#What is Union Budget 2023?

[honestnewsoaoer]

Nirmala Sitharaman Presented An Interim Budget

अंतरिम बजट में टैक्स स्लैब में कोई बदलाव नहीं, जानिए क्या बोलीं निर्मला सीतारमण Nirmala Sitharaman : 1 फरवरी 2024 को, वित्त मंत्री निर्मला सीतारमण ने नरेंद्र मोदी सरकार के दूसरे कार्यकाल का अंतरिम बजट पेश किया। इस बजट में करदाताओं को कोई नई छूट नहीं दी गई है और इनकम टैक्स स्लैब में कोई बदलाव नहीं किया गया है। हालांकि, स्टार्टअप के लिए टैक्स छूट को एक साल के लिए बढ़ा दिया गया है। Nirmala…

[askagamedev]

How expensive is voice acting (assuming professional actors with experience)? What amount of budget goes towards it? If there is a way to determine that, of course. I realize it probably depends a lot on the project. I'm looking at SWTOR which seems to be really struggling to afford VO these days, opting for unvoiced dialogue and even replacements of the main cast. Is it really taking that much of its budget (which is probably on the lower end these days) or is there some other factor at play?

Voice acting has a lot of associated costs. Specifically, getting the voice acting requires us to pay for:

The voice actor's time

The recording studio time

The voice director's time

The developer time

These can add up - we pay union voice actors about $2000 per day each according to the current [SAG-AFTRA interactive media contract rates], and we spend at least that much for studio time. We also need to factor in the time the developers are away from the development studio and are at the recording studio because they aren't doing their normal tasks while taking care of this. It isn't uncommon for voice recording to cost over $10,000 per day, all things considered.

In addition to this, voice actors are often quite busy. They often have many roles already scheduled that they have committed to. This means that they might have only one or two days they can commit to recording, then be unavailable for months after that. In such cases, it means that we can't make any modifications or changes to the script after the recording is done because the voice actor isn't available to do those lines anymore. For example, take a look at [Aleks Le's IMDB page]. He did a lot of voicework for games like Persona 3 Reload, Street Fighter 6, Octopath Traveler 2, etc. I count 18 separate projects he recorded for in 2023 alone. If he's one of my voices, I probably wouldn't be able to get him back in the recording studio for several months since his schedule is so packed.

SWTOR is especially difficult to record for because player voice lines need to be recorded once for each character class. That means aligning eight different actors schedules before a hard deadline, and that can be extraordinarily difficult. Anyone who's tried to schedule events knows this - things happen, people change, agreements fall through, things get pushed back. As such, it's a small miracle they're able to keep putting out fresh voiced content like they do.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Frequent Questions: The FAQ

[megamindfandombookclub]

Official anouncment that Part 2 of Season 1 of Megamind rules will be returning to Peacock on June 20th!

21st June on Stan

Taken from our Evil Lair Discord group, here is the current list to stream Megamind Rules in different countries:

"Megamind Rules!" Show Availability:

USA: Streaming platform: Peacock https://www.peacocktv.com/ **Date: ** March 1st AUSTRALIA Streaming platform: Stan https://www.stan.com.au/ Date: March 2nd UNITED KINGDOM (Unknown) Other Countries: Currently unknown. You may need to consider getting a VPN to use Peacock from your location. (The UK and AU have trademarks set, so it's likely you'll be getting it as well.)

"Megamind vs The Doom Syndicate" Movie Availability

USA: Streaming platform: Peacock https://www.peacocktv.com/ **Date: ** March 1st AUSTRALIA (Note: Unconfirmed, but assumed. See <#983559635455856651>) Streaming platform: Stan https://www.stan.com.au/ Date: March 2nd (?) UNITED KINGDOM Streaming platform: Sky Cinema https://www.sky.com/tv/cinema Date: April 7th

(Below info is pulled from FlixPatrol https://flixpatrol.com/title/megamind-vs-the-doom-syndicate/streaming/)

BRAZIL Streaming platform: Amazon Prime https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0GQ8FGUVP06TWTZLX0J4XOJNKM/ ALGERIA, BAHRAIN, CHAD, EGYPT, IRAQ, JORDAN, KUWAIT, LEBANON, LIBYA, MAURITANIA, MOROCCO, OMAN, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA, SOMALIA, SOUTH SUDAN, TUNISIA, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, YEMEN Streaming platform: OSN https://osnplus.com/ DENMARK (Megamind mod Dommedagssyndikatet) Streaming platform: Via Play https://viaplay.dk/film/megamind-mod-dommedagssyndikatet-2023 FINLAND (Megamind vs. Tuomiosyndikaatti) Streaming platform: Via Play https://viaplay.fi/leffat/megamind-vs.-tuomiosyndikaatti-2023 ICELAND Streaming platform: Via Play https://viaplay.is/movies/megamind-vs-the-doom-syndicate-2023 NORWAY (Megamind og Dommedagssyndikatet) Streaming platform: Via Play https://viaplay.no/filmer/megamind-og-dommedagssyndikatet-2023 SWEDEN (Megamind och Undergångssyndikatet) Streaming platform: Via Play https://viaplay.se/film/megamind-och-undergangssyndikatet-2023 Other Countries: Currently unknown. You may need to consider getting a VPN to use Peacock from your location. (The UK and AU have trademarks set, so it's likely you'll be getting it as well.)

Please support Dreamworks to show demand for more Megamind content! We've waited this long-- show them it matters!

Please do what you can to watch Megamind Rules from a legit source so that Dreamworks can get paid. With more views, there is higher chance of being for another season and/or ANOTHER movie.

DW constantly treats Megamind as an afterthought and gave the team a very small budget to work with on the show. They put their hearts into it and made something very fun and cute! Let's show our gratitude by giving back all the support we can.

The Animators Union may be protesting for better wages this summer (as is their right!) so by watching their work, we can give back to them!

Please don't allow Megamind Rules to become lost media. Please help us to keep something beautiful in this world.

If you're fan and want to join a cool and fun loving group, feel free to hop in and say Ollo!!

[cankersoregirl]

i'd be interested in your recent movie list - it's nice to hear what people are watching 🥰

OOOHHH thank you for asking!!! This gives me the perfect excuse 2 talk abt some of my favs ty hehe <3 The genres, years, countries, etc. might be wildly different and there’s no particular order to what I’m gonna list but here we go:

1. The Spook Who Sat by the Door

Ivan Dixon; action/political drama; America; 1973

EVERYONE needs to watch this honestly… it’s probably my favorite film I’ve seen this year. The movie’s about the first Black man, Dan Freeman, to be trained by the CIA, who then quits and takes the techniques he’s learned to create a team of Black youths to fight for freedom and against racism. Even though it’s a fictional plot, the real FBI pulled it from theaters for being too radical, and it has indeed been described as “the only true Black radical movie ever made.” I seriously can’t recommend it enough

2. Medicine for Melancholy

Barry Jenkins; romance/drama; America; 2008

If you’re familiar with Moonlight, you already know this filmmaker. Medicine for Melancholy is Barry Jenkins’ first film, about the romance between Jo and Micah after a one night stand that takes place in San Francisco. Some things I like about it are the ways the city and its racial issues so heavily influence the characters’ relationship so much so that it essentially becomes a character in itself. Since this is Jenkins’ first film, the budget was smaller ($15k) and it has a different feel from his newer movies which I personally really liked

3. They Cloned Tyrone

Juel Taylor; sci-fi/mystery; America; 2023

This movie was released on barbenheimer day and was WAY BETTER THAN BOTH OF THEM!!!! When Fontaine, a drug dealer played by John Boyega, seemingly gets shot and killed, Slick, a pimp, is shocked to see him walking around the next day as if nothing happened. Together, Slick, Fontaine, and Yo-Yo, a sex worker, work to uncover what actually happened and find that it’s much bigger than they could’ve imagined. This is a FANTASTIC sci-fi film with some fantastic writing (a lot of great one-liners lmao) and all the actors do amazingly. Also, the title goes hard!

