@FromaHarrop
How Did Our Land Of Plenty Become A Swamp Of Discontent?

How Did Our Land Of Plenty Become A Swamp Of Discontent?

During a visit to one of our supermarkets, a French friend looked over a long shelf of apples. Seeing several varieties piled halfway to heaven, she remarked, "This is truly the land of plenty." It truly is, but how, for so many of us, did it become the "land of discontent"?

Of course, our political battles require challengers to go on and on about how bad things are and how they can fix what ails. Gas prices are always too high. Violent crime is rampant, even in places that see almost none of it. So many voters buy into this dark vision, which is why politicians portray life in America as a daily struggle between good and evil.

But if you look at the millennia of human habitation — or even other parts of the world today — you'll see societies haunted by rape and pillage, starvation, and deadly epidemics. The Great European Famine of the 14th Century killed as much as 25 percent of some countries' population. On top of that, the bubonic plague brought death to as many as 30 million Europeans.

Modern medicine can conquer diseases that no amount of wealth or power could beat in centuries past. Small pox and polio have been largely eradicated through vaccination. Tuberculosis and typhoid fever are now highly treatable with antibiotics. So many take all this for granted.

Our recent runup in egg prices, caused largely by the bird flu, was not the calamity portrayed in some media. A dozen eggs that cost $4.75 in January 2023 were down to $2.52 a year later.

Sure, the sharp drop in the inflation rate has not restored some prices hiked by past inflation. But the bottom has hardly dropped out of the American standard of living. And since the middle of last year, average wage growth has outrun inflation.

"The Next President Inherits a Remarkable Economy," says a recent headline in The Wall Street Journal. The U.S. economy, the article declares, has been "outrunning every other major developed economy, not to mention its own historical growth rate." Through the second quarter, the American economy grew three percent. None of the next six biggest advanced countries got over one percent.

Yet 62 percent of Americans in a recent poll panned the economy as "not so good" or "poor." Donald Trump kept calling it "failing."

Factors outside of politics drum discontent into the public's head. Especially malign are social comparisons spread by advertising and social media. Those visions of early retirement on sailing yachts, winds blowing the right way, are hard to obtain even on a good middle-class income. And there's that suffocating coverage of the super-rich — of Jay Z and Beyonce's $88 million Bel-Air mansion with four swimming pools.

With more of us living isolated lives, our views distorted through social media, we are even more subject to feelings of never quite measuring up. "Inadequacy is the birthright of every American," some smart person said.

There's not much of a market to sell contentment with what we have — even if what we have dwarfs the rest of the world and most of history. Early in the last century, running water was not a given. Electricity was far from universal, even in the mansions of the Gilded Age. What average Americans back then wouldn't have done for the luxury of lighting a room with the push of a switch.

So much is better now, but sadly, Americans have been spun to feel perpetually cheated, to feel they're getting a bad deal. For so many, this land of plenty has turned into the land of discontent.

This is the month of Thanksgiving. Let's give thanks for what we have.

Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @FromaHarrop. She can be reached at fharrop@gmail.com. To find out more about Froma Harrop and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators webpage at www.creators.com.

Donald Trump Is A (Malignant) Foreign Influence

Donald Trump Is A (Malignant) Foreign Influence

I recently spent time flying to various regions of this country and was struck by how nice almost everyone was. Whether boarding to New York, Chicago or Albuquerque, I found fellow passengers to be super polite, patient with slow movers, helpful lifting bags into the overhead. The number of racial and ethnic backgrounds sharing the aircrafts would be hard to quantify.

This is America, still, for now. But one is struck by how un-American Donald Trump is. Underneath all that flag-waving, his contempt for soldiers wounded or killed in action, the democratic process, and people of other colors violates the American ideal. His us-versus-them scapegoating comes right out of the fascist playbook.

Sociologists refer to the "other" as those not treated as part of our culture/race/religion. The people I came across on my trip treated each other with basic courtesy. Trump, frankly, is not one of us.

I yield to no one in the desire to enforce our immigration laws. Polls say most Americans know we need foreign-born workers but want them to enter the country legally. I'm with them.

Illegal border crossings are now lower than when Trump left office. And Kamala Harris says she would immediately sign into law the strict, bipartisan immigration bill that Trump had Republicans kill.

After a "comedian" at the recent Trump rally referred to Puerto Rico as "a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean," Trump offered no contradicting views, much less condemnation. The Trump camp reportedly had heard the routine in advance and had no problem with the slur on Latinos. One adds that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens. They are all here legally.

Ronald Reagan, noting the strong work ethic and family values of the Hispanic culture, famously said: "Latinos are Republicans. They just don't know it yet."

Trump's running mate J.D. Vance would not backtrack either on the comedian's bigoted riff. "I haven't seen the joke," Vance said, lying right to our faces. He went on: "I think we have to stop getting offended by every little thing."

I wondered: Had the opposition mocked Vance's wife for being the daughter of immigrants from India whether he would have even responded, so lacking he is in self-respect. Vance and his wife, Usha, wore traditional Indian attire at a wedding ceremony officiated by a Hindu priest. He even had the dot on his forehead symbolizing a third eye.

You can imagine what MAGA would do had Kamala Harris, who is part Indian American, worn a sari, no matter how stunning, at her wedding. It would be all over the ads painting her as the "other."

Trump is OK with rich foreigners who dangle dollars before him. His most prominent billionaire backers are immigrants Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. They came to America to make a pile and did. They obviously see Trump as not only for sale but increasingly easy to manipulate as his mental capacities continue their decline. (At a recent rally, Trump said the country is "close to World War II.")

More to the point, these billionaire migrants don't appreciate the rule of law and orderly election process that have made America their land of opportunity. Or they don't really care, knowing they can move onto their next country and take their billions with them. (This is Musk's third nationality.)

Should Trump win the election, America faces descent into the kind of fascist society seen elsewhere, a shambles run on primitive threats and violence. One hopes that enough Republicans will want their party back and vision of America preserved to make him lose.

All this said, many members of Trump's brainwashed cult are undoubtedly good people. They just don't know it yet.

Froma Harrop has worked for Reuters, The New York Times News Service and the Providence Journal. She has written for such diverse publications as The New York Times, Harper’s Bazaar and Institutional Investor.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Trump Threatens The Stability Of Social Security

Trump Threatens The Stability Of Social Security

Donald Trump's tax and spending plans would add enormous amounts to the national debt, with some estimates as high as $15 trillion over a decade. But some of his tax cuts stand apart in threatening one of America's most revered programs, Social Security. They would essentially bankrupt it by 2031.

