Villefranche-sur-mer Fall 2026-1 - Invaded by Movie Stars

 Dear Friends,

We have been in Villefranche for most of October.  It has been great, but with nothing in particular to report.  From time to time this year, Villefranche has been one of the sites for filming a prequel to the movie, Ocean's 11.  Yesterday we noticed that the crews had arrived to transform the waterfront.  They took over two restaurants and gave them the façades of a bakery and a fish store.

Complete with fake fish.

Today the filming began.  Fortunately, we could actually see some of the filming from our balcony.  I felt like a real paparazzi with my telephoto lens.  Margot Robbie and Bradley Cooper are the big stars, and Bradley Cooper is the director.  An incredible amount of time and effort goes into preparing for a simple clip in the movie.  There is also an incredible amount of disruption for regular people trying to live their lives.  We, on the other hand could, just enjoy an escape from reality for a while.

Margot Robbie arrived on the scene first and spent a lot of time just sitting on the sea wall while everyone scurried around.  Then she strode casually on the wall,

In my imagination of the story, the handsome man (Bradley Cooper) sees her and is immediately smitten with her so he pursues her having just purchased his baguette at the fake bakery which he is actually walking towards instead of away from.

I should note that it is sunny today as you can see, but it was about 65 degrees when they were filming this scene.  The sweat marks on the back of his shirt must have been put there by a crew member and had to be remoistened from time to time.

As I said, Bradley Cooper is both a star and the director (and all kinds of different producers).  So in addition to whatever his character was doing, he is telling people what to do.  He and Margot had a discussion about the scene.  I could not hear what they were saying, but they both seemed to have opinions.

After a couple of practice runs, there were more discussion and a lot of measuring.  

Bradley was actively involved in all of this as Margot watched on with what I thought was great patience.

Eventually they brought in a camera on a moveable crane that could zoom in and out and move.  The crane blocked our view, and then the filming moved closer to the transformed restaurants and out of our view.  So all that is left for us are the memories and the ongoing disruption of the life of our little village.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

 

Reflections on my 80 years of life and my country and its future

Dear Friends,

 

I recently turned 80 years old, I do not have the energy and stamina that I used to have, and I am thinking about the incredible life I have lived and how privileged I am.  So, I am feeling my age, but that is not all that is causing me to suffer from a malaise.  My generation is leaving this world to future generations facing multiple existential crises.

 

As an American, I am embarrassed that my country, the country that has given me everything, and the country that I love is now at the forefront of virtually everything that is wrong in the world – violence, bigotry, hatred, authoritarianism, climate change, economic inequality, etc.  

 

Our country was founded on values (“truths”) – “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  Of course, these words were completely aspirational as they were written by white men who owned other people.  Our founders were deeply flawed, but they knew that aspiring and striving to achieve these truths could produce a great nation.

 

We have never lived up to these values, but many Americans have worked hard to achieve a country and even a world in which these truths can become a reality.  Unfortunately, there has always been a significant minority of Americans who reject these truths.  During my lifetime, we have had leaders who have enabled that wretched, bigoted minority to feel empowered to come out of the shadows, to be openly bigoted and to spew hatred and commit violence.  

 

Trump and the current Republican party who support and enable him are the clearest examples of leaders who have rejected the truths of our founding and have focused our country on hatred, bigotry, greed and authoritarianism.  Unfortunately for all of us, but especially for minorities and those on the fringes of society, we find ourselves on the brink of losing our democracy and the truths on which it was founded. 

 

I am somewhat optimistic that there will be a “blue wave” that flips control of the House and the Senate. I even have some hope that in 2028, Democrats will take control of both the Legislative and Executive Branches of the government.  Unfortunately, even if both those elections go well from my perspective, I have trouble seeing a path to (a) fixing all that Trump and the Republicans have broken, (b) ridding the country of hatred, bigotry and greed (or at least pushing it back into the shadows) and (c) creating a government that will pursue the truths of our founding and will work to improve everybody’s lives, especially working people.

 

To even attempt to do these things the United States needs authentic, moral leaders which unfortunately have been in short supply during my lifetime.  There is no hope that a moral leader will emerge from the immoral morass that is the Republican Party.  I’m not much more hopeful that the Democratic Party will select an authentic, moral leader as its Presidential candidate in 2028.  

