Joshua Prager, in an interview with ProPublica's Alexandra Zayas, describes how the pro-choice movement "lost the battle" for Roe v. Wade. But while the pro-life movement was considerably more creative (just look at all the phrases they made mainstream, like "partial-birth abortion"), fact is "it's much easier to try to knock something down than to defend it," and now the Supreme Court ruling, once it comes down, is "going to galvanize the tens of millions of people who are horrified about what’s happening now." We all saw this right after Donald Trump's election.
I hate to think the worst of anyone, even the Amazon executives who have promised to reimburse American employees so they can travel to get abortions (among other medical treatments), but I can't help but ask if this isn't just a scheme to fire workers. Workers can go get what they need, only to find their bosses (be they unscrupulous or merely under constant pressure to "reduce costs") rejecting their proof of treatment paperwork even if it's the most perfect paperwork ever, and hoping said workers just give up instead of fight for their job back. Hey, it's a big corporation, so we have to ask. (Occam's Razor might compel me to accept that this announcement more likely aims to distract us from Amazon's other announcement ending paid sick leave for employees with COVID.)
Starbucks has announced plans to raise wages and benefits -- but only for workers who aren't unionizing! "That’s not how labor law works and Starbucks knows it," says one union organizer, but here's what else Starbucks knows: raising wages for some people and not others divides workers, because what else can you do when you're Starbucks? Go back in time and treat all your workers much better than you did? Our Glorious Elites have no solutions to offer, only stratagems aimed to divide and conquer us. I hope all Starbucks workers have the wisdom to see through this nefarious plan.
This Roll Call profile of Rep. David Cicilline's relatively recent interest in/obsession with reining in monopolies gives us a quick history of antitrust law in America, mostly through the eyes of a staunch defender of bad antitrust policy; you'll be able to see through his cheerleading once you realize that he doesn't explain how antitrust policy specifically gives us an "advantage" over European economies -- or, more likely, once you ask who all that American GDP growth really benefited, exactly. So the article's not great, but it's good exercise for the mind.
Surprise, surprise, J.D. Vance didn't get more support from rural areas in winning the Ohio Senate Republican primary, but got about the same amount of support across the state. You know, in case you were thinking the Hillbilly Elegy author had some sort of magic key to getting rural votes -- the only "magic key" he had was Donald Trump's endorsement (though I'm pretty sure Mr. Trump's "J.D. Mandel" moment wasn't the big man losing his train of thought but simply hedging his bets), and again, it didn't mean more in rural areas. Ohio Democratic Senate nominee Tim Ryan sure hit him hard the day after the primary, though. Mr. Ryan may not be Sherrod Brown, but he's always hit a lot of the same notes, particularly the anti-war and anti-free trade notes. And that sneer when Mr. Ryan says "CNN"? I've seen that sneer in the mirror. I like his chances; I hope he stays focused.
Finally, Snopes.com does a fact-check on the theory that Bill Gates "owns most American farmland" "so he can cause food shortages," and finds it wanting -- Mr. Gates likely owns more American farmland than any American individual, but that comes to only 0.03% of all American farmland. (That's three one-hundredths of one percent, not "three percent" or "30 percent." I just know some troll's going to say it.) The interesting thing about this theory -- and if I ever have infinite time, I bet I'll discover far too many conspiracy theories are like this! -- is that it completely disappears big ag corporations from the conversation, though they'd be far more likely to cause food shortages than Bill Gates. And a lot of Twitter users have used ZOMG BILL GATEZ OWNZ ALLZ TEH FARMZ!!!!! to argue that we shouldn't worry about Elon Musk taking over Twitter, which is offensively stupid arguing, akin to saying you are only allowed to worry about one thing at a time! or if you think x is wrong, you're not allowed to say anything else is wrong. Yeah, I know, they're trolls. But as a famous philosopher once said, when a man lies, he murders some part of the world.