This is not some far-off worry. We're talking like six years from now. And the source of this scary news is the reliable and nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

How would Trump pull the legs out from under it? Start with his vow to stop taxing Social Security benefits. That sounds nice, but these taxes help fund the program. Add to that his call to exempt taxes for overtime pay and tips, further eating into Social Security payroll tax collections.

Seemingly unrelated stances would also speed up cuts in scheduled benefits. Trump's tariffs would unleash inflation, thus raising the program's cost-of-living adjustment. And his immigration plans would remove workers who pay into the system.

What a lot of people don't understand about Social Security is that there is no magical pile of government money to back up its promises. Social Security is largely self-funding by law. (Medicare is another story.) Social Security must pay for itself. Unlike the Treasury, it's not allowed to borrow.

This is how it works: Social Security payroll tax collections go into a trust fund. Any surplus funds left after benefits are disbursed get invested in special U.S. Treasury securities. These are loans to the federal government. Like other bonds, they collect interest and have to be paid back.

Foes of Social Security have long complained that general revenues are used to make good on these special Treasuries. True, but let us repeat. These securities represent loans to the government, not some new kind of spending. The Treasury must repay this debt just as it must back Treasury bonds held by China, Japan and investors all over the world. (Some on the right make the ludicrous tough-luck claim that the dough is already gone.)

The point here is that monkeying around with the flow of money going into the Social Security program is a way of deep-sixing public support for it. As president, Trump applied the same sneaky tactics in his attempt to kill the Affordable Care Act. Recall how he went repeatedly after its funding.

Shoring up Social Security will be necessary even without Trump's sabotage. The program is still forecast to be unable to meet promised payouts in 2035. But this is fixable with some overdue changes. One obvious step is raising the income level at which payroll taxes are charged. The maximum is now $168,600.

The Heritage Foundation, author of Project 2025, has an alternative plan: reduce benefits. It calls for raising the age, already hiked to 67, for collecting full benefits. So much for Americans worn out from years of hard physical labor.

Heritage also proposes lowering benefits to higher-income retirees. Two problems here. One is that, as noted, benefits to wealthier retirees are already taxed. The other is that reducing the program's value to better-off participants turns what was conceived as an earned benefit into something resembling welfare.

And there's Heritage's perennial plan to privatize the program, that is, expose beneficiaries to the whims of the stock market and other investments. Of course, no one is stopping future retirees from putting their money in stocks, crypto or trading cards. Social Security is best kept dull and simple.

Without changes in how Social Security is currently funded, benefits would be cut 23% by 2035. With Trump's tax plans, benefits would be slashed 33 percent. No two ways about it. Trump is threatening Social Security's stability.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

'Crypto Coins': Why Trump Never Stops Scamming His MAGA Flock

'Crypto Coins': Why Trump Never Stops Scamming His MAGA Flock

With the election upon us, many voters are focused on Donald Trump's unravelling mental state and his radical plans to kill off the democracy. But there should be space to recall his scams victimizing ordinary people and his joy in pulling them off. That speaks to character.

Trump's latest fishy deal involves a crypto operation. But let's start about three decades earlier, in 1995. Trump's Atlantic City casinos were going under, and he needed suckers to bail him out. He thus hawked shares of Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts.

Sophisticated investors regarded a company built on two casinos that had already gone bankrupt as an obvious loser. And so Trump turned to the chumps who bought into his rich-man, spinner-of-gold act. They put $140 million into the company and became a joke on Wall Street.

Trump was stuck with a third casino that was also failing. He persuaded Trump Hotels & Casinos Resort to take it off his hands at a grossly inflated price. By 2004, the bankers had enough and sent the company into a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. For every $10 that his marks invested at that initial public offering, they had $1 left.

Trump's explanation for the collapse in stock price should sound familiar to anyone now listening to his usual excuses: "People don't understand this company."

You heard echoes when he recently appeared before the Economic Club of Chicago. The moderator, citing The Wall Street Journal, asked him about his growing pile of campaign promises that could add almost $8 trillion to the national debt. "What does The Wall Street Journal know?" Trump responded. "They've been wrong about everything."

The year Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts filed for bankruptcy, Trump incorporated Trump University. Students fell for Trump's promise to share his tricks for building a real estate empire. (They presumably were not current on Trump's recent casino fiasco.)

Trump University was "a massive scam," according to the conservative National Review. First off, it wasn't a university. Rather it was a bait-and-switch scheme whereby students were conned into paying a typical charge of $20,000 — "ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED IN FULL" — for basically nothing. They didn't even have their picture taken with Trump, as promised. Instead, they were posed next to a cardboard cutout of him.

Trump was sued up and down and finally agreed to pay a $25 million settlement.

Trump is now trying to draw believers into his sketchy cryptocurrency company, World Liberty Financial. The clear objective is to raise a pile of money through unregistered securities offerings. The tokens are supposed to be sold only to accredited U.S. investors. But as a financial writer for New York magazine reports, "I received an email pushing me to buy them, despite having no accreditation whatsoever."

New cryptocurrency ventures put out what's called a "white paper" detailing their project. Trump calls his a "gold paper." Its cover features a portrait of a stern Donald surrounded by a blotch of what looks like melting gold.

In clear language, it piously notes that Trump, his family and Trump Organization employees may not serve as "an officer, director, founder or employee of, or manager, owner or operator of Word (they didn't bother to check for typos) Liberty Financial."

Under that is a complexly worded paragraph explaining that 75 percent of the crypto coin revenue goes to the Trump family. Trump's son Barron, who just entered NYU as a freshman, has been named one of its "Web3 Ambassadors."

If Trump has so much money, why does he run these grifts? There's a simple answer: It's a game. In his moral universe, a successful scam targeting the little people who buy your story is just good fun.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Must We Feel Sorry For Those Who Fall For MAGA Lies?

Must We Feel Sorry For Those Who Fall For MAGA Lies?

The tricks Donald Trump tried to play on the recent hurricane victims were beyond depraved. Here were people suffering major losses, their lives stopped in a hellscape of tattered roofs, ruined possessions and, in some cases, a pile of debris where their home once stood. And there was Trump making their lives more miserable as a tactic to fool them into blaming their distress on his political foes. Could these hurricane survivors see what was being done to them?