 

Most of the leadership of the Democratic Party today is completely old-school establishment that is too tied to big money interests, too afraid of making substantial changes to the status quo, too afraid of losing power and position, and too controlled by what the “political consultants” tell them to do and think.  The dividing line is often old versus young but not always - Bernie is old but is a true populist and fighter for working people, and Hakem Jeffries is young, but is so tied to the establishment, he cannot lead with principle.

 

There were 90 million people who could have voted but who did not vote in the last Presidential election. The non-voter candidate won the popular vote by a landslide.  

Non-voter                    90 million

Trump                         77 million

Harris                          75 million

Other                           3 million

There were even 18 million registered voters who did not vote.  There are many reasons given by people for why they don’t vote, but most are versions of “it doesn’t make any difference”, "the candidates/parties are all the same”, and “it won’t impact my life”.

 

To turn this country around, to save our democracy and move towards the aspirations of our founding, we must get more people to vote.  How can those people be enticed to vote?  They must believe that they are voting for candidates/political parties who care about them, who believe that working people are the heart and soul of this country, who are willing to fight for them and who are moral and authentic people.  It is up to those of us who are Democrats, independents and former Republicans who have rejected what their former party has become to demand that the Democrats put forth candidates and policies that will give disaffected members of the electorate a reason to vote.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

Rising Wealth Inequality and Rising Expenditures on Political Campaigns

Dear Friends,

The U.S. economic system is rigged dramatically in favor of the wealthy and against working people. In earlier posts I explained how federal policies—especially tax policies—have sharply increased the wealth of those already at the top while making life harder for working people.

 

Donald Trump was elected president twice because many voters accepted his claims that he would govern as a populist, defend working people, and fix our rigged economic system. Some of those voters now appear to recognize that his priority has been building more wealth and power for himself and his ultra-wealthy allies. This election cycle has again brought attention to the concentration of wealth at the top and the enormous sums spent on elections. Although I cannot prove a direct causation, the numbers are striking.

 

I reviewed wealth concentration trends dating back to 1990, when the policies of the Reagan and the first Bush administrations were beginning to show their effects. It is also important to note that, during this period, Democrats did little, even when they were in power, to alter the direction set by Reagan-era policies.

 

The data for this chart comes from Federal Reserve Bank research https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/#range:2011.2,2026.2

 

During this period from 1990 to 2026, the Top 0.1% increased its share of wealth by almost 67%, while the Bottom 50% saw its share fall by almost 30%.  Although wealth rose for every group during this period, the Bottom 50% gained only 485%, compared with a staggering 1,289% increase for the Top 0.1%.

 

As the chart shows, the only households whose share of wealth increased were those in the top 1%, and even among the Top 1% those at the very top did significantly better.  Every other group saw its share of wealth decline over this almost four-decade period.

 

Changes in income and estate tax rates obviously played a major role in this immense transfer of wealth from the bottom of the economic ladder to the very top. The top income tax rate

in 1950 was 91%

in 1975 was 70%

in 2025 was 37%

The top estate tax rate

            in 1954 was 77%

            in 1977 was 70%

            in 2025 was 40%

As you can see, from the time of the Eisenhower presidency to now, the maximum income tax rate was decreased by almost 60%, and the maximum estate tax rate was decreased by 48%.

 

Unsurprisingly, the wealthy, with all their extra wealth, have found ways to influence politicians’ votes, especially since the Citizens United decision, ensuring that tax and financial policies continue to work in their favor. Campaign spending from the 1990 through 2024 Presidential election cycles shows a dramatic increase—one that could only be fueled by the ultra-wealthy.

 

 

As you can see from the above chart PAC Spending from the 1992 (Bush 1 v. Clinton) through 2024 (Harris v. Trump) campaigns has increased by an astounding 3,824%.  As a practical matter there are no limits on this type of contributions. Consequently, this increase far exceeds the 444% increase in spending by Presidential campaigns where donations are limited.  

 

Please note that from the 2016 election campaigns to the 2024 election campaigns, the PAC expenditures have increase over $11.5 billion.  That kind of increase can only come from donors who are in the Top 0.1% of wealth category.  These ultra-wealthy contributors have received an extraordinary return on their “donations.”

