Latest news with #NewEnglander
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
William Watson: Do good pipelines make good nations?
Before I built a pipeline, as Robert Frost might have put it, I'd ask to know: who was likely to use it, what would they carry on it, who'd be buying from them and, flinty New Englander that he was, at what price? On this need to do the sums I'm with former climate minister Steven Guilbeault, and that's a sentiment you won't often read here, though I suspect his own sums would never add up to 'Yes.' A pipeline may also be a nation-building project but it's primarily a vehicle for transporting gases and fluids you want to sell. And the idea is that the profit you make from selling is enough to pay for the pipeline. And not just that: building the pipeline should be the most profitable thing you can do with the money. If you're not doing the best you can with the capital, you're wasting it. Markets are appropriately ruthless in making such choices, politicians not. Patriotism being the first refuge of a grifter, there's a tradition as old as poetry in this country of slapping a maple leaf on a thing (or before that a Red Ensign or a Union Jack), calling it nationally important and then spending as much of the public's money on it as you can get away with. It sometimes enriches the nation; it always enriches your associates, political and otherwise. Often it has been done with tax money, or tax money foregone via credits or exemptions. There being no fiscal room for new taxes or tax expenditures, the politico-industrial complex — the crony capitalists and their catalyzers in Ottawa — seem likely to go after pension money, i.e., past taxes. If you think national projects with uncertain returns will provide a better financial foundation for your retirement years than a globally diversified portfolio of conservatively chosen assets, well, you love risk more than I do. It's not just pipelines, of course. Beware high-speed rail, urban transit, ports in unlikely places (I seem to remember National Film Board movies shown to us in grade school long ago about the port of Churchill taking on the world), AI clusters. There's never a shortage of ways to lose money or people willing to help you do it. 'Something there is that doesn't love' a pipeline (as Frost might also have said, having said it of fences). Actually, plenty of things there are that don't love a pipeline: distance, rock, winter freeze, summer heat, forest fires and so on. And also many variants of people. To whom is a pipeline 'like to give offence'? Activists, lawyers, competitors, landowners, regulators, generalized busybodies and many more. Little wonder, as B.C. Premier David Eby reminds us, that companies are not queuing up with investment money. Of course, his saying that is a little like the head of the local protection racket lamenting the absence of new pizza joints to threaten to firebomb. Too much spontaneous nighttime combustion frightens off prospective investors. The big risk in a pipeline is, not the difficult terrain, but the (till now, at least) forever-expanding political minefield that has to be crossed to get to it. When your VP Government Relations is more important than your VP Engineering, that means risk is high. The political class may swear it's giving up its old harassment habits. But how far can you trust them? And can they credibly control the non-politicians who have also made pipeline-building perilous? We may be a nation of law — we are certainly a nation of lawyers, with more graduating every spring. And we have lots and lots of laws that can be used to slow processes down. And a Constitution that, bet on it, will be used to challenge any new federal law saying they must be speeded up. Channelling Mackenzie King on conscription, the prime minister says 'pipelines if necessary but not necessarily pipelines.' I'm with him, too. Pipelines may not be necessary: let markets decide. But once a market has decided and a builder has come forward, is the PM willing to say 'pipelines, notwithstanding?' Or will he let the courts work things out in their usual five or 10 or 15 years? And if he does decide the process will be two years and no more, will he enforce that? Justice Minister Sean Fraser said no one has a veto on the process and then apologized if he'd offended people who think they do. Of course, precedent suggests they're right: they do. It doesn't take much to shut things down in this spread-out country. If a small group of Indigenous protesters closes a main rail line or highway because it doesn't like a nationally important project being started, will the PM call the RCMP away from its important work scouring The New York Times to see if genocide is taking place in Gaza and have them clear the track or roadway? And will they do it if he asks? There is reason enough to doubt both links in that chain. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) used to have the private sector build things and then hand them over to the public sector. With much of the risk of building pipelines or other national projects being small-p political, that may have to be reversed. Only the government can build, even if it will only build as expensively as possible, with every intersectional concern and collective agreement honoured. But once the asset is built, running it may not be so risky. So: Build, government, then sell. William Watson: Economically, COVID was a one-shock stop William Watson: Carney's throne speech ventriloquism was a little too obvious The most famous line in Frost's 'Mending Wall' is 'Good fences make good neighbours,' though Frost's poem challenges that idea. In fact, he compares his neighbour, carrying fallen stones back to the wall, to 'an old-stone savage armed.' Apologies to Trump fans but it's hard to read that line without thinking of this era's most famous fence-builder. I guess we'll be finding out if 'Good pipelines make good nations.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Miami Herald
31-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Miami Herald
This Birkin, LL Bean love child is chaotic genius (and I need it)
I'm a New Englander through and through. I spent childhood summers swimming in New Hampshire lakes or frolicking on the beaches of Southern Maine. And wherever I went, an L.L. Bean Boat and Tote was always in the mix. Monogrammed, oversized, and packed with snacks, sunscreen, and sandy towels, it was the bag that never let me down. To this day, there is always a Boat and Tote hiding somewhere at our family beach house - ready to be tossed in the car or hauled down to the sand when the moment calls for it. Related: Dior suffers major loss as trailblazing designer exits Though the canvas is a little softer now, it holds everything and somehow still feels cool, in that effortless, practical New England way. But like most people, my taste has evolved. I still love the no-nonsense appeal of a Boat and Tote. But I also can't help but fantasize about the Hermès Birkin, that grail-level icon of luxury handbags. It's aspirational, expensive, and in some ways, totally absurd. Which makes it kind of perfect. So when I came across a bag that mashed up both - the Birkin and the Boat and Tote- I did a double take. Ladies and gentleman, this one is SPECIAL. Image source: Hathaway Hutton Enter the Boatkin. The Boatkin is a handmade, tongue-in-cheek luxury bag from the brand Hathaway Hutton. Dreamed up by founder Jen Risk, the Boatkin fuses the iconic silhouette and hardware of the Hermès Birkin with the familiar canvas and stitching of the L.L. Bean classic. According to the New York Times, Risk launched the Boatkin earlier this year. And while it may have started as a playful one-off, the bag has quickly become part of a much larger - and growing - conversation in fashion: the rise of the dupe. From TikTok-famous Stanley cup lookalikes to the now-infamous Wirkin, dupes have become a defining trend in fashion, blurring the line between homage and knockoff. Related: Forget the Birkin bag, Hermès unveils something unexpected They signal status without the sky-high price, and let consumers buy into the look of a lifestyle without the gatekeeping. The Boatkin, with its wink at two iconic brands, offers a different kind of flex - one that says, "I get the joke." It also reflects a generational shift. Consumers are increasingly seeking individuality, irony, and access, even in their luxury purchases. The Boatkin doesn't pretend to be a Birkin, and that's exactly the point. What began as a playful fashion trend is now a fast-moving market. Social media has supercharged the demand for lookalike luxury, with content creators posting "dupe hauls" and brands scrambling to deliver lower-cost versions of high-end designs. According to a report from WARC, approximately 31% of adults have purchased a dupe, with the number rising to 49% among Gen Z and 44% among millennials. The Boatkin taps into that momentum, but stands apart in its craftsmanship. Where many dupes are mass-produced, Risk's creations are made by hand, often using customer-supplied materials. That limited scale adds exclusivity - ironic, given the concept's populist appeal. But it's exactly this contradiction that makes the Boatkin feel so of-the-moment. The legal gray area surrounding designer-inspired goods remains a hot topic. And as luxury fashion contends with shifting consumer values, brands may have to reckon with more than just copycats. They'll have to compete with creators who remix heritage with humor, yet still command a waitlist. For now, the Boatkin remains a standout. Not because it's trying to be a Birkin, but because it's not. It's a reminder that in today's fashion landscape, the cleverest accessory might be the one that doesn't take itself too seriously. And for me? Let's just say...I'm not not on the waitlist. Related: Birkin bag maker faces major problem The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
USA Today
17-05-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
UFC Fight Night 256 video: Yadier del Valle makes quick work of Connor Matthews in debut
