Adam Resnick

Could you cite specific gripes with the article? I read it and found that it called out fairly widespread fraud that is costly, and that negatively impacts legitimate claimants. It also pointed out unfairness in payouts for marginal versus serious conditions. Overall, I don’t see “smear” here.

Of course you make a vital distinction. Thus, the game is on: we have a fascist leader who has not yet succeeded at imposing a fascist system top to bottom. Democratic means still exist to roll back the partial slide towards fascism. Midterms. Courts. State-level action. Consumer activism. Fight!

I am a stranger to you, but I wish you the best in overcoming all of these challenges. I perceive that you are strong and that you advocate for yourself for others. I am rooting for you.

No. Did you read the article and evaluate its arguments against the claims made in this thread?

Poor takes. Did any of y‘all read the piece? “I wanted Kirk to be safe for his sake, but I also wanted him to be safe for mine…. The same is true for Shapiro, for Hoffman, for Hortman, for Thompson, for Trump, for Pelosi, for Whitmer. We are all safe, or none of us are.”

Point taken. Counterpoint: Why are the British noticeably more expert at interviewing politicians?

Highly recommend audiobook versions, widely available at your local public library. I’ll plan to rewatch the movie since it’s been a long time.

Glad we can still access this masterpiece, as many on our planet don’t have the privilege.

Excellent non-fiction storytelling

That is an excellent recap. Thanks for pulling it together.

Congrats! Well deserved.

Ed brought it. Well done, Ed.

The hubris and insularity of my party is an important issue to unpack, and I’m glad that they are provoking that conversation. Hillary didn’t listen to staff and she lost. Bidens didn’t listen and Kamala lost. Duh that Republican fascists are ruining our country, but we need a housecleaning.

Douthat did a poor job. Softball questions. Weak or no follow up. Failure to call out lies and contradictions. Substandard journalism. Hire @mehdirhasan.bsky.social and set him loose.

Three thoughts: (1) I did enjoy their conversation. (2) Ezra and Jake, and their big outlet colleagues, have covered the Trump craziness quite thoroughly, (3) we Dems need to get our house in order and these frank conversations are a useful part of that process/truth and reconciliation is needed.

Giving Tree vibes.

I appreciate your straightforward language. And BTW the Capitol tour your staff provided in early April was really great. Thank you!

Congrats! Sounds like a really great course.

We have big differences on terminology. There are certainly many of us who consider ourselves leftists while at the same time being supportive of regulated capitalism. To you, is Denmark run in a supply side, Reaganite manner?

Right here you are not addressing the arguments in the book. He makes specific, evidence-based arguments about housing costs in different markets. If your view is that capitalism always sucks, fine. That’s a broader critique that doesn’t shed light on this book, but is a blanket rejection.

.

We are working with different definitions of leftist. I use the term in the United States context to mean a market oriented social Democratic approach. If you are devoted Marxist, that’s fine. I’m not. And neither is Ezra. That does not make us right wing supply sliders.

Fair point on the ad hominem issue. I will rephrase. It sounds like you are rejecting Klein based on a track record of leftist, market-oriented prescriptions, rather than engaging with his arguments. I’ll read Matt Walsh and judge the arguments rather than reject out of hand based on authorship.

The arguments are not obfuscated - he advocates explicitly for deregulation. One could see it as a capitulation, or as an acknowledgment that we live in a market economy and need to maximize supply in order to reduce prices, thus making housing accessible to people with lower incomes.

Ad hominem argument + vague generalization + vague suggestion. Zero engagement with actual arguments in the book. Please do better.

No. It’s a call to liberals to align our policy making with our stated goals, mainly by reducing cumbersome regulation. It’s also a primer on the best types of government policies for promoting innovation. It’s not perfect, but it has the seeds of a promising narrative for the left.

The abundance argument is not esoteric at all. It’s reasonably straightforward attempt to explain how the left can produce better results (eg housing, infrastructure, innovation), and it’s worth a look.

Tom Friedman Thinks We’re Getting China Dangerously Wrong Podcast Episode · The Ezra Klein Show · 04/15/2025 · Subscribers Only · 1h 12m

For a firsthand account of the robustness of Chinese robotic manufacturing, this podcast with Friedman is a great listen. podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...

Great piece. You really captured the immigration dichotomy there, and painted a picture of the vibrance and complexity of Mexico City.

100% Sizzler, though I appreciated Wendy’s when they had it too.

I took the White House tour this morning and both portraits were up, opposite each other in the same room.