 

The unusual increase in Presidential Candidate Spending in 2020 also reflects the influence of big money in politics. That campaign included extensive self-funding by ultra-wealthy candidates. For example, Michael Bloomberg’s campaign spent more than $1.1 billion without winning the nomination, and Tom Steyer’s campaign spent almost $350 million without winning the nomination.

 

Until we overturn the Citizens United decision and pass laws to get big money out of politics, we cannot expect to unrig the system, nor will we have a government that improves the lives of working people.

 

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

Project 2029 - 8 Housing Costs

Dear Friends,

One of the biggest affordability problems for working people is housing.  The general rule is that a household should not spend more than 30% of the household income on housing costs.  Unfortunately, far too many households in the United States must pay more than 30%.  The Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies has published a study entitled "Housing Unaffordability Soared to New Highs in 2024".   Just a few of the statistics from that study indicate what a dire problem working people have finding affordable housing.  The study defines cost-burdened households as those where the occupants are paying more than 30% of the household income for housing and defines extreme cost-burdened households as those paying more than 50% of the household income for housing.

In 2024, there were 43.5 million households (33% of all households) that were cost-burdened.  Included within that number were 21.6 million (16% of all households) that were extremely cost-burdened.  In 2024, 20.7 million homeowner households (24% of all homeowners) were cost-burdened, and 22.7 million renter households (49% of all renters) were cost-burdened.  

Of course low income homeowners and renters fare worse than higher income households.  

Homeowner Households
Income level	Rate of cost-burden
Over $75,000	10%
$45,000 to $74,999	31%
$30,000 to $45,000	45%
Less than $30,000	75%
Renter Households
Income level	Rate of cost-burden
Over $75,000	14%
$45,000 to $74,999	49%
$30,000 to $45,000	72%
Less than $30,000	83%

Obviously the lack of affordable housing demonstrated by these figures is huge problem for working people and in the richest country in the world is unacceptable.  Even the currently deeply divided Congress understands that there is a problem and recently passed the 21st Century Road to Housing Act with overwhelming bipartisan support.  Unfortunately, even though the White House supported it, Trump has refused to sign it.

If you are interested in really getting into the weeds, you can find a detailed summary by the Bipartisan Policy Center here.  It provides for a wide variety of changes that are intended to make housing more affordable.  Even if Trump signs it, this bill will not solve the problem, but it will help.

It is not my intention to delineate solutions for the housing affordability crisis we are facing.  I want to be sure that the Democrats make it clear that once they gain control of Congress and the Presidency, they will immediately enact legislation to address the housing crisis and make housing more affordable for working people. Some of the actions taken to reduce housing costs will be in conflict with other goals of Democrats, like balancing reduced regulations with negative impacts of those reductions on the environment and balancing rent controls with investment incentives. Who said governing was easy.

Democrats should not shy away from having the federal government do those things that the private sector cannot do.  Clearly, the private sector is incapable of producing sufficient affordable housing for our country, and the current system of incentives to the private sector has not been successful.

Of course, other parts of Project 2029 that provide more income to working people will help make housing more affordable, but those items alone will not be enough.

Not having sufficient affordable housing is a policy choice.  The Democrats must enact policies that provide working people with the safe, high quality, affordable housing they deserve.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

Project 2029 - 7 Post Secondary Education

Dear Friends,

In a prior post, I wrote about the need to provide high quality, free daycare and pre-K through 12 education to all.  That is only the bare minimum.  We must do the same for post secondary education. 

In the United States and generally throughout the world, attaining a bachelor's degree provides a pathway to higher life time earnings as well as a wide variety of non-financial benefits.  Here are two summary statements from a report by Lumina Foundation:  

Despite enrollment and completion rates declining and Americans’ confidence in higher education falling, the economic case for earning a college degree remains solid. College graduates earn about $1 million more on average over the course of their working years than U.S. adults with no college degree...

The results show that additional years of education beyond high school make for a healthier, more civic-minded individual who is more likely to interact with neighbors and family members and find careers that align with their natural talents and interests.

