“President Trump recently described the U.S. naval blockade of Iran as ‘a very friendly blockade.’ There is no such thing. A blockade is an act of war, using armed forces to restrict another nation’s movement, commerce and access to the sea. It does not become peaceful because no one challenges it on a particular day. Trump’s administration says the ceasefire with Iran means he no longer has to seek congressional authorization to continue the war beyond 60 days, even though federal law requires it. A ceasefire may pause the shooting. It does not make an ongoing act of war disappear. The president can argue that the blockade is necessary. He cannot honestly argue that the war is effectively over while keeping the blockade in place. More dangerous than Trump’s word choice is Congress’[s] silence.” (05/07/26)
Source: Caitlin Johnstone, Rogue Journalist
by Caitlin Johnstone
“Richard Dawkins is currently the subject of much laughter and ridicule over his recent article for UnHerd admitting that a highly sycophantic chatbot had convinced him that it might be conscious. I’m seeing the question ‘How can you be confident that AIs aren’t conscious?’ pop up a lot in response to the controversy. Speaking for myself, I would say I am confident the chatbots aren’t conscious in the same way I’m confident the animatronics at Disneyland aren’t conscious. I know humans constructed them to mimic the behavior of a sentient person. We know this for a fact. Nobody’s pretending otherwise. I am infinitely more likely to believe an animal is conscious than that an LLM is, because nobody programmed them to respond to things like pain and social stimulus in ways that are similar to humans.” (05/07/26)
“A core premise of science is that research should be replicable. If one scientist creates an experiment to measure a physical constant like the speed of light, and they document their experiment well enough, other scientists should be able to perform the same experiment and find the same result. If one lab’s results can’t be replicated anywhere else, then like cold fusion, they probably aren’t real. Outside of hard sciences like physics we don’t expect to get the same precision. Perhaps one trial finds a drug reduces heart attacks by 17%, while another finds 14%. But for research to usefully inform our actions, it needs to be at least somewhat replicable.” (05/07/26)
“Since early March 2026, the average American household has been spending 50 percent more to fill their tank than just one month earlier. The Trump administration and its Israel-first ideologues blamed market forces for the spike, framing it as short-term pain for long-term gain. What they will not say, what they are never permitted to say in Washington, is that Americans have been living the ‘pain’ of the Israeli oil surcharge tax for more than half a century. The bill keeps growing, but no longer only financially. The U.S. is also paying with something harder to rebuild than a budget, its moral standing in the world.” (05/07/26)
“A recent analysis from the Tax Foundation argues that the US federal income tax system remains solidly progressive. Citing new Internal Revenue Service data for tax year 2023, the group is emphasizing that high-income taxpayers pay the highest average tax rates and account for a large share of total income taxes paid. On its face, that claim sounds reassuring—a sign that our tax code must surely be doing its job. But this framing leaves out a critical part of the story. Yes, the wealthy pay more in taxes than everyone else. The real question: whether they’re paying enough, their fair share relative to their rapidly growing share of our nation’s income and wealth. By that measure, the answer must be a clear no. The US tax system, the underlying data show, remains far less progressive than it once was — and far less effective at counteracting inequality than it needs to be.” (05/07/26)
“Decades after a famous revolt by California homeowners led to the relief provided by Proposition 13, taxpayers acting to resist sky-high property taxes are making waves throughout the country.” (05/07/6)
“Productivity growth is an old concept; we’ve been seeing it at a substantial pace for more than 200 years. Nonetheless, many elite intellectual types like to claim they know nothing about it when they talk about AI. It’s far from clear how much of a productivity boom we will see with AI. For people who are lost with my reference to productivity growth, the story that AI will take all the jobs is a story of a massive productivity boom. If that happens, it will mean that the people who are still working will be hugely more productive, since we will be producing the same or more goods and services as we do at present, with many fewer people working. FWIW, virtually no major forecaster or forecasting agency is projecting anything like this productivity boom. For example, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that productivity growth will average 1.5 percent over the next decade.” (05/07/26)
