2020 election primary, reanalyzed

In most election maps of the 2020 election it shows the candidate who received the most votes in the election, but the problem with these maps is they don’t show who got a plurality vs a majority. Because we live in a society which for some reason still uses the primitive first past the post election system we can often end up with situations where no candidate wins the most votes because of a spoiler effect. Elections which had this effect include the 2000 General Presidential election, the 2016 Republican Presidential Primary, the 2016 General Presidential election, and the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary. The 2020 primary often shows a map which makes it look like Joe Biden won an overwhelming majority across the country, regardless of region, in almost every state. The map on Wikipedia looks like this:

2020 primary, plurality winner
Blue is Biden, Green is Sanders

The problem with this map is that Elizabeth Warren a significant share of the vote in the primary before she dropped out after super Tuesday. (Bernie stayed in… but dropped after he under performed in Wisconsin compared to 2016 in which was effectively a two man race. Wisconsin was significant for the Sanders campaign because he won Wisconsin in 2016, and if he was unable to win Wisconsin in a two horse race there was no realistic way for him to be elected after that loss). Because the Progressive Wing agrees on a lot but has major disagreements about strategy. Some of us believe that is really important that we rebuild our institutions in ways which strengthen our democracy, starting with the abolition of the filibuster, while others keep calling for a revolution and often will oppose actions like abolition of the filibuster which are critical to passing the progressive agenda which most Americans agree on. Besides that, we agree on most issues regarding the ends, universal health care is necessary, we want high quality transit, and college should be affordable to everyone who is willing and able to go, with no financial barriers. These are the three main issues which I believe separate traditional progressive Democrats from centrist New Democrats in today’s political sphere. We truly are aligned, and many of us would naturally put another progressive as our second choice if we had the freedom to do so in our elections.

dark blue is progressive
light blue is Biden
Before Warren dropped out

Before Warren dropped out in 2020, the above map is what the map actually looked like. Most states hadn’t voted, including critical swing states such as Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The only state which Biden won which he would carry in the general election against Bernie+Warren was Virginia. Progressives even beat Biden in 4 states which would vote for Trump, which were Iowa, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah.

We see here that the actual results of the 2020 primary are very different from how voters in most states actually voted. The consequence of this Byzantine primary system is that even with an epidemic raging through the country, Democrats only picked up 50 seats in the Senate, and we could have done much better than that. I personally believe that Biden ran a fairly uninspiring campaign where the theme was bipartisanship, and this severely harmed down ballot Democrats.

The Presidential Primary System in the United States forces voters to vote strategically. If popular YouTube channels and cable news convince enough voters that a candidate doesn’t have the votes to win, even if their platform is the most in line with what most voters believe, they can convince enough voters to vote for one of their less preferred candidates that they can sink the candidacy of an entire campaign.

This is just a fact about how First Past the Post works. If voters had been able to vote their conscience by using a ranked voting system, I expect we would have seen significantly different returns than we saw in 2020.

A really clear example of this is that Fairvote ran two polls, one before the Iowa election, and one before Super Tuesday.

In the first election, which was run before Iowa, Elizabeth Warren won.

In the second poll, which was run before Super Tuesday, Bernie Sanders won.

While these are only two polls, and they average about 1000 people per poll, I believe the reason that voters changed their minds is that they had enough information after the election began that people who would have voted for Warren changed their minds and voted for Bernie Sanders. I wish better data existed with 10,000 people per poll and one poll per month which would produce better data of the preferences of the American people. I understand polls are expensive, which is why we don’t have that data, but a political scientist can dream!

Poll 1: https://www.fairvote.org/democratic_primary_2020_poll#spread_of_democratic_frontrunner_rankings

Poll 2: https://www.fairvote.org/democratic_primary_2020_poll_feb_28#/

These polls strongly hint to me that our current election system does not accurately represent the values of the American people.

