public health

California hit the wall? So I live in california and so not a newsom fan. I think his ideas cost us way too much. His taxes are killing us. So to list out a couple points -

1. The "Big Business" Exodus

The Paul Mitchell and Blue Diamond departures aren't isolated incidents; they are part of a trend where the "math" of staying in California no longer adds up for legacy companies.

• The Revenue Trap: California relies on the top 1% of earners for nearly half of its income tax. When a billionaire like John Paul DeJoria moves his HQ to Texas, it’s not just about the jobs—it’s a massive hit to the state's tax base.

   

• The Regulation Wall: Many companies leaving in 2026 cite the state’s aggressive new climate mandates and labor laws as the final straw. They feel the state is making it too expensive to simply exist.

2. The Oil Pipeline & Energy Crisis

There is a major showdown happening right now over the Las Flores pipeline system.

• The Probe: Just this week (February 4, 2026), federal investigators (DOJ and SEC) began demanding documents from Sable Offshore, the company trying to restart offshore oil pipelines near Santa Barbara.

   

• The Conflict: Newsom’s administration has been fighting to keep these lines closed to meet climate goals, while critics argue that shutting down local production just makes California more dependent on expensive foreign oil and drives up gas prices for regular people.

3. The High-Speed Rail "Burn"

The High-Speed Rail remains the ultimate symbol of government waste for many.

• The Money Pit: Despite being billions over budget and decades behind, the state is doubling down. Just last month (January 2026), they launched a new push to find private investors because the state can no longer afford to fund it alone.

• The Deficit Link: It is hard for the Governor to justify spending billions on a train through the Central Valley when he is simultaneously cutting healthcare benefits for immigrants and stripping funding from homelessness programs to plug a $3 billion to $18 billion deficit (depending on whose math you trust).

So i am wondering if Sheriff Chad Bianco ideas would not be good as well?

I myself find it quite conserning that some of these old business are leaving my suspect is high costs.

Oversimplified Mindsets. I often find that in times of great stress or uncomfortable situations, what I considered disadvantages have become of great strength. People are often told one of two extremes: their station is all their fault or it isn't. Both of these takes are disingenuous to provide comfort or fulfill an agenda, or oversimplified to avoid cognitive load. Your environment and situation HAVE to affect our outcomes. But sometimes, what are seen as adversities can become great strengths, through the story, grit, or unique perspectives one has. It can be an X factor. This is not to avoid striving for a better society where opportunities are provided, but it will return some loci of control from those who have had everything externalized, and give strength to move toward your goals. 

Race and IQ. I recently got dinner at a hole-in-the-wall asian spot with a geneticist named Razib Khan. Over noodles, and with a concerned glance over his shoulder, he admitted that the science is clear: race is absolutely tied to IQ. Jews are the smartest. Pretty much everyone on the continent of Africa is at the bottom.

This fact alone is controversial, but we have to be able to talk about it, and here’s why:

I nodded, and asked: How many generations does this take to change?

Razib: As little as three generations. For example, the Egyptians used to be the smartest, but a century of inbreeding knocked them to the bottom. Incest drops IQ by 10 points in the first generation. After that the effect weakens.

This is huge. At first glance, the controversial statement seems like a slamdunk for racists the world over. But dig into the details, and you find out 3 generations is enough to change things—this means that race and IQ are not inherently linked as far as we know, they’re just linked in today’s world, because of today’s policies and systems.

Knowing this could actually help us target where we need to focus our interventions for the next three decades. Let’s get us all up!

What if Tariffs Are a Good Thing? I was surprised to find that this podcast made me wonder whether tariffs would actually be really good for the US economy and, more importantly, for midd-class American people.

With all the raging about how awful Trump is, it's been very hard to find any thoughtful analysis about which parts of his policies might actually be beneficial for Americans.

In this podcast, Ross Douthat (NYT) interviews Oren Cass, the Founder and Chief Economist at American Compass, a conservative think tank. Oren makes a really good case for the following:

• we've been living through a period of mostly-unchecked globalization
• because GDP has been rising, economists generally argue that globalization is good
• HOWEVER, Oren provides compelling reasons why GDP growth is not a sufficient indicator of the health of the economy.  He cites things like increasing income inequality and the overall reduction in purchasing power when you factor things like households now having to have two full-time incomes to buy the same basket of things

The opportunity that tariffs provide is to buffer globalization and proactively re-shape the American economy to be more self-reliant, more inclusive and more balanced (geographically, industry-wise, etc).  For example, Oren notes that globalization has been driving wealth toward tech & financial hubs, like NYC, Austin, San Francisco, while middle America has been largely stagnant. With more manufacturing, job distribution could be more equitably spread across the country.

What I liked most about this podcast were a few things:

• it provides a thoughtful challenge to the mainstream chatter that "tariffs are bad!" and "Trump is ruining our economy!"
• the basis for tariffs is actually to improve the well-being of middle Americans who are not participating in the white collar tech and financial services boom
• that it challenges the assumptions that an unfettered globalized world economy is what works best.  Maybe it isn't?

What's your view on EMFs? What do you belief about EMFs? I keep hearing seemingly reputable people warning about them. My husband says the argument isn’t scientifically sound. If you think EMFs are harmful, why, and how do you reduce exposure? I use wireless headphones a lot- my phone not so much.

Reproductive rights. I have a really hard time understanding why folks support stripping reproductive rights before we’ve tackled better support for children and families in the US.

From my perspective, the better we can support children, mothers, and families more broadly, the less we’ll actually have unplanned pregnancies.

It just seems wise to really take care of those that are alive right now and try to improve their lives.

fact checking: fentanyl situation. how are folks receiving Vance’s claim that Kamala Harris’ border policy allowed more fentanyl into the country?

i don’t know much about this topic

fact checking: fentanyl situation. how are folks receiving Vance’s claim that Kamala Harris’ border policy allowed more fentanyl into the country?

i don’t know much about this topic

When it comes "the global warming debate," there are often third ways that are ignored. Often the framing is global warming and climate deniers or something like that.

but it seems like there are obviously multiple perspectives here, and these two black and white boxes keep us from really seeing potential solutions.

Bjorn Lomborg for example believes in man-made climate change, but also doesn’t like the alarmism. Although he cherry picks data like he accuses others of, he also I think rightfully points out lots of flaws in the arguments that help us identify solutions. Much of the hurricane damage increase over time is because we’re building bigger and more expensive houses in hurricane alleys; for this problem, we can stop building there; everybody stopping flying altogether until 2100 delays increases the increase by a few weeks, so stopping flying isn’t the solution. Often the solutions are smaller, more local, less sexy: want less polar bears to die? Increase regulation on poaching. (Polar bear populations are up over the past decade because of this, apparently). I would love to identify and popularize these solutions, so they are spoken in the same breath as global warming rather than it being all gloom and doom and end of the world.

There are real tricky questions about what we’re trying to preserve and for whom, as well. If all we care about are humans and climate migration, then building infrastructure in places like Haiti and even evolving to coal power would be more helpful.

COVID Vaccines: is the cure is worse than the disease (these days)? I don’t get COVID vaccines anymore. I did the first round while we were still in lockdown.

I stand by the choice to get vaccinated then. We didn’t know what was happening, lots of people were dying, good statistics were hard to come by (good interpretations even harder), and the virus hadn’t mutated yet.

It wasn’t great for me: two shots separated by a month; 5.5 days after the first I got shingles (apparently thousands of other people also got at that exact time) and then after the 2nd I was sicker than I’ve almost ever been. It lasted about 2.5 days and then was VOOM instantly cleared up. It was weird and felt unnatural. But perhaps when I later got COVID, it would have been WAY worse, without having gotten the vaccine.

Now, I don’t believe it’s worth it. The experience of having COVID is way less. It’s less deadly. There’s not a chance of herd immunity. And I’ve got friends who have awful long COVID from the vaccine. I haven’t done all the research, and anyone who’s tried to tell me about the research has seemed stilted to one side or another that had me take their interpretations with a huge grain of salt.

COVID Vaccines: is the cure is worse than the disease (these days)? I don’t get COVID vaccines anymore. I did the first round while we were still in lockdown.

I stand by the choice to get vaccinated then. We didn’t know what was happening, lots of people were dying, good statistics were hard to come by (good interpretations even harder), and the virus hadn’t mutated yet.

It wasn’t great for me: two shots separated by a month; 5.5 days after the first I got shingles (apparently thousands of other people also got at that exact time) and then after the 2nd I was sicker than I’ve almost ever been. It lasted about 2.5 days and then was VOOM instantly cleared up. It was weird and felt unnatural. But perhaps when I later got COVID, it would have been WAY worse, without having gotten the vaccine.

Now, I don’t believe it’s worth it. The experience of having COVID is way less. It’s less deadly. There’s not a chance of herd immunity. And I’ve got friends who have awful long COVID from the vaccine. I haven’t done all the research, and anyone who’s tried to tell me about the research has seemed stilted to one side or another that had me take their interpretations with a huge grain of salt.

What's your view on EMFs? What do you belief about EMFs? I keep hearing seemingly reputable people warning about them. My husband says the argument isn’t scientifically sound. If you think EMFs are harmful, why, and how do you reduce exposure? I use wireless headphones a lot- my phone not so much.

It's time to make circumcision illegal. Here’s the deal.

I believe it’s time to abandon this outdated procedure. It’s easy to maintain personal hygiene today and have access to healthcare, which were the two, IMO, worthy arguments for allowing this procedure.

The others- cultural, religious, or aesthetic arguments are outdated.