Tea at Trianon: The Art of the Deal: Japan Pays Upfront, America Builds Now

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Friday, July 25, 2025

The Art of the Deal: Japan Pays Upfront, America Builds Now

From Amuse on X:

Let us begin with the fundamentals. Trade deficits have long haunted American politics, most often serving as cudgels wielded by opposing factions. Economists debate their significance. Politicians weaponize them. Meanwhile, the public rightly senses that an imbalance exists when goods flow in and factories shut down. Traditional trade deals attempt to remedy this by offering future concessions, increased market access, or vague commitments to "level the playing field." But these promises are paper tigers, easily ignored, impossible to enforce. Trump’s Japan deal breaks that pattern by inverting it. Instead of asking for concessions in the future, he demanded compensation upfront: a $550 billion infusion of Japanese capital to finance American infrastructure and industry.
This is a paradigmatic shift. Imagine, if you will, a wealthy guest who has long overstayed their welcome, consuming more than they contribute, finally agreeing to help renovate the house. That is what Japan has agreed to do. Rather than merely apologizing for the trade imbalance, they have provided a signing bonus that allows the US to reinvest in itself, without begging Congress for a dime.
Critics may ask: why would Japan agree to such terms? The answer is simple, and it is twofold. First, Trump’s judicious application of a 15% tariff on Japanese imports, a strategic retreat from higher threatened rates, signaled credible resolve. Second, Japan understands the geopolitical stakes. A strong, self-sufficient United States is the linchpin of Pacific stability. Financing American energy, manufacturing, and AI facilities is not charity. It is insurance against Chinese hegemony. (Read more.)

When NASA went woke. Also from Amuse on X:

In 1969, Neil Armstrong took a single step that echoed across centuries. Today, NASA's Artemis program trudges forward with the bureaucratic gait of a midlevel HR department pushing a PowerPoint on pronouns. How did we get here? The answer, in brief: identity politics. Artemis, the ambitious initiative to return Americans to the Moon, has become less a scientific endeavor and more a case study in the consequences of subordinating competence to quotas.
To be clear, Artemis was not always thus. There was a moment, fleeting, but real, when hope reentered NASA's orbit. That moment bore the name Jared Isaacman. But that moment was reportedly snuffed out by Sergio Gor, the Director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, whose personal vendetta against Elon Musk doomed Isaacman's confirmation. Gor's obstruction did more than kill a nomination, it delayed America's lunar ambitions by at least a year, perhaps more. What might have been a renaissance at NASA became another casualty of palace intrigue.
Isaacman, a self-made billionaire, ace pilot, and commander of private orbital missions, represented precisely the kind of energetic, capable, and forward-thinking leadership the Artemis program required. As the founder of Shift4 Payments and architect of the all-civilian Inspiration4 and Polaris Dawn missions, Isaacman had already accomplished feats NASA once deemed impossible. He cut through the red tape. He got Americans into space, efficiently, affordably, safely. He inspired the public. And unlike the ceremonial caretakers of the federal space bureaucracy, he had actually gone to space himself.
His nomination to lead NASA promised a return to merit, innovation, and clarity of purpose. During his confirmation hearings, Isaacman argued that Artemis should be completed "as fast as possible," advocating for near-term pragmatism (using SLS and Orion) but long-term sustainability through commercial partnerships and reusable launch systems. This was no utopian dream, it was the proven SpaceX model adapted to the public sector. Had Isaacman been confirmed, Artemis might have evolved from an aimless spectacle into a galvanizing national achievement. Instead, the Biden holdovers and bureaucratic inertia won. And what we are left with now is the Artemis experiment, not in lunar science, but in DEI. (Read more.)