There are so many different reasons why we should change from our ridiculous 50 step primary/electoral college disaster system to a single ranked voting election for the President in November where all ballots are due on the same day nationwide. Some reasons why we should switch include:

  1. All voters will have the same information.
  2. Voters won’t be swayed by how candidates already performed in the primary.
  3. There won’t be split ballots if one caucus has two strong candidates but the other only has one.
  4. Voters can vote their conscience, and they won’t have to worry nearly as much about how their neighbors voted except in extremely rare circumstances (for my fellow political math nerds out there, we can talk about the Condorcet criterion, but ultimately, we have a system which is neither Condorcet compliant nor majoritarian, plus I don’t care about the majority criterion, but all systems I support follow the mutual majority criterion)
  5. It guarantees the candidate will represent the majority of Americans as closely as possible.
  6. The American people deserve to have politicians who represent them.

In my analysis of the 2020 primary it is obvious to me that we need to move to a national ranked voting election for the President of the United States to ensure that every American can vote their conscience and be fairly represented.

This is not about rehashing the 2020 primary, this is about preparing for future Presidential elections so we can hopefully someday have a system which represents the majority of Americans.

We need to abolish the primary system and ensure that every American has the same information as everyone else.

Conspiracies without regard for reality

Interesting twitter feed today after I made a little comment correcting a mistake about the historical record, read it here:

It’s pretty ludicrous. If you follow the rest of the thread, you will find how people simply don’t understand the history of what happened. Long story short, I was incorrect that Pelosi removed the public option, it passed the Senate in November 2009, was removed from the Senate version which passed in December 2010, and then the House signed onto the bill on March 21, 2010, which was signed by President Obama two days later on March 23rd. Joe Lieberman demanded the bill should not include a public option, his demand was met, and then the bill was sent back to the House. At that point,

After the Senate passed the bill the House knew the bill would probably die if it went back to the Senate, and all progress would be lost. The best option at that point was to pass the bill as is, since filibuster abolition was off the radar before Elizabeth Warren entered the national spotlight.

This Twitter thread is rife with misunderstandings of what is actually happening in our congress, and these lies are frequently spread by far left leading to accusations that the ACA is actually a tool which was pushed for the insurance industry. Now this is obviously not true, the insurance industry actively continues to fund opposition candidates to every candidate who wants to introduce health care reform, and the Heritage Foundation actively opposes expanding Medicare, and want to see the Affordable Care Act repealed. The right wing pro-corruption wing of American politics did everything they could to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and if John McCain hadn’t been in the hospital days before the final vote they would have succeeded.

This is where we end up where a lot of people who call themselves “socialist” and want Medicare for All (which actually isn’t socialist because it doesn’t turn the entire health care sector into a publicly run entity, but what do I know, I’ve already probably read more Marx and Lenin than these people will read in their entire lives, and I plan on reading more because its important) will make up these elaborate conspiracy theories about how Obama was in the hands of the pharmaceutical and insurance companies (FEC records beg to disagree) and there is an elaborate secret agreement between Democrats and Republicans to keep health insurance companies afloat (which must be why the AHCA which would have been a massive cash grab for insurance companies failed and didn’t get a single Democratic vote in 2018) despite all of the evidence to the contrary! If Democrats really were in the grips of the insurance industry, it would have taken just one Senator to change their vote, perhaps Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and the ACA would have been repealed. If Democrats were indeed that corrupt then it would have been very easy to have Manchin vote in favor of the AHCA and the bill would have become law. But not one of them did. I might be incredibly annoyed at how New Democrats effectively oppose filibuster abolition, college affordability, the public option, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, and other necessary laws… but I must give them credit where credit is due… not one of them broke party line to vote against the ACA in 2018.

These people who believe these complex conspiracy theories about Obama is worse than his actions appear tend in my experience to be the same people who believe Bernie Sanders is the one who will save America from corruption!

Give me a fucking break. After reviewing the history and checking my facts, it is very obvious to anyone who has lobbied a single day in their lives and has actually studied how the Senate works that If it wasn’t for the filibuster, the public option would have passed the Senate in 2010 rendering the maneuver to label a bill as budgetary bill totally pointless. In 2013 there was a very important vote to reduce the power of the filibuster, and that was one of the few times where Sanders and Warren split on a vote. Sanders voted to keep the filibuster, despite the fact that the filibuster is the reason the public option failed despite 58 Senators being in support of it.