UFC Fight Night 256 video: Yadier del Valle makes quick work of Connor Matthews in debut Yadier del Valle needed less than three minutes to win his UFC debut. At UFC Fight Night 256, del Valle (9-0 MMA, 1-0 UFC) submitted Connor Matthews (7-4 MMA, 0-3 UFC) with a rear-naked choke at 2:54 of Round 1. There was a feeling out process on the feet where del Valle landed hard leg kicks. He took Matthews down and eventually took the New Englander's back where he locked in the choke and got the tap. Cuba's Del Valle, 28, continues to build on the momentum he gained through an insane back-and-forth brawl vs. Antonio Monteiro on Dana White's Contender Series. Saturday's win was his third career submission. Matthews, 32, could find himself on the chopping block after the loss. The defeat was his third in as many UFC attempts. He was finished in all three. Up-to-the-minute UFC Fight Night 256 results
Newsweek
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Why David Souter Was My Favorite Supreme Court Justice
I knew that Justice David Souter—who died last week at 85—was different from the moment I first met him. Federal judges dream of ascending to the highest court in the land, senators picture themselves as presidents, and Roman Catholic cardinals aspire to the papacy, but he seemed a reluctant member of what has been called "The Priestly Tribe." My first conversation with the reserved New Englander occurred after a 1994 dinner in the Supreme Court's majestic Great Hall. The next morning, I was to be interviewed for a fellowship at the high court, and I expressed some anxiety over the stiff competition. He encouraged me to relax and let fate take its course. Souter recalled that he had been hesitant to interview with President George H. W. Bush for the Supreme Court's 1990 vacancy when Justice William Brennan suddenly retired from the bench. A new U.S. appellate court judge for the First Circuit in 1990, Souter was skeptical of the nomination process for the highest court, having witnessed the vicious fight over President Ronald Reagan's unsuccessful 1987 appointment of Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court. Souter was perfectly happy with his secluded life in Weare, New Hampshire, living with his elderly mother in a ramshackle cabin in the woods. He was thrilled with the recent move from his state's Supreme Court to the federal bench. Why travel all the way to Washington to interview for a position he did not want and did not think he would get? Judge David Souter with his right hand raised as Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist delivers the oath of office. Erin Rath (C) daughter of a family friend holds the Bible while President... Judge David Souter with his right hand raised as Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist delivers the oath of office. Erin Rath (C) daughter of a family friend holds the Bible while President George H.W. Bush (R) looks on during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House on Oct. 8, 1990, (Photo by More Mark Reinstein/Corbis via Getty Images But, as Souter told me after the Judicial Fellows dinner, his friends encouraged him to accept the interview request, if for no other reason than it would generate a lifetime's worth of cocktail party anecdotes—not that the introverted intellectual attended many such soirees. His home-state senator, Warren Rudman, had urged Bush to consider Souter as Brennan's replacement. Driving the reluctant interviewee to the Manchester airport for the flight to Washington, Rudman discovered that his famously parsimonious friend had only $3 in his wallet. The senator loaned Souter $100 for spending money. As Bush's chief of staff, another Granite State native, John Sununu noted in his oral history for UVA's Miller Center, "Souter came in, and as usual [he] in his own New Hampshire dry charm made the president feel very comfortable." Or as Bush's attorney general, Richard Thornburgh, put it, "Souter . . . rode easier in the saddle," a metaphor that may have appealed to a president who had sought his fortune in Texas. Bush and Souter—at heart two gentlemanly, Ivy League-trained, Episcopalian New Englanders—compared notes and philosophies. The president recognized a perfect nominee for the times: a brilliant jurist who represented the best of American virtues and exhibited no vices or controversial positions on judicial issues (as had Bork three years earlier). Souter's very obscurity became the deciding factor in his favor, in addition to his state judicial experience and impeccable academic credentials—Harvard undergraduate (Phi Beta Kappa) and law degrees, along with one from Oxford, earned as a Rhodes Scholar. Bush had his man. With a stunned candidate at this side, the president announced Souter's nomination on the same day he met him for the first time, a mere 72 hours after Brennan's resignation. It all happened so quickly that a worried Souter called the president's legislative affairs director, Fred McClure, who recalled that the new nominee phoned to say, "Fred, I left so quickly to come down to do this deal that I don't have the slightest idea what people can see through the window into my house and what magazines and books are