4. Bad Genius

Baz Nattuwat; thriller; Thailand; 2017

I literally watched this last night (happy birthday Nonkul!) lol. In this movie the character Lynn gets paid to work with her friends to help other high school students cheat on tests. When I tell you this had me SWEATING from stress. It was very entertaining, I really liked the way it was shot and how it consistently kept the tension up

5. Do the Right Thing

Spike Lee; drama/comedy; America; 1989

Taking place on an unbearably hot summer day, racial tensions rise between the Black civilians and the Italian owners of a pizzeria in Brooklyn. This is a v famous movie, directed by Spike Lee, and honestly many of the themes still ring true today

6. Sorry to Bother You

Boots Riley; sci-fi/comedy; America; 2018

Set in the Oakland, Cassius Green becomes a telemarketer and uses a “white voice” to do better at his job. But when his coworkers form a union, he decides to take a promotion instead, leading to unexpected consequences. I don’t want to spoil anything, and this is another famous movie that many people have probably already seen and have probably been spoiled BUT. there is a crazy twist. I really enjoyed the messages and craziness this movie had to offer

7. Marry My Dead Body

Cheng Wei Hao; comedy/mystery; Taiwan; 2022

I saw this with my friend on my birthday and honestly it could not have been a better way to watch it. A homophobic cop accidentally gets into an arranged marriage with a dead gay ghost. Is that not one of the best plot descriptions u have ever heard. It’s horror, it’s comedy, it’s gay, it’s a romance (TO ME! And like everyone else who watched it)… WHAT MORE COULD U WANT!! It gave me a similar feeling as Secrets in the Hot Spring & Pee Mak, two movies that somehow seem to cover So Many Genres & that I love sooo much (the former is my fav movie ever). I literally laughed so hard I almost peed myself at times <3

Other than that some other movies I watched & enjoyed this year are: Love Lies Bleeding (2024), Claudine (1974), Eve’s Bayou (1997), and Bottoms (2023). I don’t wanna make this too long so I’ll stop it here but I hope you enjoy these films too if you decide to watch any!!

[lets-steal-an-archive]

Actors and writers want fans to help their Hollywood strike. Here’s how.

How are strikers encouraging audiences to get involved?

SAG-AFTRA and WGA members have used social media to spread information about the strike, detailing how viewers can support entertainment workers’ demands for higher minimum pay, improved safety and more streaming residuals. Among their recommendations for aiding the strike efforts are sharing, liking and commenting on posts about the recently expired SAG-AFTRA contract because “actors are working people just like everyone else.”

“There’s a lot of misconception that our union is about stars and celebrities,” said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s national executive director and chief negotiator.

Most of the guild’s 160,000 members, he said, are “working actors who are trying to make a living, pay their bills, pay their rent.”

Actors and writers are encouraging fans to join the picket line in their local area to increase strike visibility. They say people can bring signs, water and snacks to picketers. Union-allied organizations such as the Directors Guild of America, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States have thrown their support behind the strike effort in person and online, joining a broader coalition of unions pushing against mistreatment in the workplace.

Crabtree-Ireland said strike supporters could aid the effort by amplifying the union’s demands with social media posts and donations to fundraisers for SAG-AFTRA members. Boycotting projects made by the AMPTP is not the priority, he added.

“We’re not at this time calling for a boycott of anybody. Our focus is on shutting down production. … But that’s not to say that that won’t be something we do in the future,” he said.

How can entertainment workers receive financial support during the strike?

Several organizations have committed to supporting members of SAG-AFTRA and the WGA. Some of the most prominent funds are SAG-AFTRA’s Entertainment Community Fund and nonaffiliated crowdsourced fundraisers like the Union Solidarity Coalition Fund, Groceries for Writers and the Snacklist.

The fundraisers say they provide resources that include mental health support, health insurance, counseling, career resources, budgeting tips and grocery aid.

Fowlkes, T. 2023. "Actors and writers want fans to help their Hollywood strike. Here's how." The Washington Post, July 17. <washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2023/07/17/actors-strike-what-can-fans-do/>

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Nation of Change:

China’s largest automaker, BYD, is selling its Dolphin hatchback EV for a low-low $15,000, complete with a 13-inch rotating screen, ventilated front seats, and a 260-mile range. Here in the U.S., you have to pay more than twice that price for the Tesla Model 3 EV ($39,000) with lower tech and only 10 more miles of driving range. In case $15K beats your budget, the Dolphin has a plug-in hybrid version with an industry-leading 74-mile range on a single charge for only $11,000 and an upgrade with an unbeatable combined gas-electric range of 1,300 miles. Not surprisingly, EVs surged to 52% of all auto sales in China last year. And with such a strong domestic springboard into the world market, Chinese companies accounted for more than 70% of global EV sales.

It’s time to face reality in the world of cars and light trucks. Let’s admit it, China’s visionary industrial policy is the source of its growing dominance over global EV production. Back in 2009-2010, three years before Elon Musk sold his first mass-production Tesla, Beijing decided to accelerate the growth of its domestic auto industry, including cheap, all-electric vehicles with short ranges for its city drivers. Realizing that an EV is just a steel box with a battery, and battery quality determines car quality, Beijing set about systematically creating a vertical monopoly for those batteries — from raw materials like lithium and cobalt from the Congo all the way to cutting-edge factories for the final product. With its chokehold on refining all the essential raw materials for EV batteries (cobalt, graphite, lithium, and nickel), by 2023-2024 China accounted for well over 80% of global sales of battery components and nearly two-thirds of all finished EV batteries.

Clearly, new technology is driving our automotive future, and it’s increasingly clear that China is in the driver’s seat, ready to run over the auto industries of the U.S. and the European Union like so much roadkill. Indeed, Beijing switched to the export of autos, particularly EVs, to kick-start its slumbering economy in the aftermath of the Covid lockdown.

Given that it was already the world’s industrial powerhouse, China’s auto industry was more than ready for the challenge. After robotic factories there assemble complete cars, hands-free, from metal stamping to spray painting for less than the cost of a top-end refrigerator in the U.S., Chinese companies pop in their low-cost batteries and head to one of the country’s fully automated shipping ports. There, instead of relying on commercial carriers, leading automaker BYD cut costs to the bone by launching its own fleet of eight enormous ocean-going freighters. It started in January 2024 with the BYD Explorer No. 1, capable of carrying 7,000 vehicles anywhere in the world, custom-designed for speedy drive-on, drive-off delivery. That same month, another major Chinese company you’ve undoubtedly never heard of, SAIC Motor, launched an even larger freighter, which regularly transports 7,600 cars to global markets.

Those cars are already heading for Europe, where BYD’s Dolphin has won a “5-Star Euro Safety Rating” and its dealerships are popping up like mushrooms in a mine shaft. In a matter of months, Chinese cars had captured 11% of the European market. Last year, BYD began planning its first factory in Mexico as an “export hub” for the American market and is already building billion-dollar factories in Turkey, Thailand, and Indonesia. Realizing that “20% to 30%” of his company’s revenue is at risk, Ford CEO Jim Farley says his plants are switching to low-cost EVs to keep up. After the looming competition led GM to bring back its low-cost Chevy Bolt EV, company Vice President Kurt Kelty said that GM will “drive the cost of E.V.s to lower than internal combustion engine vehicles.”

So, what does all this mean for America? In the past four years, the Biden administration made real strides in protecting the future of the country’s auto industry, which is headed toward ensuring that American motorists will be driving $10,000 EVs with a 1,000-mile range, a 10-year warranty, a running cost of 10 cents a mile, and 0 (yes zero!) climate-killing carbon emissions.