In his defense of the filibuster, Sanders and friends rendered the biggest gift to private insurance insurance industry they could possibly ask for, because as long as the filibuster exists there is almost no way to pass significant health care reform, or many other bills such as voting rights.

This is a very weird scenario where a group of people will make up elaborate schemes where Obama is an evil corrupt man with a black heart who is out to get the common man based on elaborate backroom deals which there is absolutely no evidence in favor and loads of clear evidence to the contrary, and Bernie Sanders is a perfect politician who is out there for a common man, despite the fact that until very recently he openly supported the one and only very bizarre parliamentary maneuver which prevented most progressive legislation from passing Congress over the last 50 years, consistently voting in favor of the one parliamentary procedure which enables minority rule to this very day.

DSA is a very strange organization.

Joe Lieberman is a total complete piece of shit.

Not everything is a backroom deal. Sometimes the evidence is staring at you in plain daylight on the public roll call.

This is one of those times.

Abolish the Filibuster…

 

Save America.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0363

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act

https://newrepublic.com/article/73683/the-public-option-still-dead

Why the Taliban is letting us evacuate

The only reason the Taliban isn’t fighting us is because they aren’t organized enough yet. If they start attacking Americans we will kick their asses. Give it 5 years, once they have total domination over Afghanistan, the story will be very different.
They give Biden credit that the Taliban kicked our ass and they are being strategic
Not just total domination, but continued support from the Saudi government and Pakistan. They dont need to develop Afghanistan, they have the infinite money mod.
People don’t understand this basic fact
Thats all I see on my Twitter feed this morning. All these PR majors who don’t know shit about politics.

You cannot contain fascism in a single country. We tried that in the 30s. It doesn’t work.

Its really not that complicated.

India and today

Rule number one: Don’t trust terrorists.

Fact: Pakistan harbored bin Laden and has a history of arming terrorist groups.

Fact: Pakistan and India have terrible relations

Fact: India has been a target for terrorist attacks before.

Fact: Afghanistan is about to become a major training center for terrorists.

Fact: there have been many attacks by Islamist militants against India for decades, the last one was in April https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_India

With all of these easily verifiable facts.

It’s pretty obvious that a Taliban takeover in Afghanistan is the worst possible news for India. It will worsen Indo-Pakistani relations, and I pray it won’t erupt into a blown out war between both countries because that will be a disaster.

The Taliban has already started executing civilians and banning education for girls and women.

It’s also not a question of IF the Taliban will harbor terrorists who attack other countries.

It’s a question of WHEN.

How we got here, Afghanistan edition

Fuck the New Democrats.

Fuck the Republicans.

Fuck Jimmy Carter.

Reagan was the devil.

May both Bushes rot in hell.

Obama did a better job than any other president over the last half century, but he still could have done far far more.

Trump is a good for nothing bastard, who doesn’t give a fuck about anyone but himself, and it shows.

Biden is a loser.

That being said…

This is meant  to  be a quick and dirty about how Afghanistan fell to the terrorists. Read the Wikipedia articles for more details.

The year was 1973. The Emir of Afghanistan stepped down as Emir and founded the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The government was stable for 5 years until the Soviet Union launched a coup against the government and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was formed. In response to this, President Jimmy Carter started to send money and arms to the Mujaheddin.  The United States, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan were directly involved in financing the Mujaheddin until the Soviet Union was crumbling. This support continued until 1989 when the US government cut support to the Mujahideen. The Mujahideen formed the Islamic State of Afghanistan in 1996, after 4 years of brutal warfare. At this point they started a brutal regime which is famous. The Mujahideen had all the resources provided to them by the Americans, Saudis, and Pakistanis in the 1990s. Afghanistan has a literacy rate of only 31%. The Afghans didn’t stand a chance. No one cared.

In 2001 they were harboring Osama bin Laden, and he attacked the United States. We attacked Afghanistan to take out the Taliban (supposedly) and never completed the offensive. There were never enough troops. Too much attention was diverted to Iraq by the Bush administration. There was almost no effort to divert funding away from the Taliban and bring their financiers to justice. Not enough resources were focused on educating Afghans so their government could have a mature responsible civil service. In a country where women had not had access to education, they were in a fundamentally different situation. Under Bush, Obama, and Trump, the focus was on military means, and not enough attention was put into developing a mature civil service after 20 years of war (when we invaded).

