… Verdict: …
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) defines Palestine refugees as:
“…persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict…The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration.”
These excerpts are from: “To Fix Democracy, First Figure Out What’s Broken”, by Adam Gopnik/The New Yorker. September 25, 2023.