Not only did President Biden extend the critical $7,500 tax credit for the purchase of an American-made EV, but his 2021 Infrastructure Act helped raise the number of public-charging ports to a reasonable 192,000, with 1,000 more still being added weekly, reducing the range anxiety that troubles half of all American car owners. To cut the cost of the electricity needed to drive those car chargers, his 2022 Inflation Reduction Act allocated $370 billion to accelerate the transition to low-cost green energy. With such support, U.S. EV sales jumped 7% to a record 1.3 million units in 2024.

Most important of all, that funding stimulated research for a next-generation solid-state battery that could break China’s present stranglehold over most of the components needed to produce the current lithium-ion EV batteries. The solution: a blindingly simple bit of all-American innovation — don’t use any of those made-in-China components. With investment help from Volkswagen, the U.S. firm QuantumScape has recently developed a prototype for a solid-state battery that can reach “80% state of charge in less than 15 minutes,” while ensuring “improved safety,” extended battery life, and a driving range of 500 miles. Already, investment advisors are touting the company as the next Nvidia.

But wait a grim moment! If we take President Donald Trump at his word, his policies will slam the brakes on any such gains for the next four years — just long enough to potentially send the Detroit auto industry into a death spiral. On the campaign trail last year, Trump asked oil industry executives for a billion dollars in “campaign cash,” and told the Republican convention that he would “end the electrical vehicle mandate on day one” and thereby save “the U.S. auto industry from complete obliteration.” And in his victory speech last November, he celebrated the country’s oil reserves, saying, “We have more liquid gold than anyone else in the world.”

[beardedmrbean]

SOFIA, Bulgaria (AP) — Hundreds of angry farmers took to the streets in Bulgaria’s capital, Sofia, on Monday to complain of what they called “the total failure” of the government to meet the mounting challenges of the agricultural sector.

They called on Agriculture Minister Kiril Vatev to step down for not keeping his promises to ease the administrative burden on the farming sector, to seek state compensation for high costs and falling incomes.

Like their colleagues elsewhere in Europe, Bulgarian farmers are frustrated with domineering European Union regulations, the hardships stemming from the surge in fertilizer and energy costs because of Russia’s war in Ukraine, the increasing imports of farm products that are flooding local markets and the undercutting of prices.

Ventsislav Varbanov, who chairs the Association of Agricultural Producers, complained that the government is adding more undue burdens, instead of seeking some relief for the farmers.

“Let me remind you that our interests were not protected neither as the Ukrainian goods flooded us," he said, referring to cheaper products exported from Ukraine, "nor had we budget guarantees for the losses we suffered because of the war in Ukraine.”

Varbanov pleaded for a long-term government policy: “We want to know what will be in tomorrow, in the next year, in the next five years.”

Meanwhile, the grain producers’ association announced that its members might join the protests on Tuesday by blocking main roads with their farming vehicles.

The association expressed discontent with a statement made by Prime Minister Nikolay Denkov in response to their demands for compensation that only grain producers who can prove a loss for 2023 will receive financial support. The association wants some form of compensation for all grain producers.

[adrianasartworld]

Advocating for change through collage art.

America’s unlivable minimum wage:

The federal minimum wage for employed American workers has remained at $7.25 since 2009. In his article, “Can a Family Survive on the U.S. Minimum Wage?,” financial journalist Andrew Bloomenthal argues that the $7.25 an hour is “poverty wage” for individuals, as the “income earned is not enough to bring people out of poverty,” a problem that is even more severe for single parents who are placed below the federal poverty line. Information from the 2023 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics explains that the majority of jobs and occupations affected by the minimum wage problem are service workers; this includes sectors like hospitality, healthcare, food preparation, customer service, as well as personal care services. In many U.S. states, low wage families cannot survive without the help of government assistance programs. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities claims that there are over fifteen million full time workers in America that rely on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), and/or Medicaid .  

 Minimum wage workers in America need an adequate federal minimum wage that is adjusted for inflation–which would be $15. If this happened it would raise wages “of up to 27.3 million workers and lift 1.3 million families out of poverty"​. Without change, more working Americans will fall further and further below the poverty line. Organizations and unions need the help of the American people to reach the ears of policymakers, lobbyists, and politicians. The government needs to see that this is a problem that requires a solution. 

Using art to change minds.

Historically, the visual arts have played a role in fostering social, political, and economic change throughout the world. Scholars Hassans Amwiine and Ugwu Jovita Nnenna of Kampala International University, explain the idea of “artivism” as the “fusion art and activism”, a combination that has the ability to influence “social movements and [bring] change”. In the modern day censorship has targeted creatives who attempt to challenge the “status quo”, however, we can engage in activism through "the creation of pamphlets and posters to the performance of songs and dance”. Not only is art used to represent ideas and change but it also helps to “bolster the confidence and morale of those engaged in social protest” . The visual arts create collective identities while challenging hegemonic structures like unequal gender roles or racial discrimination. Artivism is a multifunctional tool that amplifies the voices and causes of the underrepresented and unheard. 

So, what are the exclusive benefits of bringing art into activism? Suzanne Nossel’s article “Introduction: On ‘Artivism,’ or Art’s Utility in Activism” asserts that art “has the ability to change our minds-inspiring us to take on different perspectives and to reimagine our worlds”. Furthermore, she explains that we live in a world where “social change is to be rigorously monitored, evaluated, measured, and reported upon”. Art transforms the messages of social movements into a visual concept that “move[s] an individual makes social change possible”. In many cases, the collaboration between artists, patrons, and activists intertwines in a way that bridges communities together and heightens the attention of a movement. 

My “artivism”

Collage is a unique type of art medium that uses mixed-media to display a diverse collection of images that create a new subject or idea. Kolaj Magizine’s article gives detail of the medium's history and usage in social movements of the past. The institute explains that collage was first used as a form of artistic expression by Russian revolutionary groups during the early 20th century movement against facism. Collage even has its own precedent in the United States, when civil rights protestors utilized collage during the 1960s to further their cause of fighting for social justice. Stylistically, collage artwork is associated with the German Dada art movement, which embraced spontaneity, emotion, and irrationality–the works often asked viewers to question traditional values and societal structures. 

Now in the 21st century, artists worldwide are using collage as a force for pushing social and political change. My collage illustrates “ something in common among the individuals depicted [that implies] a shared struggle, cause, or ideology”.

So, ask your representative: "Could you survive on $7.25?"

Learn more at:

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations

National Employment Law Project

Campaign for America's Future

FairShare

[mariacallous]

In February 2024, Columbia University Press informed me that it had sold the rights to my book on sanctions to a Russian firm that would translate it and sell it in Russia. I replied that I did not want sales of my book to support the Kremlin’s war machine, and my publisher agreed to cancel the contract. Last month, just before Christmas, I was stunned to see that a translated version of my book was a popular read in Russia. Columbia University Press had forgotten to tell me that it had not managed to cancel the deal.

My publisher had the right to sell my book to its Russian partner. My book contract allowed it, and most business in Russia by Western companies does not breach sanctions. However, what is legal may not be morally or economically sound. Western firms that continue to do business in Russia help Moscow finance the war in Ukraine through their payments of Russian corporate taxes. This is not even a sound investment: Nearly three years into the war, Western firms cannot repatriate the profits they earn in Russia, and the assets they own on Russian soil are not really theirs anymore.

Western firms’ continued business in Russia is not a marginal phenomenon. Data compiled by the Kyiv School of Economics and Ukrainian volunteers show that, as of 2023, around 800 multinational companies from Western and like-minded countries were still operating in Russia—either because they decided to stay or because they were still generating revenues there despite having pledged to leave. Combing through the data, two facts stand out. First, around 60 percent of those global firms that operated in Russia before the full-scale invasion began in February 2022 still continue to do so. Second, Germany, the United States, and France are—by far—the top three countries of origin for Western firms that retain a presence in Russia, accounting for around half of them.

Browsing through statements by Western firms explaining why they have decided to stay in Russia yields intriguing surprises: Many argue that their decision hinges on humanitarian reasons, either because they produce critical goods (like food) or because they feel responsible for the well-being of their staff and their families. Both arguments are easy to debunk. Russia is self-sufficient when it comes to food; in fact, it is a major exporter of many staples. What’s more, Western sanctions do not target Russia’s access to humanitarian goods like food, so an in-country presence isn’t required. The talking point about staff does not stand up to scrutiny, either. Russia has a massive labor shortage, with unemployment at record lows and alternative jobs more than plentiful.

What is undeniably true is that the hundreds of Western firms staying in Russia are helping Moscow finance the war in Ukraine. The data is eye-popping. In 2022 and 2023, firms from the G-7, European Union, and like-minded economies generated around $370 billion in revenues on Russian soil, which was more than Moscow’s military budget over the same period. In the first two years of the war, Western firms transferred more than $11 billion in corporate taxes to Russian state coffers, with Austrian bank Raiffeisen alone accounting for one-tenth of this amount. The data is not available yet for 2024, but a ballpark estimate suggests that Western firms probably paid another $4-6 billion in corporate taxes, bringing the total to roughly $16 billion funneled to the Kremlin since the invasion began.

Two data points help put this figure into context. First, $16 billion is enough for Moscow to pay for around 5,300 Iskander missiles, 1,100 Kinzhal ballistic missiles, or 320,000 Shahed drones. For comparison, Russia’s massive attack against Ukraine last Christmas used 78 missiles of various types in addition to 106 Shahed drones and decoys. Second, the amount Western firms have paid in Russian corporate taxes since the start of the war is roughly equivalent to Germany’s entire military, humanitarian, and financial support to Ukraine over the same period. But money is not the only measure. For Moscow, the presence of Western firms has substantial propaganda value, as it supports the Kremlin’s talking point that the Russian market is too important for Western firms to abandon.

It is clear that the moral argument convinced only a minority of Western firms to make a clean exit from Russia. At the start of the conflict, most Western firms prioritized the economic argument over the moral one, with revenues from Russia seen as too important or Moscow’s conditions for asset sales too unfavorable. Many Western businesses were also betting that if they could weather the war, then they would be in a better position than their competitors once sanctions are dropped and Russia reopens. This bet was a losing one for Western firms, as the Kremlin now controls their revenues and assets.

Take revenues first. Only a few weeks into the invasion in 2022, the Kremlin outlawed transferring dividends to headquarters in “unfriendly countries” a category that includes the United States, European Union, and the United Kingdom. The ban has been relaxed a bit since then, but conditions remain stringent; the transfers cannot exceed 50 percent of the profits of Western firms in Russia. Conditions are so harsh that even firms from “friendly countries” face headaches: Indian oil firm PSU, for instance, has no idea if it will ever be able to repatriate around $900 million in profits from its Russian operations. Things could soon get worse. With growing signs of strain in the economy, Moscow could well decide to impose full-blown capital controls.

With the Kremlin controlling access to their revenues in Russia, many Western firms initially assumed that a wait-and-see approach was the best option. In hindsight, this strategy was a losing one. In August 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree ensuring that Western companies could not sell their Russian assets without government approval; those operating in energy or finance would even need permission from Putin himself. One year later, the Kremlin nationalized the Russian assets of French food maker Danone and Danish brewer Carlsberg, with both firms losing all but a fraction of their assets’ value. With Moscow’s finances increasingly in the red, things took another turn for the worse in October 2024. A presidential decree mandated that Western firms exiting Russia could only recoup a quarter of their assets’ value at most: The Kremlin requires companies from “unfriendly countries” to discount the selling price of their assets by at least 60 percent, in addition to a 35 percent “voluntary contribution” to Russian state coffers.

In Russia, Western companies are running businesses that are not really theirs anymore. If the moral motivation was not compelling enough, the economic argument to leave Russia is now watertight. On my side, the Russian publisher of my book eventually agreed to stop selling it, although I have no way to check if it’s keeping its promise. Russian readers might be interested to learn that their purchase of my book serves a great cause, though. I have long given proceeds from worldwide sales to charities—initially the French Pièces Jaunes, which finances projects for hospitalized children. I have now switched to donating royalties to the Ukrainian government’s appeal to finance drones and robots for its military and generators for electricity-deprived schools.

[southeastasianists]

In February 2023, a few months after I departed from my field site in Singapore, the Deputy Prime Minister announced significant changes to Singapore’s housing policies. In his eagerly anticipated budget speech for 2023, Lawrence Wong reaffirmed Singapore’s commitment to nurturing familial aspirations among Singaporeans and proceeded to outline measures aimed at reducing the uncertainties faced by (heterosexual) couples in their housing journeys. Chief among these measures was the granting of extra balloting chances to families with children and young married couples aged 40 and below (Ong, 2023). 1 Previously, both engaged and married couples received two ballot chances each, whereas now legally married couples and married couples with children would receive three balloting chances.

This announcement and its implications must be understood within context. Approximately 80% of Singaporeans reside in public housing flats (Lin, 2022), 2 representing some of the highest flat ownership rates in Asia and underscoring the success of Singapore’s public housing model—a model that Singaporeans and its leaders rightly take pride in. However, this success comes with a caveat. In Singapore, flat ownership is contingent upon adhering to and staying on a particular life path.

In brief, there are several pathways to acquiring a public flat. Among them, the Build-to-Order (BTO) housing program, known locally as “BTO,” is the most affordable and accessible route for Singaporean citizens to own a public flat. Eligibility to apply for a BTO before the age of 35 hinges on the formation of—or in the case of engaged couples, the intention to form—a conventional family nucleus. 3 (Singles may participate after 35.) 4 Eligible couples or families submit an online application, which is then entered into a computer-generated ballot. This ballot, occurring four times a year, can induce significant anxiety, as couples may succeed on their first attempt or as late as their 13th try. 5

It is this anxiety and uncertainty that the Deputy Prime Minister sought to alleviate by offering married couples more balloting chances. Returning to the formalities of the BTO process, couples must then wait 3 to 6 years for the flat to be built, and they risk losing their down payment (an amount that can be as high as 20,000 Singapore dollars) 6 if they separate or divorce during this period. Subsequently, after moving into the flat, they must fulfil what is termed a Minimum Occupation Period. For those who balloted as a married or engaged couples this typically entails remaining married and residing in the flat for a period of five to ten years, depending on the location of the flat. In other words, access to a subsidized flat in Singapore before the age of 35 is heavily contingent upon coupling and maintaining that union.

During my PhD fieldwork, I began to realize that what I was studying was not merely housing policy, but rather people’s endeavours to live together, and the various modes of romantic labour they engage in to synchronize their relational lives with grant, balloting, and flat building cycles. Particularly, I observed my interlocutors, many of whom were still in university, attempting to pre-empt uncertainties in balloting and long wait times by committing to serious relationships early. The idea was that finding a partner early would enable them to wait out multiple balloting attempts and access optimal grant opportunities. Often, they disclosed to me that their BTO partner was also their first romantic partner.

To facilitate this accelerated romantic trajectory, my interlocutors often adopted a decidedly pragmatic attitude toward romance. They sought not necessarily passion or love, but rather what Adely (2016) 7 termed compatibility when writing about marriage in Jordan. Compatibility, for Adely and for my interlocutors as well, referred to “more practical issues of financial security, the ability of a couple’s families to get along, as well as shared expectations of married life” (103). When one girl realized that her then-partner was not aligned with her romantic schedule, she reached out to her friends to ask if she should “leave now and cut my losses”. In a departure from conventional romantic timelines, I observed my interlocutors transitioning courtship to the period after they had already made a down payment for a flat but before the flat was ready. In essence, they committed to purchasing a flat together (and indirectly, to marriage), and then sought to determine or mold each other into the right marital or cohabiting partner. The implication seemed to be that, as one interlocutor expressed, a “person can be made right”. Another stated that the interim wait for the flat was a “rehearsal” for marriage. Yet, despite their best efforts, I also witnessed relationships fail. Ironically, they failed not despite, but often because of, attempting to fit their romantic lives onto a narrow path.

When one of my primary interlocutors, a 23-year-old Chinese-Singaporean woman named Grace, broke up with her boyfriend of a few years in the middle of my fieldwork, it came as a shock to both of us. They had already selected a unit and made their first down payment for the flat. She had diligently assessed their compatibility and conducted due diligence with extreme care. In fact, when they first got together, she asked him a list of questions about how he would handle familial conflict, his approach to finances, and his views on children. Satisfied that he was a stable partner who could be trusted for the long term, they agreed to ballot together. The irony was that when they broke up, the reasons she pointed to had nothing to do with their life goals or finances. Instead, she said she felt that he was almost too stable for her – “attraction mounts for him the more stable our relationship is, but I realize that it doesn’t work for me this way.” She had simply fallen out of love, and consequently lost her down payment. She was not alone. While some of my interlocutors managed to devise ingenious kinship solutions to circumvent flat restrictions, many realized that the romantic arrangements they sought in their schooling years or early twenties were not what worked best for them. In other words, paradoxically, the pursuit of the stability incentivized by the BTO generated more modes of romantic and financial uncertainties.

This is why I was uncertain about how to interpret the announcement regarding married couples receiving more balloting chances. A starting point could be to bemoan the continued lack of attention paid to the needs of those whose life trajectories differ from statist reproductive visions—such as single mothers, queer couples, and others. However, even among the group explicitly prioritized by the BTO, there appears to be a romantic hierarchy in effect. The recent change evidently favors married couples over engaged couples. In a Today article (Ong, 2023), 8 an interviewee is quoted as saying that the change would offer “some safety net so that if the timeline does not fit and we get married, after we get married, we’ll at least have some advantage.” In theory, I understand how this change could potentially alleviate some of the pressure to enter into relationships early. Couples could initially ballot multiple times as an engaged couple, and when they are ready to commit, they could then marry and ballot for a flat together. With increased balloting chances, they are now more likely to secure a flat. This, theoretically, should reduce the uncertainty that couples feel about obtaining a flat, a factor that supposedly drives young couples to rush into the ballot. However, I remain cautious. If housing supplies do not increase significantly, 9 this would imply that it would become more difficult for engaged couples to secure flats, while marginally easier for married couples. In other words, it would extend an already exclusionary criterion – between singles and normatively coupled individuals – to the differentiation between engaged and legally married couples.

While couples enter the BTO with the expectation and hope of eventual marriage, they also understand the inherent risks involved. For my interlocutors, expediting marriage closer to key collection was a strategy to limit potential entanglements in the event of a relationship breakdown. This remains a relevant concern considering the need to meet grant deadlines and the wait for a flat, which means the need to start finding a partner young might not change significantly. I worry that what has changed now is that some couples might feel that instead of using the waiting time as a “rehearsal,” a prelude to marriage, they might now feel incentivized to simply get married. This timeline, at least in the iteration that I found in the field, leaves little room for young people to evolve, to experiment, and to figure out who they are and what they want in a romantic relationship and marriage. We talk a lot about aspirations in Singapore – aspirations for a flat, for children, for marriage – that we seem to forget that desire, and the different but often messy paths through which people discover themselves and their needs, are also part of the calculus of life. Forgetting this ironically produces more, not less, romantic and, if one were to count the potential loss of a down payment, financial instability.

Joy Xin Yuan Wang Joy is a PhD Candidate at the University of Cambridge, Department of Social Anthropology.

Notes:

Ong, Justin . 2023. “Additional BTO Ballot Chance for ‘Prioritised First-Timers’ a Fairer Move than Reserving More Flats for Them: Analysts.” TODAY. February 16, 2023. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/prioritised-first-timers-hdb-bto-flats-2109006#:~:text=the%20previous%20day ↩

Lin, Chen. 2022. “Singapore Sees the Rise of Million-Dollar Public Housing.” Reuters, August 31, 2022, sec. Asian Markets. https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/singapore-sees-rise-million-dollar-public-housing-2022-08-31/ ↩

In brief, an official family nucleus in Singapore is generally defined as

a) If you are married, you, your spouse, and your children (if any). b) If you are single: you and your parents. c) If you are widowed/divorced/separated: you and your children under your custody. d) Fiancé and fiancée e) Orphaned siblings

Marriage is central to the eligibility criteria because four out of the five officially endorsed pathways to forming a family nucleus flow from marriage. Note, for example, that option C does not account for mothers and fathers who have children out of wedlock. ↩

n August 2023, after this essay was written, the government announced greater changes to housing in Singapore. Two major changes included the recategorization of mature and non-mature estates into three categories- Standard, Plus, Prime. Prior to this change singles looking to purchase to BTO flats could only purchase 2-room flats in non-mature estates. While Singles continue to be limited in the size of BTO flat they can purchase (only 2-bedroom flats), they are now allowed to purchase flats from any location. (See this article for the details of the new changes https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/national-day-rally-2023-hdb-flats-singles-prime-bto-resale-3711471) ↩

In the field I met couples who only succeeded on the 11th time. This rice media article suggests that it is possible to fail 13 times at the ballot: https://www.ricemedia.co/bto-hdb-singapore/ ↩

Fong, Kenneth . 2021. “Planning to Break-up after You BTO-Ed? You Might Lose about $40,000!” Blog.seedly.sg. September 25, 2021. https://blog.seedly.sg/break-up-bto-hdb-application/ ↩

Adely, Fida. “A different kind of love: compatibility (Insijam) and marriage in Jordan” The Arab Studies Journal, Vol. 24, no. 2, 2016, pp. 102–27. ↩

Ong, Justin . 2023. “Additional BTO Ballot Chance for ‘Prioritised First-Timers’ a Fairer Move than Reserving More Flats for Them: Analysts.” TODAY. February 16, 2023. https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/prioritised-first-timers-hdb-bto-flats-2109006#:~:text=the%20previous%20day ↩

The government has made promises and proposed measures to increase the supply of BTO flats. The most recent signs in February 2024 appear promising, with some flats promised to be delivered in a timeframe of within three years (https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/housing/19600-bto-flats-to-go-on-sale-in-2024-over-three-exercises-instead-of-four-desmond-lee). However, how this will play out and how the acceleration of flat delivery will affect romantic timelines and decisions is yet to be seen. ↩

[eaglesnick]

“It's not just about the current economic environment. History shows that slashing budgets always leads to recession.” Ha-Joon Chang

The press, media, and online pundits, especially those on the right of the political spectrum, have been drumming on about the poor performance of the UK economy. They are not wrong.

“Economy flatlines under Labour as growth is revised down to ZERO in months after election amid fears of a 2025 'recession made in Downing Street'." (Mail Online: 23/12/24)

“Blow to Rachel Reeves's plans for economy as UK GDP growth forecast DOWNGRADED.” (GB News: 03/02/25)

This blame for our demise is clearly the fault of the Labour government and in particular Rachel Reeves, or so those on the right would have us believe.

What these right-wing pundits don’t tell us is that virtually the whole of the Eurozone is experiencing the same economic problem. GDP only increased by only 0.1% for year 2023/24 in the Eurozone as a whole.

The UK actually had a growth rate 300% higher at 0.3% for the same period so our economy was actually performing better than our European neighbours. Even so, it is a dismal economic situation.

The point to be made though, is that Britain isn’t alone in having a sluggish economy. The whole of Europe is suffering the same problem, which would suggest that no single Chancellor can have that big an impact on future growth. The conditions affecting UK economic growth are universal rather than being country specific.

High interest rates to combat inflation have discouraged both investment and consumer consumption. High energy costs brought about by both the Russian/Ukrainian war and the unfair way the energy market is rigged to favour high pricing, have constrained both business and consumer spending. Economic uncertainty due to rising prices has led to a weakening of consumer confidence and spending, and without increased spending there can be no improvement in growth. On top of this the whole world now has Trump imposed tariffs to contend with which will further increase prices, negatively affect businesses and further eroding consumer confidence.

The sad fact is this country was ill prepared for the global events that have battered it over recent times. During the period of ridiculously low interest rates - several years at 0.5% - instead of investing in public services and infrastructure we had Austerity forced upon us by George Osborne and David Cameron.

As a result of Austerity the UK economy slowed in comparison to countries who introduced less stringent measures after the Financial Crash of 2008, such as Obama's America. By 2014 GDP per capita in the UK was nearly 16% lower than before the financial crash. The massive reduction in public investment, including a 40% real cut in fiscal years 2010-11 and 2011-12, limited infrastructure development and economic multiplier effects.

The resulting dissatisfaction with life in Britain that Austerity measures brought to ordinary working families contributed to the countries decision to leave the European Union. This decision is estimated to cost the UK £311billion by 2035, a massive 4% reduction in GDP growth. This Brexit effect is still working its way through our economy.

Taking all of these factors into account it is disingenuous for those on the right to blame Labour for our economic low growth rate – especially as it was people like Farage and those on the far-right of the Tory party who successfully campaigned for Brexit.

I am no fan of Rachel Reeves or of Sir Keir Starmer and they have much to answer for but the sluggish growth of the economy is not (yet) one of them

[callstheadventurescience]

My grad department just went back on a scheduled 12% raise for grad students on GTAs.

The upcoming academic year (AY) 2024-2025 should have seen part two of a two-part raise for grad students on graduate teaching assistantships in my department. The two year plan was that masters students would increase from an initial $13k to $15k, and then finally to $16k, and PhD students from an initial $19k to $22k to $25k (all USD). After trying for many years to get the university, mostly College of Sciences (COS), to raise our stipends and essentially being told that it was a departmental problem and therefore required a departmental solution, our department opted to admit fewer graduate students on TA for the next several years so that the budget for TA salary was split fewer ways. That was the mechanism for more money per TA, and the justification for it (to appease COS, who had stipulations for the raise despite telling us that it was our problem to solve 🙄) involved having TAs for introductory undergraduate biology labs take on an additional two sections to make the workload commensurate with that of TAs for upper level biology lab sections.

This method of making the raise happen is not...great, and I can talk about how it's not exactly fair, but believe me when I say we had exhausted most other options.

The first part of the raise went through in AY 2023-2024. Intro bio lab TAs took on their additional sections and we admitted fewer students.

Last week when grad students received our GTA contracts to sign, the stipend didn't reflect the second part of the raise. We brought it up to department leadership, thinking it was just a mistake, and their response was essentially: where are you getting this notion of a second raise?

Now the blame game is happening, with various profs in departmental leadership and grad admissions claiming that they didn't know there was a part two to the scheduled raises, or that they were on sabbatical and no one filled them in. The "architect" for this plan left last year for a different institution and this just "fell through the cracks." Other profs on leadership state that the raise was never guaranteed, and their evidence for this is that intro bio lab TAs never took on the forecasted additional lab sections...to which we grad students said, uh yes they very much did? They've been taking on additional sections since last semester.

Imagine a department so dysfunctional that something this important could fall through the cracks. That's my department.

Apparently leadership is scrambling to figure out what they can do, so I suppose that it should be considered a positive that the department is taking very seriously the mistake that they made 🙄

I personally have very little hope for this being rectified, at least this year. Our department already admitted the new cohort, meaning that the TA budget is already split and spoken for. We aren't unionized. I don't think that there is legal recourse for us, but if there were, none of us can afford counsel and the university's free legal resources are off the table because they cannot assist in any matter relating to the university or staff of the university. And our profs are right: this raise was never legally guaranteed. But it's one thing for it to fall through because the funding mechanism fell through or something similar. It's another entirely that it fell through due to departmental negligence and dysfunction.

Grad students are threatening to quit. Not least of all because many of us signed leases and made other life decisions under the assumption that we would be receiving a 12% raise. Nearly 75% of us are on GTA, so most of us are very deeply affected by this.

If this were a script for a sitcom, I'd tell the writer to tone it down a little. Unfortunately it's reality for me and grad students in my department.

If this isn't rectified, then I am officially done with my department. I will no longer attend seminar talks or lunches with seminar speakers. I will no longer attend or contribute to departmental potlucks or get-togethers. I'll be damned if I attend the retirement party of our out-going chair. The only events I will attend are proposals and defenses of my fellow grad students.

My department likely won't care about or notice my abstention, but it's the principal of the matter. It's also easy for me to say "fuck it" since I only have a semester left. But I'm really actually quite sad and bitter that my time here will end on such a sour note. I haven't felt this let down or disgusted in a very long time, which is saying something.

Finally: DM me if you want to know the department name and university. I can say without reservation that no one should apply here without knowing what kind of department dysfunction they're going to experience.

[hullomoon]

hullomoon's 2024 works round-up: part one

it’s the end of the year, which means it’s time for a work round-up! once again i didn't post too much this year, but i definitely know that i was doing longer works (looking at you 17 hour pod!). if you haven’t yet, check out my 2019 roundup, 2020 roundup, 2021 roundup, 2022 roundup, and 2023 roundup! all works are ordered in chronological posting order.

part one | part two | part three | part four | part five | part six

[podfic] leave the children behind | Stranger Things | Joyce/Hopper, Steve & Hopper | 32:53

She catches sight of Hop first, of course. He’s who she’s looking for after all; or, perhaps more accurately, she will think later, he’s the only one she thinks she’s supposed to be looking for in this moment. The way Robin Buckley had talked about what had happened beneath Starcourt that night — well, it had all just seemed so final, she’d thought, and truly she’s never been so happy to be wrong in her life. Meanwhile, in the Soviet Union, Joyce finds not one ghost but two.

[podfic] the goodest boy, his Henry, and the other guy | Red, White, and Royal Blue | Alex/Henry | 04:07

“David?” That voice. The most beautiful sound in the world. David scrambles to his feet, performing a perfunctory stretch before leaping off his bed and bounding down the hallway. His heartbeat accelerates when he sees his Henry, wrapped up in a scarf, looking soft and snugglable. And oh! Behind him is the other guy.

[podfic] Interlude | Schitt's Creek | Alexis & David | 12:25

David whips the tie from around his neck and throws it to the floor in frustration. He will not cry, he will not cry. There is an itinerary and he’s supposed to be sticking to it. There is not enough time to budget in a whole other round of emergency skincare; the only option, if any, would be a few dabs of concealer. That’s it. — Or, a missing scene before the wedding where David's getting ready and realizes he can't quite do it on his own.

[podfic] Goosey Nature | Doctor Who & The Untitled Goose Game | multivoice | 01:42

"Don't you shake your tail feathers at me!"

[podfic] Mixed Emotions | Stranger Things | Steve/Eddie | multivoice | 33:43

Steve and Eddie trade mix tapes, for totally normal friend reasons. And if a little extra work goes into choosing just the right song, well, what's wrong with that?