Trump's targets this time weren't foreigners with dark skin. The migrants from Haiti knew they weren't eating people's pets. They knew they were being used as scapegoats.

By contrast, the smashed-up communities in North Carolina and Georgia are places heavy with his potential voters. How many identified the two-step dance in which Trump tried to obscure how much help was available?

Trump executed the sly trick of telling folks that FEMA is offering $750, leaving the impression that was all. The $750 was immediate help to cover essentials like food, diapers and water. FEMA could also provide $42,000 or more for home repairs and other services. Trump left that out.

He sported with the lie that Joe Biden hadn't reached out to Georgia's Gov. Brian Kemp. Kemp said he had initially missed a call from Biden, and when they connected, the president just said, "Hey, what do you need?" And Kemp wasn't the only state and local Republican trying to stop the sick games being played on his constituents.

Chuck Edwards, a North Carolina Republican representing hard-hit mountain areas, had to put out a press release denouncing the hoaxes and conspiracy theories being spread about the FEMA response. Trump wasn't the source of all of them, but he did nothing to dissuade his ally Elon Musk from letting his lies and other misinformation spread like mold on his X social media site.

It wasn't true, as Trump insisted, that FEMA was out of money because it had been spent on housing illegal migrants. Nor did he counter dangerous rumors of unclear origin. They were useful, after all.

And no, FEMA was not confiscating the properties of hurricane survivors who applied for disaster assistance when their homes were deemed unlivable.

In a social media post, Trump said of North Carolina, "I'll be there shortly, but don't like the reports that I'm getting about the Federal Government, and the Democrat Governor of the State, going out of their way to not help people in Republican areas." Totally made up.

FEMA workers were bombarded with threats. The absolute bottom was hit when a 44-year-old man in North Carolina, brandishing a rifle and handgun, menaced FEMA employees trying to help distressed residents. This reminded some of the terrible old days when urban gang members would shoot at firefighters trying to save lives.

There have always been creeps who use disasters to con victims of their money or sadistically inflict more pain. What's new is that one of the creeps is now a former president running for another term.

When you surrender to the MAGA media bubble, you don't get to choose which items confirm your prejudices, which ones hurt you in service of making you mad at people Trump wants you to be mad at. Some may wake up to the cruel manipulation. Others will be victims to the end.

Which brings up a consideration that may sound ungenerous, but here goes: If some of the hurricane victims don't obtain available help because they've chosen to believe MAGA and its media allies, must others feel sorry for them?

We don't have to answer. It may be sufficient to simply note that some people just can't be helped.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Elon Musk

Why Migrant Musk Wants To Control The U.S. Presidency

Elon Musk is a migrant.

There is a difference between a migrant and an immigrant. An immigrant is a person who moves to another country with the intention of living there permanently. The great majority of immigrants to America come for work or personal safety or affection for the way of life. Their goal is to assimilate.

A migrant is someone who moves from one place to another, often across country borders, for various reasons with money high on the list. The United States is Musk's third nationality. He started off as a South African. He then became a Canadian. Now he's an American.

Musk is an entrepreneurial genius. Of that there's no doubt. But his pursuit of wealth and power has shown him soulless regarding the communities he lords over. And his support of the man who tried to overthrow this country's elected government does not speak of any strong attachment to American tradition, namely, the U.S. Constitution.

Though already wealthy, Donald Trump's slobbering before Vladimir Putin strongly suggests he wants to become oligarch wealthy. It's unclear whether Musk or Putin is the richest man alive. Either might assume Trump could be acquired.

For all his bashing of California, Musk got his start soaking in the advantages of being a tech entrepreneur there. In 2002, he launched SpaceX in the Los Angeles area. In 2004, he joined Tesla, based in Palo Alto, and made it the electric vehicle giant it is today. And along the way, he helped himself to more than $3.2 billion in direct and indirect California subsidies since 2009.

Musk had every right to move SpaceX and social media company X, formerly Twitter, to Texas or anywhere else. But he should spare us the baloney of his stated reason, California's law aimed at protecting transgender children. I share his aversion to a lot of the wokeness, but Musk's tweet that the bill was "attacking both families and companies" was laughably histrionic.

Look, Musk wanted less regulation, lower taxes, and official hostility to organized labor. Why didn't he just say that?

He did stop the United Auto Workers from unionizing the giant Tesla plant in Fremont, California, threatening those who joined with loss of their stock options. That would have been illegal.

In a recent conversation on X, Trump praised Musk for firing workers who went on strike. "You're the greatest cutter," Trump gushed. "I look at what you do. You walk in and say, 'You want to quit?' I won't mention the name of the company, but they go on strike and you say, 'That's OK. You're all gone.'" They laughed in unison.

The worst part of this exchange wasn't the firings. It was the evident pleasure Trump took in visiting pain on workers.

California does have ways to get even. Tesla sales there have fallen 17 percent in the first half of this year, whereas sales by other EV makers soared — from 26 percent for Ford to 77 percent for Rivian. And a state commission just voted against more SpaceX launches from the Vandenberg Space Force Base outside Los Angeles.

Musk recently played the yahoo arguing that the budget deficit under Biden was "insane." It happens that Trump ran up the national debt by twice as much as Biden. His plans for tax cuts and spending would add $7.5 trillion to budget deficits over the next decade, according to The Wall Street Journal. Kamala Harris' proposals would add half as much.

But, you know, this isn't really about government spending. Trump says he'd invent a position for Musk in a future administration. If so, what a convenient stop the United States would have been for Elon Musk.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Bottom Line On Southern Border: It's Already Orderly

Bottom Line On Southern Border: It's Already Orderly

There were fewer arrests at the Southern border in July than in the last month of the Trump presidency. Shelters have seen a massive drop in migrants. And Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is having a hard time finding enough recent arrivals to fill buses headed north.

The reason for this development is President Joe Biden's new border policy, which basically stopped migrants from asking for asylum if they crossed the border illegally. Vice President Kamala Harris just called for even tighter restrictions.

Still the specter of uncontrolled immigration, even when that's no longer the case, continues to haunt much of the voting public. And Donald Trump polls better on the issue than Biden's vice president.

Is this fair? Perhaps not, but it's understandable. Biden spent much of his early presidency watching "caravans" of migrants march over the border, claim asylum, and then be given dates for asylum hearings years in the future. What took him so long to stop that easy entry remains a mystery, including to his supporters.