According to a study by the Education Data Initiative (here), the United States has the highest average public college tuition of all other OECD countries at $9,596 in 2022-23 academic year

There are many countries that highly subsidize post secondary education.  For example,

Norway - While public postsecondary education in Norway is tuition-free, student loans are available for living expenses and private tuition costs. 

College students in Norway pay $0.00 for one year of tuition in an average public bachelor’s 

Sweden -Tuition in Sweden is free to EU/EEA citizens, and Sweden’s government spends more on postsecondary education than most other developed countries.

• College students in Sweden pay $0.00 for one year of tuition in an average public bachelor’s program; 

France - While the French government subsidizes public higher education for all, EU/EEA citizens usually receive more in subsidies than non-citizens (apart from a few specific groups, such as long-term residents and refugees).

• For EU/EAA citizens, tuition for the 2024-25 academic year is €175 (equivalent to 182.10 USD at the end of 2024) for a licence (bachelor’s) program; 
• For non-citizens, a smaller share of education costs are subsidized; tuition for 2024-25 is €2,850 (equivalent to 2,966 USD at the end of 2024) at the licence (bachelor) level.

Germany - While Germany offers free tuition at its public universities to EU/EEA students, this does not include living costs or semester contributions (which cover administrative costs, student services, etc.).

• College students in Germany pay $156.70 for one year of fees in an average public bachelor’s program.

While the United States spends more on education than other countries, it does not receive commensurate results.  In this case, I believe the reason is the high cost to families, particularly working families for whom the opportunity is beyond their reach. The following chart from a study by the OECD compares the percentage of the population that has post secondary education delineated by the education of the parents.  As you can see, the United States is in the middle of the pack despite spending much more than other countries.  In addition, the opportunity gap for students whose parents did not have post secondary education remains a stain on a country that claims to provide equal opportunity. 

If we are ever to achieve true equality of opportunity, we must provide affordable educational opportunities to all.  While scholarships are nice, the government must ensure that all students who meet the educational qualifications can attend post secondary educational programs for free.  If a student and/or the family must incur debt to provide this opportunity to the student, we have failed.  The children of working people deserve the opportunity to attain all the benefits that post secondary education provides.  In the richest country in the world it is a policy choice to fail to do so.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

The Crossing - 3

 Dear Friends,

As promised here is my post about the food on the Queen Mary 2 on our crossing of the Atlantic from New York to Southampton.  Our group booked together for the Queen's Grill level.  Consequently we could eat all our meals together in the Queen's Grill.

We had a designated table that only we could use.  We could go to a meal anytime during the meal service.  We also had the same group of servers.  

The menus changed daily.  Copies of the next day's menus were put in our cabins the night before.  Here is a sampling of the menus.

Breakfast

Lunch

Dinner

Gala Evening Dinner

There was also an à la carte menu for dinner, but you had to order those items by lunch of the day you wanted them.

Fortunately for us the portion sizes were generally smaller than one might expect which meant that we did not gorge ourselves as much as we might have.  Here are some samples of the various dishes. 

I was delighted that I could have fresh berries for breakfast every day.  The waiters got used to bringing me two helpings.

The avocado toast with poached eggs was a real favorite.

Of course dinners were the highlight of the food extravaganza.  There were beautiful little starters.

At many dinners the maitre d' would offer a special pasta to add to the regular menu.  

There were plenty of delicious fish dishes.  

Unfortunately, on this sole meunière I took the picture before the waiter had added the spinach.  So do not blame the Queen Mary 2 for the appearance of the plate.

There was also far more meat than our doctors would have recommended, but it was very good.  We also could not resist the flaming dishes.  

Rack of Dorset Lamb

Beef Wellington

Chateaubriand of Beef

The normal desserts were really good.

But the flaming desserts were always special.

Baked Alaska

Cherries Jubilee 

One night we experienced a fun soufflé.

Of course tea time on a British ship is very important and very good.

And just in case we were hungry, a small appetizer was delivered to our room between tea and dinner.

On the last night the waiters found out that Jane and I would celebrate our 57th anniversary in a few days so they prepared a special dessert for us.

And serenaded us with "Let Me Call You Sweetheart".

What a wonderful experience it was!  If we can, we will do it again, but next time we will go from Southampton to New York so we can see the Statue of Liberty as we enter New York harbor.

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal