I can only imagine government procurement officers are rolling they’re eyes everywhere as are government contractors, seeing how the government is quiting contracts for political reasons. Nobody likes to get stiffed on a contract, especially not for reasons of convenience – actually it’s even more dubious then that – it’s reasons of political messaging by the newest administration.
Contractors I’m sure will be demanding every right they have for full payments under contract breaking for convenience terms, and going forward they’ll insist both on higher prices from governments and tougher language relating to early termination of contracts – if they don’t entirely get out of the business of government contracting.
Heck of it is, it will raise costs not just for the federal government but also every little town and village because the risk of government breaking contracts is higher now. It could even push up interest rates in unrelated markets like mortgages and auto loans.
Interstate 687 briefly dips into Connecticut but for traffic violations and misdemeanors there is an interstate compact that allows the NY State Police patrol this section.
The same is true for Interstate 86, where it dips into Pennsylvania for a a short stretch.
enrollment) ONenrollment USING sum(ct)) ORDERBYdem-rep DESCLIMIT 10;
Because of the partisan gender gap, there are no women in the top 10 names for enrolled Republicans. But in case if you are wondering what the most Republican women first names in New York State – Irina, Tammy, Svetlana, Gianna, Alla, Lyudmila, Galina, Yelena, Inna, Larisa.
Republican women in New York tend to be either Russian or Italians, or in the case of Tammy, I’m thinking probably older and rural.
Lately there has been a lot of concern about how tariffs could raise prices. It’s no different then the argument that government regulations and business taxes raise prices, and while it’s a legitimate debate, one could also argue that steel — and materials more generally — are too cheap.
Does the United States really need to manufacture and throw away 135 billion cans every year? Maybe that should be the discussion. That’s a lot of cans, that could be avoided by choosing alternative packaging, or better yet foods that do not require packaging. A lot of canned goods are loaded with salt and other unhealthy ingredients, and arguably are too cheap and convenient to buy and consume.
Even the idea of a tin can is a misnomer in the modern era. Almost all tin cans are steel, not primarily tin, and lined most commonly with polycarbonate which contains Bisphenol-A (BPA) that is known be harmful for human health. The BPA-free cans often have a different bisphenol in that is likely as harmful to heath. Some tins cans contain a thin layer of tin, especially if the food is acidic and would eat away the polycarbonate coating inside. That also makes it a mess for recycling, which only about 65% of cans produced in any year recycled. While the steel might be recovered, all of the polycarbonate is going up the stack of smelter and the tin is being lost as slag. Recycling is hardly a closed loop system. Not to mention all those old farm dumps you find in the woods filled up with rusted old cans.
The truth is raising the price of cans is likely only going to add a few pennies onto the cost of canned goods. But it might make people buy less of them, and that is good for everybody besides the canned good industry. There are better alternatives that have less packaging, like dried beans and lentils that can be cooked at home in the evening or morning for later use. Or fresh fruits and vegetables, especially those produced close to home in season. Or even frozen fruits and vegetables, which while packaged in plastic, are far less waste then what you get when you buy them in a can, even if the can is supposedly recyclable. Often flash-frozen fruits and vegetables are sold in large bags compared to all material and energy consumed in a smaller-canned portion.
We have to fund the government somehow. A few pennies tax on tin cans in the form of a tariff isn’t a bad way to do it. It will encourage the use and consumption of fewer throw-away cans, in favor of alternative ways of cooking that healthier for both ourselves and the planet. And the evidence is pretty clear that taxes on consumption are vastly superior to income and capital gains taxes, which discourage economic growth rather then discouraging waste.