Biden did champion that bipartisan immigration bill, the strongest border enforcement measure in decades. Seeing calm at the border as a threat to his campaign, Trump then had Republicans kill it. In February, he called the legislation "a death wish for the Republican Party." Trump needed a chaotic border for personal reasons and cowed Republican lawmakers into providing him one.

When the border became quieter than when he left office, Trump switched to racist attacks on the migrants themselves. For those more attuned to his sabotage of a genuine fix, he invented a fraudulent reason for killing the bill. It was the provision that would have shut the border once encounters reached a seven-day average of 5,000.

That relied on confusing the public — and many legislators — about the definition of "encounters." To quote Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson at the time, "Apparently, we're concocting some sort of deal to allow the president to shut down the border after 5,000 people break the law ... that'd be a million more illegals into our country every year before we take remedial measures."

That was untrue.

Encounters are not green lights into the country. An encounter may be with someone who attempts to enter the country illegally or is otherwise deemed inadmissible. Trying to sneak in is not the same as succeeding. Some may be processed for further immigration review, but most are detained or sent back. And a single person who repeatedly gets caught can represent several encounters.

Harris says she would tighten the border further, adding 1,500 Border Patrol agents, 4,300 asylum officers, and 100 immigration judges. A shortage of such authorities enabled much of the mess. And she vows as president to sign that serious immigration bill.

Back to the bottom line: Migration at the border, measured by encounters, is lower than it was during Trump. Do voters want as president a big mouth who tanked the tough immigration bill and now — with the facts no longer in his favor — has resorted to clown talk about migrants eating pets? Or do they want the vice president whose administration went far in getting the job done and who promises even more controls if elected?

Republican-leaning voters should strongly consider whether a Republican nominee who came right out and said that an effective immigration bill would have been "a death wish" for his party should lead the country. There's a thing called the national interest and another thing called Donald Trump's interest. They're not the same thing.

Hats off to the growing number of prominent Republicans who recognize the difference. And extra kudos to those who are publicly supporting Harris for the good of the country.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Trump, Harris

If You Want Cheaper Energy, Vote For Kamala Harris

Donald Trump's "drill, baby, drill" mantra portrays fossil fuels as the magic road to lower energy prices. He's exactly wrong. Solar, wind and other renewable sources are.

Renewables already provide electricity to consumers in Europe that's so cheap, it's at times free — this according to The Wall Street Journal, a decidedly non-socialist news source. Such are the rewards of Europe's green energy revolution, supercharged after Russia's invasion of Ukraine caused a spike in oil prices.

Example from the Netherlands: Jeroen van Diesen can get free energy based on whether the sun is shining or the wind is blowing, especially when demand for power is low. Sometimes the price actually dips below zero. Van Diesen says he made about $34 over the past five months charging his car when the price turned negative.

"Wholesale prices swing wildly each hour of the day," the Journal notes. And as more electricity flows from wind and solar installations, the price can go into negative territory. In other words, the prices can swing wildly downward.

The wholesale price in the Netherlands has been down to zero or below for eight percent of the year. In Spain, that's happening 12 percent of the time.

Most of us in the United States pay a fixed price for electricity set by the power company. But in much of Europe, people can sign up with providers who charge hourly prices on the wholesale power market.

Europe also went all in on alternative energy sources like wind and solar power whose generation costs are minimal. Last year, 44 percent of the European Union's electricity was produced by renewables, versus only 21 percent in the U.S.

Back in Europe, energy nerds have set up smart meters in their homes so that when the price of electricity falls, their cars automatically begin to charge. And manufacturers have found ways to send low-priced energy to gas tanks that function like virtual batteries.

The Biden administration has been overseeing massive investment in wind, solar, electrical vehicles and energy storage. These subsidies cost money, but so do most initial investments. As Europe has shown, these outlays can eventually produce handsome returns for the economy.

And so what are Trump's plans for a green-energy future? Well, Trump has vowed — Lord, give me strength — to target offshore wind projects. "They're killing the whales," he hollers, which marine biologists say is baloney. The 2025 Project's blueprint for another Trump term calls for ending all subsidies to promote the development of renewable energy, which, we must add, is also clean energy.

At the debate with Harris, Trump took aim against renewables with another lie, about Germany going back to fossil fuels. A spokesman for Germany's economic ministry swatted down that nonsense. "We already generate more than half of our electricity from renewable energies," he said. "In 2030, it will be 80 percent."

Real time pricing combined with renewable energy would be great for the United States, especially sunny California and the windy Great Plains. U.S. regulators became reluctant to let customers sign up for such plans after a rare winter storm in Texas sent wholesale prices temporarily soaring in 2021. Some are reconsidering.

In Southern California, the wholesale price has been negative for nearly 20 percent of the year, thanks to the region's boom in solar power installations. California has started a pilot program to offer real time pricing.

To be honest, the overall electricity bill wouldn't be zero because there remain costs for generation, transmission, and distribution. But, boy, they could be far, far closer to zero.

So what will it be, American consumers? The clean energy future is also the cheap energy future, and only Harris wants to take us there.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Donald Trump

Where Political Violence Begins: Crazy Talk, Crazy People And Guns

One evening, just over a week ago, I was walking in Midtown Manhattan when dozens of police cars, sirens blasting, lights flashing, descended on the area. Cops cut off entire avenues to traffic. Soon a phalanx of police vehicles, followed by a column of identical black SUVs, whooshed past red lights.

They were taking former president Donald Trump to his home at Trump Tower. The New York Police Department was clearly determined not to let anything happen to him on their watch, certainly not after a young man of no obvious political persuasion nearly killed him in Butler, Pennsylvania.

But on Sunday, someone else evidently wanted to take a shot at Trump through an unguarded chain fence surrounding his golf course in West Palm Beach. The suspect is a former construction worker with grandiose notions, a sizable rap sheet and more than a few screws loose.

Here's the bigger picture: Crazy political talk may be activating crazy people bent on violence. And about 99 percent of the blather is coming from the Trump side. Am I blaming the victim? This in no way justifies physical threats against him, but the answer, to a large part, is yes.

Trump has called for killing the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He's argued that as president, he could assassinate his political rivals using SEAL Team Six and get away with it. He mocked the savage attack against Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul. He unleashed the January 6 riot on the Capitol, calling the thugs who attacked police "hostages."

Violent talk does percolate in the fringe left, but now we have off-the-wall intimidation by the official Republican candidate for president. I defy defenders of Trump's behavior to cite similar rhetoric from anyone who matters on the Democratic side.