[podfic] This Ken Has a Boyfriend! | Stranger Things | Steve/Eddie | multivoice | 13:39

Eddie the Banished is a half-elf bard, destroyer of Kas, devilish charmer, the Party’s ace up their sleeve, and he is trapped in the Barbie bin. Someone —a loyal party member never rats on their own— dumped him in the fluorescent neon pink tub during clean-up and now he’ll spend the weekend with the dippy plastic models. There’s three Barbies and one Ken, and no one has broken yet. Do they really just sit here and do nothing? “This is hell.” “Well that’s rude.”

[podfic] Five Cakes Marcus Thought Were Bombs and One He Knew Was Fire | The Bear | Marcus-centric | multivoice | 04:51

Six drabbles about Marcus's search for a perfect new cake to bake.

it's perpetual bliss | Schitt's Creek | Stevie/Ruth | 487

It's the end of their first date and Stevie is soaking up the last moments

[Podfic] covered bridge love | Stranger Things | Steve/Eddie | multivoice | 16:39

“You fucking asshole,” he says, and the moment he lifts his head, Steve’s hand is pushing tear- and sweat-matted hair off his forehead, so careful and kind and infuriating in the way the touch takes over Eddie’s entire self to the point where he can’t help but lean into it. “You absolute fucking jerk.” “I’m sorry.” “Yeah,” Eddie scoffs wetly, “you oughta be.” – Steve is injured in a fire. His ex-boyfriend gets a call. It was supposed to be easier this way.

[podfic] Close Encounters of the Alces Kind | Schitt's Creek | Gen | multivoice | 07:58 & 08:52

why are you trying to get me to stay at work longer than i need to what did you do Nothing i can hear you lying

[kaijudirector]

007 Fest 2023 - Headcanons!

Run out the guns, it's headcanon time! Prepare for barrage! (and my first post, so forgive me if I make a few mistakes, and it's a bit late due to my personal schedule)

Bond Headcanons

James Bond is not a codename. Quite frankly, I've never subscribed to this theory. I've always believed that we jump to a slightly different universe with every actor switch. Each universe shares vaguely the same series of events, with certain commonalities. Such as…

Every film Bond has lost their Tracy, except (maybe) Connery and Craig. Moore still visits his Tracy's grave, Dalton's was mentioned to have been married in LTK. Brosnan we never know flat out, but remember - "Or if you find forgiveness in the arms of those willing women, for all the dead ones you failed to protect…" Connery represents and interesting scenario. Diamonds are Forever can be read in two ways - either Bond is out Spectre-hunting after You Only Live Twice to catch the remains of what remains of Spectre, or he's on the warpath after Tracy died in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. For the sake of this theory, let's say that the latter scenario is canon.

Brosnan's Bond used to have unlimited spending money, but then Dench!M cut the funding, hence her nickname of evil queen of numbers This is something that has some basis in the Fleming books. Bond in Casino Royale is allowed to spend exorbitant amounts of money on the Secret Service's tab - millions of francs that is. Despite the fact that in the 50s 1 pound meant 13 francs, this still constitutes a hefty amount. I remember reading that novel!Bond basically has an unlimited budget in a guidebook. I have a feeling this is similar in the movies - after all, I doubt even a RN commander's pension could afford the hundreds of thousands in monies Bond is bound to lose in the movies. Of course, in Brosnan!Bond's timeline, I have a feeling Dench!M ended up putting an end to that little scenario.

There was no Cuban Missile Crisis in the Fleming books. Rather, Operation Thunderball was the "big nuclear scare that defined the Cold War". In the movies, it's largely kept under wraps, but in the book, it eventually goes public by the end of the story. Of course, the loss of two atomic bombs in the Caribbean may have convinced certain figures in the Soviet Union that keeping their nukes in such an area would be… disastrous to say the least. So with that in mind, they decided not to bite the bullet and kept Cuba nuke-free.

SMERSH was kept around specifically to counter the OO Section in the books. SMERSH in real life was disassembled in 1946, whereupon the MGB took on its counter-intelligence duties before reformatting into the KGB in 1954. We know in later books, specifically The Man With the Golden Gun and Octopussy and the Living Daylights, that the KGB does exist in the Fleming books. However, considering how more proactive the British Secret Service is, especially with the OO section, I would hazard a guess that SMERSH was kept around specifically to combat them, at least until the KGB came into existence (which then absorbed it).

Brosnan's Lleweylln!Q did retire… He took his fishing boat to Wales and lived out the rest of his days somewhere in the countryside where they only speak Welsh (a little something @emiliasilverova and I cooked up a few years ago)

Kincade is (or at least was) married to May Maxwell For those of you who don't know, May Maxwell is Book!Bond's Scottish housekeeper. In between assignments, she and Kincade stay up in Skyfall, before Bond summons her to look after his flat until he returns. Sadly, perhaps the reason we don't see her in Craig!Bond's run is that she may have passed away at some point.

Blofeld was always a megalomaniac, but kept that under wraps... until Bond drove him over the edge

One major line of thinking I remember when I watched Tim Burton's Batman movies is that Batman is always just one step behind his villains in the crazy department, with his morals relatively intact. Conversely, we see Blofeld acting like an absolute machine in Thunderball (and all his appearances in the movies before YOLT), but when Bond foiled his plots, he slowly began to lose it. This gave way into him being more expressive, megalomanaical, and downright unconventional (biological warfare, suicide gardens, and diamond lasers) as time goes on. After all, how would YOU process your hundred-million-dollar master plans going up in smoke at the hands of a suave secret agent who always gets away with it?

Bond's favorite book is Treasure Island

John Gardner mentioned that Robert Louis Stevenson was Bond's favorite author. And with the latter writing a sea story that stars a young orphan named James, who gets involved in some epic swashbuckling adventures, it just feels right.

[toiletpotato]

the caption for the picture in the article states "NZ Prime Minister Chris Luxon's office has confirmed taxpayers paid for his Māori language classes."

article transcription below "keep reading"! (emphasis mine)

written by Ben McKay, last updated at 2.15 am on 18 Dec 2023

--

As New Zealand grapples with a new style of government and approach to the Māori language, Prime Minister Chris Luxon has fallen foul of his advice to the public service.

Mr Luxon appears guilty of a double standard after scolding bureaucrats for taking cash bonuses for understanding the Māori language, te reo, while using taxpayer funds to learn it himself.

Mr Luxon recently confirmed his government would axe payments to te reo-speaking public servants and criticised those who took the bonuses.

"People are completely free to learn for themselves," he said.

"That's what happens out there in the real world, in corporate life, or any other community life across New Zealand.

"I've got a number of MPs, for example, that have made a big effort to learn te reo ... they've driven that learning themselves because they want to do it.

"In the real world outside of Wellington and outside the bubble of MPs, people who want to learn te reo or want to learn any other education actually pay for it themselves."

However, Mr Luxon did not follow his advice.

After repeated requests, the prime minister's office confirmed taxpayers paid for Mr Luxon's classes through a budget offered to the leader of the opposition, saying it was "highly relevant" to his role.

"I think it makes me a better prime minister," he said on Monday.

Opposition Leader Chris Hipkins said te reo was "a national treasure" and learning it should be incentivised.

"Christopher Luxon should be commended for learning Māori, but it's absolute hypocrisy for his government to then set about cancelling the taxpayer subsidies he used to do so, thus denying others that same opportunity," he said.

Waste watchdog the New Zealand Taxpayers' Union called on Mr Luxon to pay back the tuition costs.

Mr Luxon's right-leaning coalition of the National, ACT and NZ First parties has already strained relations with many in Māoridom, particularly over plans to wind back te reo use as championed by the Labour government.

Public servants have been told to communicate in English while public bodies - such as Waka Kotahi for the New Zealand Transport Agency - must revert to using their English-language name first.

Detractors say the government is bashing a minority and inflaming a culture war while the government argues changes have confused non-te reo speakers.