Trump signed an agreement with the Taliban which essentially assumed they would take over last year. And guess what? They did.

Jimmy Carter started the conflict.

Reagan exacerbated it.

Bush, Obama, and Trump failed to provide the logistics so the Afghan government could be a high quality government.

Now the country suffers.

It’s America’s fault.

It’s Jimmy Carter’s fault.

Both parties are to blame.

It’s our largest failure in the last century.

It’s fucking disgusting.

Short treatise on climate change

Quick reference sheet for climate change and solutions

  1. Global warming is real.
  2. The largest contributor to climate change is carbon dioxide emissions.
  3. Carbon dioxide emissions come from a wide variety of sources, primarily from electricity generation, transportation, and agriculture.
  4. The ratio of which source is the most important differs by region.
  5. The 2 most important sources of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and most developed countries are from electricity and transportation.
  6. The main thing we need to do in order to reverse climate change is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions as quickly as possible.
  7. If governments want to increase an activity, let’s say the number of people going to college, the most straight forward, efficient, and fair policy to increase education is to subsidize it. We do this because there education generates positive externalities for society.
  8. If governments want policies to reduce consumption of a good which is causing negative externalities, then we should do the opposite of a subsidy which is a tax. This will encourage people to move from the activity which is bad for society to an activity which doesn’t negatively impact people around them.
  9. Governments have little to no control over how the substitution effect will work. While subsidies for one form of renewable energy or another will make some impact, its almost impossible to control how much of the substitution effect will just switch investment from one renewable source to another. One example is how anti-nuclear protests which have successfully shut down nuclear plants often end up with that electricity coming from dirty energy. While there will probably be some impact on global warming from subsidies, this is governed solely by regional market forces.
  10. The ratios of which sources are the largest contributors in one area vs another varies widely by region. Around 20% of electricity in Washington state comes from dirty energy, roughly 70% of electricity in Texas comes from dirty energy. A one size fits all subsidy approach will simply not work in a country as large as the United States which has such different sources of electricity by region.
  11. Transportation became the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions in the 2010s, and mostly from individual cars. We need a policy which reduces emissions in cars substantially as fast as possible, while also cutting emissions from electricity.
  12. While climate change is obviously important, we also have many other issues which need attention, such as education, health care, and other important programs. It is important to be efficient in how we use our resources. Even if we just print all the money we need, we will never have infinite people to administer programs. This is why it is important to be direct in policies to maximize efficiency.
  13. If the goal is to reduce CO2 significantly than we need a federal policy which will work in all states and not be susceptible to the substitution effect simply switching from one renewable source to another. We need one which is also agnostic when it comes to which activity is generating the CO2. Given how power lines do not respect state boundaries, while state by state policies are better than nothing, we will eventually need an aggressive federal policy.
  14. There is one policy which targets CO2 directly, regardless of source, regardless of activity, and will not simply substitute wind for solar. That policy is called an exemption free carbon tax.

References:

EPA US sources

EPA global sources

EIA Texas Overview

EIA Washington Overview

Substitution effect in action regarding closing nuclear plants

Voting Laws and Tipping Points

We are in a really bad situation when it comes to where politics are heading right now. Besides from the COVID recovery, which is currently failing, the current administration has no accomplishments yet beyond the stimulus which passed earlier this year, and no realistic chance of any on the horizon.

A week from tomorrow, the Census Bureau will release final counts for redistricting, that is the end point where the most important sections of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act will have no impact until 2032.

At that point, don’t expect the Republicans to make anyone fail to see that they don’t give a damn about bipartisanship or the well being of Americans. The defeat of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act in a week is a major victory for them. Failure to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act before redistricting is complete is by any account a massive failure on the part of the Democratic Party and all of its leadership.

Key swing states like Arizona and Georgia have already passed significant restrictive laws regarding the right to vote.  Senators Kelly and Warnock are both up next year, and they only won by 51% percent of the vote each. The 5 swing states in 2022 are Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Arizona and Georgia have passed voter disenfranchisement laws already, but all 5 have no excuse absentee voting. If we lose Arizona and Georgia, we would need to pick up the other three to have 51 votes, which is still not enough to overturn Manchin and Leahy’s support of the filibuster. If President Biden is to be a notable president with more than a brief mention in future history books, we need to keep all 5 seats, otherwise he will be the next Calvin Coolidge.

The failure to pass HR1 will guarantee extreme gerrymandering in almost every state, and if the Republicans pick up only 5 more seats, they will have control of the House of Representatives. If Democrats lose in any one of those 5 swing states, Republicans will have at least 51 seats in the Senate, which gives them near complete control of government.

The delay to pass HR1 and the obvious lack of balls in the current administration and DNC leadership to hold Democratic Senators accountable when they say they oppose HR1 will cost us the Federal government, and many battles in State governments across the country.

For the 2024 presidential election, only three states matter. Republicans need to pick up Arizona and Georgia (which if Democrats don’t give people a reason to stand in line, they probably will ) and one of either Michigan, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania. Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin all voted for Biden with a margin of under 1% in 2020.

This is why I am going to  be watching the Senate races in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania next year. It will not bode well for Biden if Democrats fail to pick up either Senate seat in those two states next year, and if we cannot win those Senate seats, it is unlikely that Biden will retain those states in 2024.

In 2018, Governor Tony Evers won the Governorship of Wisconsin by only 1% of the vote. If Democrats lose the Governorship next year, and cannot pick up the Senate seat in Wisconsin, than that is very good news for the Republican Party, and doomsday level news for President Biden. This will allow the GOP to pass voter discrimination laws in 2023 which will reduce turnout in 2024, and there will be no way for the President to stop them in a world without the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. That will cost Biden the Presidency.

The best thing to do is for President Biden to make sure that over the next year he does everything he can to give voters a reason to turnout to vote in 2022, otherwise I doubt he will get any significant legislation passed. This basically requires him to either make significant executive orders or use the bully pulpit to force Manchin, Sinema, and Leahy to join the Democrats in the abolition of the Filibuster.

If we don’t get significant executive orders and no significant laws beyond the stimulus bills in March out of this administration, and we lose either the Governorship or Senate seat in Wisconsin,  given the voter disenfranchisement laws being passed in key states which matter, we need to be very worried about 2024.

The delay is deliberate

In 9 days the Census Bureau will release the counts which will be used for redistricting every state in the country.

If the John Lewis Voting Rights Act were passed before then, republicans would not be able to gerrymander these states.

As long as the filibuster is in place, HR1 will not pass.

As long as Biden thinks that he might get his bipartisan bill, he won’t fight the filibuster.

As soon as the census count is out we have less than a month to pass HR1 before the gerrymandering is nationwide.

Hence, it is in the best interest of the GOP to stretch out the voting process on this infrastructure bill as long as possible.

Because if the negotiations were to end, and it becomes obvious to President Biden that bipartisanship is not possible with McConnell, it will become painfully obvious to everyone with half a brain that the ONLY way to make significant change today is through an uncompromising abolition of the filibuster. Thats when the president brings out the bully pulpit, if he has any sense.

If filibuster abolition happened before gerrymandering is complete, democrats could pass HR1, ensuring that Republicans cannot gerrymander, all but guaranteeing a Democratic trifecta for the foreseeable future given demographics.

If filibuster abolition happens after the gerrymandering is done, it does not matter. Republicans will have already discriminated and gerrymandered their way to power, they then would likely take congress next year, and the presidency in 2024.

For this reason, the drawn out negotiations for an infrastructure bill are in the best interests of the Republican Party, and we are very close to the date where the only way to correct the gerrymandering will be through a highly packed court system (courtesy of #Jillnothill), and the very idea of a highly packed court ruling against gerrymandering is downright farcical.

Come back to reality and kill the filibuster before it is too late.

Is Medicare for All Socialist?

First of all, socialism is generally talking about non market based mechanisms, where everything market based is derided as a compromise.

A non market based system would then mean there is no usage of a market, meaning the entire system is devoid of exchanging with people outside of its all in one system. This means no buying drugs from private companies because that is using market mechanisms.

Medicare for all does not manufacture drugs within the government, it is a single insurance plan which everyone in a country is part of. This gives that one insurance plan MARKET POWER as a monopsony to lower drug prices. Since medicare for all purchases drugs on an open market, it is a market based solution to lower drug costs.

A monopsony is a market structure where there is only one buyer for a good or service. Monopsonies work by forcing suppliers to sell at a lower price point because of how their demand curve looks on the classic Marshallian supply and demand graph. This market structure increases consumption and lowers prices.

For this reason, medicare for all is a market based health care policy which only works because of supply and demand.

We need climate action NOW

Forest fires burn across the American west. Hurricanes ravage the gulf coast. Australia loses millions of animals. The coral reefs are getting bleached and dying. Fossil fuels fund regimes which harm their people. Climate change is here. Climate change is real.

The clock is ticking to end climate change. We need to act now, and we need to make the actions we do work as soon as possible. We need to reduce fossil fuel consumption as much as we can, as soon as we can, everywhere in the world.

Technology has advanced considerably over the last 20 years, electric cars can travel over 300 miles on a single charge, solar power installations are going in around the world and the cost of solar has plummeted. Working from home is becoming more feasible, and we have all the tools we need to make this world transition to renewable energy.

Most people know that global warming is real, and that it is a problem. In order to make people match that concern with actual actions, we need to make it more economical for people to use renewable energy as opposed to fossil fuels. We need to do this swiftly, and we need to have a plan now.

Fortunately, in order to get most people to switch, we need to simply make it less expensive to use renewables than fossil fuels. and there are two ways to do that. Either the government can significantly subsidize renewable energy, or the government can make burning fossil fuels more expensive. At the end of the day it is the same thing because of the substitution effect.

There are only two questions remaining, first of all, which government programs will reduce carbon pollution the most for the smallest amount of money in the shortest amount of time, and second, will a policy dilute resources from other necessary programs?

When it comes to both of these questions, the obvious answer is of course a carbon tax. A carbon tax is the most efficient way to reduce pollution, it doesn’t dilute funds from other necessary programs, and it doesn’t favor one source of energy over the other. Maybe you live in a very windy area, in that case windmills make sense. Maybe you live in Florida, or Texas, or even Washington (to be honest) in which case solar panels are a very sensible and economical choice.

Most importantly, we need to pass a policy like this as soon as possible. As soon as the filibuster is abolished, we need to pass the bill proposed by Citizens Climate Lobby which is fully written out, ready to work, and will start making an immediate impact as soon as it is passed. Learn more about their policy proposal here: Citizens Climate Lobby

I prefer the plan by Citizens Climate Lobby because it hits all of the marks, 1. it exists, 2. it will work quickly, 3. it’s cheap.

My first point is because the Green New Deal still has not been fully written up. It is impossible to know exactly how much it will cost and exactly how much pollution it will reduce before it is written into a final draft as a real bill. A climate change bill needs to have these details flushed out, and we need to be able to set each proposal next to each other so we can determine the bang per buck of each proposal, and how long it will take us to get to any of our goals. Until the Green New Deal is finished, and it is studied to understand how quick it will work and how much it will cost per ton of carbon reduced, it is just a pipe dream. Also, it doesn’t take over two years to move policy from an idea to a final draft. We have other policies ready to go right now which are completed and have real estimates on how much carbon emissions will be cut.

The fact of the matter is carbon taxes are the most efficient way to reduce carbon pollution. There is no way any policy is going to beat a carbon tax on cost effectiveness simply through subsidizing renewable energy.

Second, carbon taxes win on speed. The legislature passes a carbon tax, the tax is implemented, and it costs more to pollute. Basic economic theory teaches us that when a good is more expensive, people consume less than they did before. With a subsidy, you have to start by allocating those funds (which can take years) and then you have to setup an agency to distribute those funds, and then you need to allocate those funds appropriately. Carbon taxes are simply faster.

Third, it is cheap. as found in that study by The IET and many many others over the last decade.

Please join Citizens Climate Lobby and work to pass real legislation which is based on science, we know will work, and will be equitable, fair, and effective.

We simply don’t have time to wait.