These disturbing head games also hurt ordinary Americans, for whom MAGA evinces minimal concern. After a 14-year-old murdered two students and two teachers at a Georgia high school, Trump's running mate JD Vance dismissed such shootings as "a fact of life." When a school shooting took the life of a sixth grader in Perry, Iowa, Trump opined that we "have to get over it."

MAGA likes to say that Trump is being endangered by the mean things Democrats say about him. Does the movement have anything to match Trump's ludicrous lies about Haitian migrants stealing and eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio? Bomb threats ensued, forcing the city to close schools and cancel town hall meetings.

Asked whether he would denounce the bomb threats, Trump refused to take even that baby step toward decency.

Vance, meanwhile, admitted on Sunday that he knew the story about the dogs and cats was phony, but it was a useful way to rile up the locals over a large influx of Haitian migrants into their community. Has the bar fallen so low that Vance expects praise for admitting he lied?

"If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that's what I'm going to do," he said. Few question that a sudden large influx of immigrants can create strains on local services. But the city and state are dealing with it while balancing the advantages of a needed new work force.

Ohio's governor, the city manager and religious leaders were asking Trump to stop. These migrants are there legally, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine noted. "What the companies tell us is that they are very good workers ... and frankly, that's helped the economy."

Springfield has a revitalized downtown and diversifying economy. Give the place a break.

Crazy talk, crazy people and guns everywhere. It doesn't have to be this way.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Trump's Debate Debacle Is Shock Therapy For Distracted Voters

Trump's Debate Debacle Is Shock Therapy For Distracted Voters

As we tuned into the big debate, the Trump camp was peddling the claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating people's dogs and cats. When the debate turned to the subject of immigration, Donald Trump jumped on that hallucination without prompt.

"In Springfield, they're eating the dogs!" he howled. "The people who came, they're eating the cats!"

The split screen showed Harris initially laughing at the lunacy. Then her face screwed up with the concern of a psychiatric nurse.

There are no credible claims of dogs, cats or other pets being eaten by immigrants in Ohio. A debate moderator inserted that modest fact check. His source was Springfield's city manager, who would know.

Nurse Ratched is a character in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, the Ken Kesey novel made into a movie then a Netflix series. The head nurse in a mental institution, Nurse Ratched exerted authoritarian control over the patients, enforcing rules. Harris could have channeled that disciplinarian at the debate, herding Trump's outlandish statements into a padded cell with a strong hand.

Harris further tormented Trump by noting his references at rallies to Hannibal Lecter, the fictional psychiatrist and serial killer. Lecter was a cannibal who ate his human victims, never mind dogs.

She baited him into meltdown over the crowd size at his rallies. Of course, she was going to do that. And he responded with what shrinks might call "a dissociative episode," a means to cope with the overwhelming stress of hearing that some of his rallygoers left early.

Trump went on about the 75 million people who voted for him. Harris pointed out that 75 million is less than 81 million, the number who voted for Joe Biden.

"Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people," she said. "Clearly he is having a very difficult time processing that."

Harris used the words "tired" and "old," leaving out the word senile. Trump had repeatedly referred to Barack Obama as his 2024 opponent at a time that Biden was the presumed candidate. And he has confused Nikki Haley with Nancy Pelosi. We call these episodes memory lapses.

At a certain point, Harris had to say, "It's important to remind the former president, you're not running against Joe Biden. You're running against me."

Immediately after the debate, Harris called for another one. Serious commentators opined that if Trump went for round two with her, he'd have to prepare. This is something he's known not to do and for which he may lack the mental capacity. Staffers working for Trump at the White House say that when they tried to hand him simple one-page summaries, he wouldn't read them. Or couldn't.

In the reality-based world, a new report has inflation slowed to 2.5 percent in August — another reason the Federal Reserve is expected to soon lower interest rates. Violent crime is way down. The Southern border is now calm.

And dogs trot the streets of Springfield, Ohio, unthreatened by hungry migrants.

You can't "sane wash" this guy, as much as some Trump supporters, real or paid, may try. This debate treated Americans to an informal forensic psych eval of Donald Trump. Such assessments are used to determine an individual's competency to stand trial.

As for how therapists might manage Trump in the future, one might borrow from Ratched's "comforting" quote to an unruly patient: "The best thing we can do is go on with our daily routine."

Donald Trump has administered a kind of political shock therapy to the part of the voting public that hasn't been watching closely. Lest he regain possession of the nuclear codes, intervention is called for, preferably at the polls.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Kamala Harris

These Republicans Know Harris Must Beat Trump To Save Democracy

Presidential elections of yore were not like this one. Would the media kindly get that into their collective skull? Many journalists seem to think that the reluctance of Kamala Harris to sit down for searing in-depth interviews on "the issues" is a major issue.

The one she did with CNN rested on the old gotcha questions. Harris said that she's now for fracking and that the border is orderly thanks to the president's executive order. Furthermore, she would sign the strict border bill that Donald Trump had killed to keep the issue alive. She's been saying this for months.

The only truly important issue in the presidential election of 2024 is existential. Can America survive as a democracy; that is, can it be saved from a mentally declining Donald Trump intent on falsifying vote totals, having already tried to do it through violence? He's already threatening to contest the election that hasn't happened. And the only way to put an end to that extortion is to beat Trump soundly in November.

Sure, we good-government types feast on detailed policy papers. But what we can gather about the vice president, much of it based on the Biden administration in which she serves, is that Harris is moderate on most things. Should she be elected, there will be reason to harp, make no mistake. (I look forward to that day.) Most important: We know that if she loses, she will concede.

In the meantime, our political traditions are facing code red.

What should bother us more than the price of hamburger is the prospect of ending four centuries of democracy dating back to the New England colonies. But if the economy is deemed all that matters, the indicators confirm far stronger economic growth under Biden.

Trump tells the MAGA masses they're not seeing what they're seeing — that dictators get the job done. On the contrary, democracies offer the best economies: Businesses need stable political institutions and the rule of law to flourish. And when the elected government pursues policies antithetical to economic prosperity, the voters can replace the leaders.

That's the argument advanced by "VCs for Kamala." These venture capitalists hold that strong, trustworthy institutions are a feature, not a bug, of American capitalism.

Growing numbers of smart conservatives now see MAGA as a threat, not only to democracy but to the survival of the Republican Party. A Republican hasn't won the popular vote in a presidential election since 2004. And the bizarre characters Trump foists on the party as down-ballot candidates — Kari Lake in Arizona, Mark Robinson in North Carolina — seem destined for easy defeat.

Leading conservatives are not only urging followers to withhold their vote for Trump but to vote for Harris. As former Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger memorably told Democrats at their convention, "I am proud to be in the trenches with you as part of this sometimes awkward alliance that we have to defend truth, defend democracy and decency."

He hasn't given up the Republican label and told listeners that "Whatever policies we disagree on pale in comparison with those fundamental matters of principle, of decency, and of fidelity to this nation."

A group called "Republicans Against Trump" is spending over $11 million on television ads and billboards reading, "I'm a former Trump voter. I'm voting for Harris."

What Harris can do for the country is take Trump off our backs, and it appears that she could do it. So what if she passes on interviews that distract from the one big thing, which is securing the democracy.

How one feels about gas prices might matter in normal elections. This election is not normal.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Not All Of The Teamsters Are Kissing Trump's Rear End

Not All Of The Teamsters Are Kissing Trump's Rear End

How is it possible that the Teamsters still haven't made an official presidential endorsement? Really, are they going to choose Donald Trump, who conned them into believing he'd help save their pensions? Or Kamala Harris, whose boss, Joe Biden, actually did — and to the tune of $36 billion? Doesn't sound like a tough decision to me.

I used to be a Teamster. Joining was a requirement of a job as a bus tour guide. As a former badge-wearing member, I was stunned at the sight of Teamster president Sean O'Brien kissing Trump's rear end at the Republican National Convention.

O'Brien said the union didn't automatically endorse Biden because it had to first do its "due diligence." Oh? Was more careful investigation required after Biden signed a law that saved the pensions of 350,0000 retired Teamsters?

O'Brien's exercise in servility was something to behold.

"President Trump had the backbone to open the doors to this Republican convention, and that's unprecedented," O'Brien hollered while Trump beamed. The Teamsters head evidently didn't have the backbone to tell Trump to pound sand for ignoring his promise to save the Teamsters' main pension fund.

"I look at Sean O'Brien as basically Donald Trump's dancing show pony," Rick Smith, a Teamster who does a talk show about organized labor, said on his Working People podcast. "He allowed himself to be used."

A good number of Teamster retirees did have the guts to ignore their alleged leadership and appear at the Democrats' convention to throw their support behind Harris. The Teamster's vice president at large, John Palmer, immediately announced he would challenge O'Brien in the 2026 election for a new union head.

The decision on whom a union endorses shouldn't hinge on whether you like D's or R's. It should be based on the self-interest of members. When Trump promised a bunch of tech billionaires that he'd champion policies to make them richer, they stampeded to his side. If Democrats offered the same thing, the bros would be there. In Trump world, blue-collar workers don't have economic self-interest. The baubles of cultural warfare are enough for them, and they don't cost anything.

We get that MAGA feeds on the anxieties of workers without college degrees, which describes the great majority of Teamsters. We get that cults provide community.

But Trump has a lifetime record of abusing his workers and opposing organized labor. A month after the Republicans' convention, he's on X praising Tesla CEO Elon Musk for firing workers who went on strike. "You're the greatest cutter," Trump told Musk, brimming with admiration. "I look at what you do. You walk in and say, 'You want to quit?' I won't mention the name of the company but they go on strike and you say, 'That's OK. You're all gone.'"

The United Auto Workers assumed this was a threat against Tesla workers who might want to join a union. The UAW had no qualms about endorsing Harris.

What Biden did for the Teamsters' pension fund was not without political risks. Bailouts are not very popular, especially of pensions that had been underfunded. A 2022 Wall Street Journal editorial took issue with it, complaining that Democrats opposed cuts in pension payouts and instead "rushed through a bailout."

As for the Teamsters president, a pat on the head by the MAGA king seemed reason enough to applaud the man who wouldn't lift a finger to help his members when he had the power to do so.

"One thing is clear," O'Brien boomed in praise of the ex-president. "President Trump is a candidate who is not afraid of hearing from new, loud ... voices." Especially when he can ignore them.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Sorry, But Usha Vance Can't Clean Up Her Husband's 'Cat' Box

Sorry, But Usha Vance Can't Clean Up Her Husband's 'Cat' Box

Republicans handed Usha Vance the unenviable task of cleaning up her husband's history of hostile comments regarding women. Alas, she tried.

Specifically, Usha attempted to dismiss J.D. Vance's trashing of "childless cat ladies" as a "quip." A "quip" is a witty or clever remark, often characterized by its brevity. Had Donald Trump's running mate left it at that, one could make that argument, however stretched. But, no, J.D. went on to say that they "are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too." That was not brief, and humor is not J.D.'s strong suit.

Usha then dug the hole deeper.

"What he was really saying," she explained, "is that it can be really hard to be a parent in this country."

There may be truth in that, but he said no such thing.

Usha said her husband "would never" want to offend people who are struggling to have children while acknowledging that some people choose not to start families for "very good" reasons.

Oh?

The reason people choose to start or to not start families is no business of hers or of J.D.'s. Vance is one of those tech bros who believe their pile of money makes their opinions on how others, especially women, conduct their lives very, very important.

Three years ago, Vance produced a fundraising email stating, "We've allowed ourselves to be dominated by childless sociopaths - they're invested in NOTHING because they're not invested in this country's children." Oh, "childless sociopaths" is not insulting, right?

Our military cemeteries are populated by men who invested everything in their country before they were old enough to start families. These are Trump's "suckers and losers," a reason he gave for skipping a planned visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery — burial ground for American soldiers who died in World War I. It was also raining.

To quote from Project 2025, the wish list for Trump's second term closely tied to Vance, "Married men and women are the ideal, natural family structure because all children have a right to be raised by the men and women who conceived them."

The first half of that sentence is OK. The traditional family is an ideal. But then we get into the conception part. Just suppose the source of the sperm or of the egg is a violent alcoholic or druggie. Adopted children can do just fine, as can children raised by a grandparent. In sum, children have a right to be raised by responsible adults.

Birth rates are falling in most of the industrialized world. The reasons are complex. Even societies that offer ample child care and guarantee parental leave are seeing fewer babies. But Project 2025 would actually take away supports. It would kill the Head Start program, designed to help low-income children prepare for school and free parents to go to work.

The tech bros can sit around their ski chalets in Utah and "phone it in." A nanny may be with their kids, wherever their kids may be, assuming they have any. Most working Americans, male and female, do not have that luxury. The nurse doing the hospital night shift has to stay till dawn. Police officers must show up at grisly scenes at all hours. Buses still need drivers.

