Tom Sgouros

@tsgouros.bsky.social

Policy nerd, data science, researcher, former Treasury official, Rhode Islander. https://sgouros.com

It is absolutely nobody's business what someone receiving food stamps purchases with this benefit. In EVERY case, the more you try to "means test" and create "moral" justifications for denying things, the more you increase the cost of the program, and the more people you hurt for no good reason.

Food stamps no longer covering "junk food" might sound positive on paper to some, but let's consider what that actually means.

A food stamps recipient no longer being able to purchase ginger ale if they have an upset stomach.

A parent receiving food stamps not being able to afford a birthday cake for their child or cupcakes for a school party.

A physically disabled recipient no longer being able to buy frozen meals even though they cannot cook for themselves.

Samuel Alito is corrupt, accepting gifts from people with business before the court, and holding stocks directly impacted by cases he rules on. Those financial conflicts of interest and refusal to accept basic judicial ethics, on their own, warrant impeachment and removal. If the US had standards.

Lawrence Hurley@lawrencehurley.bsky.social · 2w ago

Justice Alito's delayed financial disclosure report for last year his been posted. Confirmation that, as of 2025, he's still holding on to oil & gas stocks ahead of the big climate change case being heard in October.

Mutual aid is great but requires more effort on everyone's end than, say, a church food pantry, which in turn requires more effort on everyone's end than a food stamp program. Gutting something like USAID is either sociopathic or economically disastrous but was presented as cutting waste/abuse.

As a general rule that applies not only to charitable giving but to many areas is that reducing transaction costs is by default good. A flaw of libertarianism is the assumption that government adds transaction costs when it's actually a powerful reducer of them when used correctly.

Faine Greenwood@faineg.bsky.social · 2w ago

The reason you want an actual humanitarian aid system and *don’t* want to force everybody to rely on online mutual aid is because online mutual aid *forces people experiencing horrific trauma* to perform on the Internet for survival.

The thing is you have to be a party hack right now if you care about good things because basically nothing matters more than republicans losing and democrats winning, but lots of people want to not be party hacks more than they want good things.

Not sure why this gets lost in basically every conversation about energy affordability, but the bills we pay depend on both prices and usage. Energy efficiency, from appliance standards to building codes, is the most effective energy affordability policy in US history and there's not a close 2nd.

Mark Z. Jacobson@mzjacobson.bsky.social · 2w ago

California pays the 13th-lowest grid electricity bills per capita in the US despite having the 2nd-highest electricity price. Texas pays the 38th-lowest bills per capital (21% higher than CA) despite half the electricity price as CA. Why, because TX consumes 2.5x the electricity per person as CA.

Securing funding and making sure it was allocated to the Birthing Center was a top priority this year. Our access to healthcare shouldn't rely on Hospitals' good graces, it should be protected.

The politicization & illegal cancellation of federal research funding is an existential crisis for every research university in the country, especially flagship R1 publics. Again, you would think university presidents would speak up, loudly & collectively, about this. Alas. bsky.app/profile/mcop...

Matt Grossmann@mattgrossmann.bsky.social · 3w ago

NSF is substantially reducing grants, zeroing out many SBE subdivisions, & withholding the funds to spend next year on central initiatives: www.nature.com/articles/d41...

We have had this conversation so many times. You do not have to platform/debate obscene views that are also false. I wrote during a wave of pressure on progressives to compromise with far-right haters:

I can comprehend, and do, that lots of people don’t believe climate change is real, but is there some great benefit in me listening, again, to those who refuse to listen to the global community of scientists and see the evidence before our eyes? A lot of why the right doesn’t “understand” climate change is that climate change tells us everything is connected, everything we do has far-reaching repercussions, and we’re responsible for the whole, a message at odds with their idealization of a version of freedom that smells a lot like disconnection and irresponsibility. But also climate denial is the result of fossil fuel companies and the politicians they bought spreading propaganda and lies for profit, and I understand that better than the people who believe it. If half of us believe the earth is flat, we do not make peace by settling on it being halfway between round and flat.
Patrick Sturgis@patricksturg.bsky.social · 3w ago

How about refuting them on theoretical and empirical grounds? That is kind of how science works. It doesn’t work by calling people names, refusing to engage with their claims and attempting to get them fired.

I think one reason the public has such a shallow understanding of the extent of the damage Trump is doing is that *US political & media elites* have such a shallow understanding. Douthat's pleasant upper-middle-class life hasn't been unduly disturbed, so really, what's the big deal?

Jake Grumbach@jakemgrumbach.bsky.social · last mo.

Trump II has profound consequences that will last a century: -destruction of administrative state & civil service -extreme wealth concentration, tech oligarchy -climate rollbacks -end of rule of law w/o pushback incentivizes future backsliding -Iran Pundits hate this because it sounds shrill

El-Sayed: "Notice how they used my full name, in echoes to exactly what they did against President Obama. At the end of the day, it's not radical to believe people should be able to afford their groceries, they should have healthcare, that the president should not be able to deny elections ... "