Te reo use is on the rise in NZ but remains a second language.

Competent speakers have grown from six to eight per cent from 2016 to 2021, including 23 per cent of Maori, up from 17 per cent.

Assimilationist governments banned the language in schools for much of the 20th century, causing trauma for many Māori.

Some government members are hostile to te reo use, with Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters believing Aotearoa, the Māori term for NZ, is illegitimate.

In parliament last week, the 78-year-old declined to answer a question in te reo from Rawiri Waititi, the Māori Party co-leader who has mobilised thousands to protest the new government.

Mr Luxon insisted he supported the language and wanted others to learn too.

"It's a fantastic language," he said.

"I wish I had learned as a younger person ... I'm trying to learn.

"I've found it actually very hard."

Mr Luxon had a chequered record with the Indigenous language in his former role as Air New Zealand's chief executive.

Under his leadership, stewards began using te reo greetings such as "kia ora" for hello and "ma te wa" for see you soon.

In September 2019, the airline sought to trademark "kia ora" - the name of its in-flight magazine.

After consultation with Māori leaders, and a local and international backlash, Air New Zealand abandoned the bid a week later.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

This political cartoon by Louis Dalrymple appeared in Judge magazine in 1903. It depicts European immigrants as rats. Nativism and anti-immigration have a long and sordid history in the United States.

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

March 28, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAR 29, 2024

Yesterday the National Economic Council called a meeting of the Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force, which the Biden-Harris administration launched in 2021, to discuss the impact of the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge and the partial closure of the Port of Baltimore on regional and national supply chains. The task force draws members from the White House and the departments of Transportation, Commerce, Agriculture, Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, Energy, and Homeland Security. It is focused on coordinating efforts to divert ships to other ports and to minimize impacts to employers and workers, making sure, for example, that dock workers stay on payrolls. 

Today, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg convened a meeting of port, labor, and industry partners—ocean carriers, truckers, local business owners, unions, railroads, and so on—to mitigate disruption from the bridge collapse. Representatives came from 40 organizations including American Roll-on Roll-off Carrier; the Georgia Ports Authority; the International Longshoremen’s Association, the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots; John Deere; Maersk; Mercedes-Benz North America Operations; Seabulk Tankers; Under Armour; and the World Shipping Council.  

Today the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration announced it would make $60 million available immediately to be used as a down payment toward initial costs. Already, though, some Republicans are balking at the idea of using new federal money to rebuild the bridge, saying that lawmakers should simply take the money that has been appropriated for things like electric vehicles, or wait until insurance money comes in from the shipping companies. 

In 2007, when a bridge across the Mississippi River in Minneapolis suddenly collapsed, Congress passed funding to rebuild it in days and then-president George W. Bush signed the measure into law within a week of the accident. 

In the past days, we have learned that the six maintenance workers killed when the bridge collapsed were all immigrants, natives of Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador. Around 39% of the workforce in the construction industry around Baltimore and Washington, D.C., about 130,000 people, are immigrants, Scott Dance and María Luisa Paúl reported in the Washington Post yesterday. 

Some of the men were undocumented, and all of them were family men who sent money back to their home countries, as well. From Honduras, the nephew of one of the men killed told the Associated Press, “The kind of work he did is what people born in the U.S. won’t do. People like him travel there with a dream. They don’t want to break anything or take anything.”  

In the Philadelphia Inquirer today, journalist Will Bunch castigated the right-wing lawmakers and pundits who have whipped up native-born Americans over immigration, calling immigrants sex traffickers and fentanyl dealers, and even “animals.” Bunch illustrated that the reality of what was happening on the Francis Scott Key Bridge when it collapsed creates an opportunity to reframe the immigration debate in the United States.

Last month, Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post noted that immigration is a key reason that the United States experienced greater economic growth than any other nation in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. The surge of immigration that began in 2022 brought to the U.S. working-age people who, Director Phill Swagel of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office wrote, are expected to make the U.S. gross domestic product about $7 trillion larger over the ten years from 2023 to 2034 than it would have been otherwise. Those workers will account for about $1 trillion dollars in revenues. 

Curiously, while Republican leaders today are working to outdo each other in their harsh opposition to immigration, it was actually the leaders of the original Republican Party who recognized the power of immigrants to build the country and articulated an economic justification for increased immigration during the nation’s first major anti-immigrant period. 

The United States had always been a nation of immigrants, but in the 1840s the failure of the potato crop in Ireland sent at least half a million Irish immigrants to the United States. As they moved into urban ports on the East Coast, especially in Massachusetts and New York, native-born Americans turned against them as competitors for jobs.

The 1850s saw a similar anti-immigrant fury in the new state of California. After the discovery of gold there in 1848, native-born Americans—the so-called Forty Niners—moved to the West Coast. They had no intention of sharing the riches they expected to find. The Indigenous people who lived there had no right to the land under which gold lay, native-born men thought; nor did the Mexicans whose government had sold the land to the U.S. in 1848; nor did the Chileans, who came with mining skills that made them powerful competitors. Above all, native-born Americans resented the Chinese miners who came to work in order to send money home to a land devastated by the first Opium War.

Democrats and the new anti-immigrant American Party (more popularly known as the “Know Nothings” because members claimed to know nothing about the party) turned against the new immigrants, seeing them as competition that would drive down wages. In the 1850s, Know Nothing officials in Massachusetts persecuted Catholics and deported Irish immigrants they believed were paupers. In California the state legislature placed a monthly tax on Mexican and Chinese miners, made unemployment a crime, took from Chinese men the right to testify in court, and finally tried to stop Chinese immigration altogether by taxing shipmasters $50 for each Chinese immigrant they brought.   

When the Republicans organized in the 1850s, they saw society differently than the Democrats and the Know Nothings. They argued that society was not made up of a struggle over a limited economic pie, but rather that hardworking individuals would create more than they could consume, thus producing capital that would make the economy grow. The more people a nation had, the stronger it would be.

In 1860 the new party took a stand against the new laws that discriminated against immigrants. Immigrants’ rights should not be “abridged or impaired,” the delegates to its convention declared, adding that they were “in favor of giving a full and efficient protection to the rights of all classes of citizens, whether native or naturalized, both at home and abroad.”

Republicans’ support for immigration only increased during the Civil War. In contrast to the southern enslavers, they wanted to fill the land with people who supported freedom. As one poorly educated man wrote to his senator, “Protect Emegration and that will protect the Territories to Freedom.”

Republicans also wanted to bring as many workers to the country as possible to increase economic development. The war created a huge demand for agricultural products to feed the troops. At the same time, a terrible drought in Europe meant there was money to be made exporting grain. But the war was draining men to the battlefields of Stones River and Gettysburg and to the growing U.S. Navy, leaving farmers with fewer and fewer hands to work the land. 

By 1864, Republicans were so strongly in favor of immigration that Congress passed “an Act to Encourage Immigration.” The law permitted immigrants to borrow against future homesteads to fund their voyage to the U.S., appropriated money to provide for impoverished immigrants upon their arrival, and, to undercut Democrats’ accusations that they were simply trying to find men to throw into the grinding war, guaranteed that no immigrant could be drafted until he announced his intention of becoming a citizen. 

Support for immigration has waxed and waned repeatedly since then, but as recently as 1989, Republican president Ronald Reagan said: “We lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people—our strength—from every country and every corner of the world. And by doing so we continuously renew and enrich our nation…. Thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we're a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge, always leading the world to the next frontier. This quality is vital to our future as a nation. If we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost.”

The workers who died in the bridge collapse on Tuesday “were not ‘poisoning the blood of our country,���” Will Bunch wrote, quoting Trump; “they were replenishing it…. They may have been born all over the continent, but when these men plunged into our waters on Tuesday, they died as Americans.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON