California Rep. Katie Porter (D -Irvine) has been a political rock star ever since the progressive won the 45th Congressional District seat in South Orange County — long a bastion of conservative politics — in 2018. We talk to her about her Iowa roots, the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol invasion, her attempts at bipartisanship and the color of her favorite marker that she uses for her already-legendary whiteboard lectures during congressional hearings.
The run-up to the country’s largest-ever election has been bloody; the aftermath will set the tone for President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, whose record so far is woeful. Our analysis of listed green-technology firms reveals striking growth—but as with any tech-stock spike, it is worth asking whether it is all a bubble. And a look at two missions heading to Venus. For full access to print, digital and audio editions of The Economist, subscribe here www.economist.com/intelligenceoffer
In 2002 the BBC did a poll where they named the top 100 Britons in history. It had many people you have probably heard of, including Isaac Newton, Princess Diana, John Lenon, and Queen Victoria.
The person who was ranked #2, however, is someone that many people outside of the UK might not have heard of. Yet, he really is one of the most important people when it came to the development of the modern world.
Learn more about Isambard Kingdom Brunel on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.
Mike and Sarah have big feelings about an enduring debate. Digressions include “Carrie,” party planning etiquette and Whole Foods cafeterias. Sarah’s sound quality changes midway through because she moves from a McDonald’s parking lot to a Hardee’s parking lot.
Investors didn’t care about Lululemon’s clothes... They focused on Lululemon’s Mirrors. United Airlines is re-introducing supersonic jets because in business, if you’re on-time, you’re late. And Jokr’s 15-minute deliver-your-cravings startup introduces a new industry in the US: Super Delivery.
$LULU $UAL $ACIC (Archer) $DAL
Got a SnackFact? Tweet it @RobinhoodSnacks @JackKramer @NickOfNewYork
Want a shoutout on the pod? Fill out this form:
https://forms.gle/KhUAo31xmkSdeynD9
Got a SnackFact for the pod? We got a form for that too:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe64VKtvMNDPGSncHDRF07W34cPMDO3N8Y4DpmNP_kweC58tw/viewform
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
The NFL recently announced it would stop using “race norming” when assessing who would receive a share of their recent $1 billing settlement for former players. The practice, which assumed Black players started with lower cognitive function and made it harder to collect their share, is standard in many areas of medicine.
Guest: Darshali Vyas, Physician at Massachusetts General Hospital
If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you’ll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work.
In a year when Covid-19 has had a devastating effect on families, with loved ones dying sometimes alone in hospital or without the usual funeral rites, Tom Sutcliffe and guests discuss mortality and what it means to have ‘a good death’.
In her latest book, Should We Stay Or Should We Go, the writer Lionel Shriver explores a number of alternative endings. The couple at the centre of her novel make a pact to end their lives when they hit 80, to avoid a slow decline either physically or mentally. As Shriver looks at how that decision might play out in reality, she’s arguing for a more open discussion about the end of life.
It’s a view shared by the consultant geriatrician David Jarrett. In 33 Meditations on Death – Notes from the Wrong End of Medicine he draws on family stories and case histories from his three decades treating those who become old and frail. Jarret’s book is an impassioned plea for everyone – old and young – to engage and make plans for the end.
The playwright Jack Thorne is part of the collaborative team (with designer Bunny Christie and director Jeremy Herrin) behind the National Theatre’s new play, After Life, based on Hirokazu Kore-eda's award-winning film. It follows a group of strangers as they grapple with the question: if you could spend eternity with just one precious memory, what would it be? Although all the characters are deceased, the play is a celebration of life, and about what matters to us most.
In a year when Covid-19 has had a devastating effect on families, with loved ones dying sometimes alone in hospital or without the usual funeral rites, Tom Sutcliffe and guests discuss mortality and what it means to have ‘a good death’.
In her latest book, Should We Stay Or Should We Go, the writer Lionel Shriver explores a number of alternative endings. The couple at the centre of her novel make a pact to end their lives when they hit 80, to avoid a slow decline either physically or mentally. As Shriver looks at how that decision might play out in reality, she’s arguing for a more open discussion about the end of life.
It’s a view shared by the consultant geriatrician David Jarrett. In 33 Meditations on Death – Notes from the Wrong End of Medicine he draws on family stories and case histories from his three decades treating those who become old and frail. Jarret’s book is an impassioned plea for everyone – old and young – to engage and make plans for the end.
The playwright Jack Thorne is part of the collaborative team (with designer Bunny Christie and director Jeremy Herrin) behind the National Theatre’s new play, After Life, based on Hirokazu Kore-eda's award-winning film. It follows a group of strangers as they grapple with the question: if you could spend eternity with just one precious memory, what would it be? Although all the characters are deceased, the play is a celebration of life, and about what matters to us most.
Chuck DeVore moved his family from California to Texas a decade ago. The move was prompted by several factors, including “seeing [California] drifting further and further to the left,” he said.
Today, many people are making the same decision DeVore, vice president of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, made and are leaving California for the Lone Star State. That raises the question: Will Texas be pulled to the left by all the people moving there? Initial data suggests that it won't be.
“People come here for their own, very deeply personal reasons,” DeVore said. “And you can't assume that because someone came here from a blue state that they're going to have liberal views.”
Polling reveals that many people who move to Texas from California support conservative candidates in elections. That could change at any time, though, he warns.
DeVore joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the ways in which his organization is working to keep Texas, Texas. He also explains what might be next for the recent election reform bill that failed in the [Texas Legislature] when Democrats walked out of the session, preventing a vote on the legislation.
Also on today’s show, we read your letters to the editor and share a few highlights from The Heritage Foundation’s recent Resource Bank conference in Austin, Texas.
In recent years Americans have experienced a range of assaults upon the truth. In The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth (Brookings Institution Press, 2021), Jonathan Rauch describes the various ways in which our understanding of truth has come under attack, and the mechanisms that exist to fight back. As Rauch explains, the challenge of determining truth is as old as civilization itself, with the system we use today a product of concepts formulated in the 17th and 18th centuries. Today this system faces an unprecedented challenge created by the digital revolution, which has inverted the social incentives on which the reality-based community depends and fractured reality for millions of people. The consequences of this today can be seen today in both the numerous agenda-driven disinformation campaigns and the coercive conformity of “cancel culture” that challenges diversity of thought. Yet for all of the threats posed to the Constitution of Knowledge, Rauch argues that within it are contained the tools with which people can fight back successfully in order to maintain our social system for turning disagreement into truth.