there." Drawing with the Right Side of the Brain came to mind. "They're going to think I'm weird," Souter told McClure. "You're just creative," McClure tried to reassure the nominee. "Oh, my God," the jurist responded when he thought that a "somewhat pornographic magazine" might be on top of his desk. McClure repeated that he thought the nominee would be fine, noting that a racy publication might actually "be good on this [conservative] side." Maybe it would make the staid New Englander seem less prudish. McClure shepherded Souter through the confirmation process: "David's a very smart guy, and my biggest concern . . . other than the personal side [of being a confirmed bachelor] was to keep him from getting into an intellectual discussion . . . with members of the Senate," which had derailed Bork. Much more humble than the Reagan nominee, Souter was also "smart enough to listen to us, and so it worked out well . . . ." McClure reported. Indeed, it did. Sununu recalled that the nomination "sailed through [90-9]. So, the president got what he wanted, a confirmation that was well received publicly, well received at the Senate level, and a well processed confirmation. From the needs that he [Bush] had at the time, it was the right decision." Souter's nearly two decades on the U.S. Supreme Court proved Sununu's assessment. As a justice, he was much closer to the moderate Northeastern Republicanism of George H.W. Bush than Reagan's right wing of the GOP. And although a self-contained New Englander, he was not immune to the Irish charm of his predecessor, who maintained a chambers in the Court building after his retirement. A poignant photograph of the two shows Justice Souter tenderly supporting a feeble Justice Brennan by the arm as they attended the 1993 funeral of Justice Thurgood Marshall. We may never know the extent of Brennan's jurisprudential influence on his successor, but Souter's moving eulogy to his friend "Bill" at the latter's 1997 funeral spoke volumes about their close personal relationship. The reserved, formal, Yankee jurist revealed how the gregarious Brennan would embrace him in a warm bear hug, call him "pal," and always make him feel "great" during visits to his chambers. Tongue in cheek, Souter also remembered how Brennan, a renowned master at mustering majorities on the nine-person court, taught him "how to count to five." Here's hoping the two are reuniting in the Great Beyond. Barbara A. Perry is J. Wilson Newman Professor in Presidential Studies at UVA's Miller Center and a 1994-95 Fellow at the U.S. Supreme Court. Most of the quotes in this column can be found on the Miller Center website's George H. W. Bush presidential oral history pages: The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter, who signified a bygone era, dies at 85
There will never be another David Souter on the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Republican appointee's liberal votes made 'no more Souters' a GOP rallying cry for judicial nominations going forward. He was appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1990. But his votes in a series of cases over the years made him a cautionary tale for Republicans. The court's recent decisions are proof that the party learned its lesson, having amassed a GOP supermajority that, among many other things, overturned abortion rights in 2022. Republicans still lash out these days at occasional defections from Chief Justice John Roberts and the Trump appointees. But those newer justices were all vetted to an extent that they would not be 'Souters.' Roberts said this of Souter's passing Thursday at age 85: Justice David Souter served our Court with great distinction for nearly twenty years. He brought uncommon wisdom and kindness to a lifetime of public service. After retiring to his beloved New Hampshire in 2009, he continued to render significant service to our branch by sitting regularly on the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit for more than a decade. He will be greatly missed. The mild-mannered New Englander's retirement in 2009 was also emblematic of the era he left behind (or, that left him behind). A Democrat, Barack Obama, was president at the time. That cleared the way for Obama to nominate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who sits today as part of the three-justice Democratic minority. Likewise signifying this bygone era, Obama's other appointment, Elena Kagan, replaced Justice John Paul Stevens in 2010; Stevens, who died in 2019, was appointed by Republican President Gerald Ford and, like Souter, came to align with the court's liberal wing. It would be shocking if any current justices deliberately retired while a president of the opposing party is in office. Today, the court is more precisely split along party lines. That partisan hardening is what lets us describe the court's actions in big cases occurring along party lines, as opposed to the vaguer 'conservative' and 'liberal' labels. That's an uncomfortable fact for some, but it's nonetheless a legacy of the 'no more Souters' campaign. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