Topping off J.D. Vance's longtime critiques of women is his singling out of Simone Biles in 2021 for withdrawing from competition over mental health issues. He accused the media of supporting Biles, America's greatest gymnast ever, during her "weakest moment." Somehow, the words "weak" and Biles don't go together.

Usha has her work cut out for her.

Froma Harrop has worked as a reporter and editor for Reuters business desk, The New York Times News Service and the Providence Journal. She has won numerous awards and written for many publications including The New York Times, Harper’s Bazaar and Institutional Investor.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Who Pays When Others Cheat On Taxes? You Do

Who Pays When Others Cheat On Taxes? You Do

When Republicans took control of the House in January 2023, their first order of business was a bill was to cut additional IRS funding from the Inflation Reduction Act. President Joe Biden fought them off and managed to retain $60 billion of that needed money.

Had Republicans succeeded in keeping the IRS enforcement budget at starvation levels, the deficit would have grown nearly $115 billion over 10 years, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.

Thank you, alleged party of "fiscal responsibility."

As it happened, the beefed-up enforcement has yielded an extraordinary $1 billion in revenues. This wasn't from any tax increase; it was from collecting $1 billion in back taxes and penalties that wealthy households owed.

The rich can hire lawyers and skilled accountants to hide income, find deductions and invent them. The taxes owed by working people, on the other hand, get taken right out of their paychecks. Folks on a payroll have few places to hide income.

This notion that skimping on the IRS' ability to enforce the tax laws is a way to control government spending is — how do we put this? — insane. That's like saying landlords could save a lot of money if they stopped paying collection agencies to retrieve rents from deadbeat tenants.

It takes overheated language and half-truths to con ordinary wage earners into believing that beefed up enforcement of the tax laws was going to hurt them. Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, gave it a try.

"We don't agree with this heavy-handed enforcement rule that's designed to extract tens of billions from the American people," Cole, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, said about efforts to increase IRS funding.

A means to extract billions from tax cheats? Where do we sign?

When he was accused in 2016 of grossly evading taxes, Donald Trump responded that not paying taxes "makes me smart." When investigators got their hands on some of Trump's tax returns, it was revealed that he had 26 businesses with zero revenue for which he claimed hundreds of thousands in tax deductions for expenses.

Halfway through Trump's administration, the poorly funded IRS "spent far more money auditing the working poor than the 24,457 households with incomes of $10 million and up in 2019," tax expert David Cay Johnston wrote.

Meanwhile, "not even 500 of the nearly 25,000 households reporting incomes of $10 million or more in 2019 were audited. That's 2 percent — just 1 in 50. Only 66 audits were completed."

As an aside, Americans can pretty much drop the notion that entrepreneurs need lax tax laws to get rich. Sweden has high taxes to fund social spending and a well-oiled infrastructure that strong economies need. But that hasn't stopped Swedes from innovating and getting fabulously rich.

Sweden has twice as many billionaires per capita as the United States does. Skype, Spotify and other household tech names were started there.

Nothing wrong with making a fortune. All we ask is that the wealthy pay their taxes as everyone else does. We often hear that the top one percent of taxpayers account for the vast majority of income taxes paid. Nothing wrong with that. The rich who pay their taxes are still rich, and America's wealth gap continues to widen.

Look, I don't like paying taxes, and I don't pay any more than I have to. But yes, I pay what I owe. The middle class shouldn't have to pay more than its share to make up for cheating by the rich.

When the rich don't pay their taxes, who pays? Most of us other taxpayers can find the answer by looking in the mirror.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

The Far Left Won't Be Badly Missed

The hard-line pro-Palestinian group Within Our Lifetime has been protesting against, of all people, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders. Where did the New York congresswoman and Vermont senator go astray? Didn't they denounce Israel's actions in Gaza as "genocide"? Didn't they call for halting military aid to Israel?

They did both, but Ocasio-Cortez in particular has drawn the group's wrath for approving a resolution affirming Israel's right to exist. She also supported funding for Israel's Iron Dome, which is not a weapon of attack but a system of defense for shooting down Hamas rockets.

None of these positions preclude criticizing Israel's conduct in the war. It's not easy taking a nuanced stance on a tragic conflict with hardened support on each side. But Ocasio-Cortez seems to be trying to pull back from previous statements deemed hostile to Israel.

Why is a good question. It may be a change of heart. Or it may be political calculation after a fellow "squad" member Jamaal Bowman got his clock cleaned in a Democratic primary for reelection in his congressional district, which combines some New York suburbs with part of the Bronx. The infusion of cash by the pro-Israel lobby in the campaign of Bowman's challenger, Westchester County Executive George Latimer, no doubt played a part. But it took more than AIPAC's ample checkbook for an incumbent to lose by 17 points.

Bowman showed himself a conspiracy nut who questioned that Hamas terrorists had raped Israeli women. He also childishly set off a fire alarm in a House office building and then lied about it.

But Within Our Lifetime even denounced Bowman as a "Zionist" for backing the reelection of "Genocide Joe" for president — also for supporting the Iron Dome system on the assumption, we assume, that Israel should be allowed to live.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus, meanwhile, took back its endorsement of Rep. Mondaire Jones after he endorsed Latimer instead of Bowman. The progressive Working Families Party of New York followed suit.

Are you keeping score?

Jones is the leading Democrat to take the flippable seat held by Rep. Mike Lawler, a moderate Republican. Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington, called Jones' decision to back Latimer "horrific." Would someone kindly tell Jayapal that Latimer is a Democrat?

The Democratic Socialists of America pulled its endorsement of Ocasio-Cortez, largely for participating in a panel discussion with a Jewish group. While there, she said criticism of Israel at times crosses into antisemitism but also that accusations of antisemitism are sometimes used to shut down legitimate critiques. The DSA declared her very participation in the event a "deep betrayal." (The local chapter has stuck with her.)

Oh, the tantrums, the expulsions, the denunciations. The authoritarian impulse on the far left continues to eat its own.

Sanders is responsible for some of the childish pique. He's not only gone after dissenters but also after people who don't dissent but ask innocent questions like why they should vote for him. During his unsuccessful run for the U.S. Senate in 1972, Sanders was asked just that. He responded with an annoyed, "If you didn't come to work for the movement, you came for the wrong reasons. I don't care who you are; I don't need you."

So there.

When Bowman got wiped out, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries offered a notably dry-eyed response. "The results speak for themselves," he said. "The voters have spoken." And he's no doubt pleased that the very likely winner in November will be the team-player Latimer.

Ocasio-Cortez's surprise upset in a 2018 primary put the DSA on the map. Without her, the DSA is back in the basement of irrelevance. She should consider herself liberated.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Donald Trump Can't Undo The Damage He Did To Abortion Rights

Donald Trump Can't Undo The Damage He Did To Abortion Rights

Try as he might, Donald Trump can't blur the hard reality he forced upon American women. He vowed in 2016 to get rid of Roe v. Wade and succeeded. As a result, American women lost a half-century right to end an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy.

Some of the harsh truths turn into nightmares. When Nicole Miller, mother of two and 20 weeks pregnant, started to bleed heavily, her husband rushed her to an emergency room in Boise, Idaho. She needed a life-saving abortion, but the ER staff refused to perform one. Instead, they loaded her onto a plane for Utah, where the doctors could do what she needed to survive.

One of the Idaho doctors reportedly told her, "We need to get you to a place where you have all of your options."

This story isn't a freakish exception. At least six women in similar situations have been airlifted out of Idaho, a scene you'd expect in an impoverished country with bare-bones health care.

Trump argues that ending Roe simply left rulemaking on abortion to the states. Some conservative states would have restrictive laws, he said. Some would be more relaxed. That pitch was not without its appeal.

Until you looked at the states. Idaho had put such a strict ban on abortion that its doctors wouldn't do the procedure for fear of losing their licenses and facing jail time if some ignoramus second-guessed their decision to end even a catastrophic pregnancy.

Miller recalls thinking, "I'm standing in front of doctors who know exactly what to do and how to help and they're refusing to do it."

After Roe went down, the Biden administration told ER doctors that they must perform emergency abortions when necessary to protect a pregnant woman's health. The U.S. Supreme Court — Trump's court — recently declined to decide on whether states had to comply with that federal law. Abortion foes claim that the ER exception was written to turn emergency rooms into "abortion havens." Oh, please.

There is now a nationwide migration of OB-GYNs from states that ban abortion to states that permit it. These specialists also deliver babies, and their departures are creating health care deserts for local women. Since its radical ban was put in place, Idaho has lost nearly a quarter of its doctors in obstetrics and gynecology and more than half its maternal fetal medicine specialists.

Trump tries to cover the damage he's done to women's health care with outlandish claims. The toxins in his brain recently formulated this assertion: "They will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month and even after birth."

Taking the life of a viable newborn is murder and was murder in the days of Roe. Trump doesn't say — and might not even know — that he was referring to the rare late-term abortions where the fetus has severe deformities and is nonviable.

Late-term abortions take place at or after 21 weeks of pregnancy, when something has gone terribly wrong. Fewer than one percent of abortions happen at that stage. Tests often don't reveal whether a fetus or the mother's health are in great danger until well into a pregnancy.

Trump is trying to appease his anti-abortion constituency while, wink-wink, struggling to make the pro-choice majority think his dismantling of Roe v. Wade isn't the disaster it's become.

Trump's "pro-life supporters" needn't worry. He has put them in charge. And he probably thinks he can lie his way out of the terrible consequences for women who need to end a pregnancy.

Who ever thought an American bleeding out from a disastrous pregnancy would have to be flown to safety in her own country?

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Why We Need Not Obsess Over Declining Birth Rates

Why We Need Not Obsess Over Declining Birth Rates

Americans have this big obsession over population numbers. One reason is that reports related to population come with numbers. Numbers give politicians and journalists something concrete to either agonize or crow over.

The problem with this approach is that the numbers don't necessarily reflect the living reality of people being counted. Americans felt OK with their country in 1960, when the population totaled 179 million. But with birthrates falling and population growth flattening, there's allegedly a crisis even though the number of Americans today, 336 million, is almost double that of 1960.

The Boston Globe frets that cities like Omaha, Nebraska, and Bakersfield, California, are producing far more babies per capita than Boston and Seattle. The reason is that highly educated workers are more likely to delay starting a family until their 30s. About 53 percent of Bostonians aged 25 and older have at least a college degree, compared with just under 40 percent of Omahans in the same age group.

Needless to say, Boston and Omaha are both wonderful cities, each in its own way.

This counting also fails to consider land area. Older coastal cities have tight city limits whereas the newer ones in the interior tend to have large land areas. Omaha has about 500,000 people living in an area of about 145 square miles, while Boston's 675,000 residents squeeze into 90 square miles. Thus, one can more easily live in a suburban-type setting — where many families prefer to raise kids — in a place like Omaha than in Boston. Boston has huge far-flung suburbs outside the city limits that don't make it into this kind of count.

There are problems attached to fewer babies. Many argue that falling birth rates combined with rising life expectancy will lead to economic crisis as fewer young people are available to support growing numbers of retirees.

Another word for problem, however, is challenge. One reason for higher life expectancies is that Americans are healthier at older ages. It's undeniable that for many, 65 isn't what it used to be.

Picturesque rural areas like Sevier County, Tennessee, are now growing rapidly as older Americans, who once hiked there on vacation, now want to hike there in retirement, The Wall Street Journal reports. Long-time locals may resent the heavier traffic, but robust younger retirees need relatively little health care, and they tend not to have kids in school. Thus, they go light on use of public services.

Furthermore, retirement is not what it used to be. The older workforce — defined as Americans 65 and up — has nearly quadrupled since the mid-1980s, according to The Pew Research Center. Those 75 and older are the fastest-growing age group in the workforce. Their participation has more than quadrupled in size since 1964.

Of course, these numbers also reflect there being more older people. And many have not saved enough for a long retirement and must continue working. But many healthy "retirees" simply want to stay engaged.

Today's older Americans tend to have higher educational levels than their parents. Their jobs are less likely to require heavy physical labor, which can wear out a body. That brings us to "phased retirement," a trend whereby a worker stays with the same employer but puts in fewer hours.

There's the related phenomenon of "bridge jobs" — jobs in the same industries that involve a different kind of work or fewer hours. An example would be a manager moving into a sales position.

In the last century, the global population nearly quadrupled from 1.6 billion to 6 billion. Continuing that trend would have led to environmental catastrophe. Today's flatlining birth rates should be far preferable.

They come with challenges, yes. But it can all be worked out,

Reprinted with permission from Creators.