The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Disunited States of America
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

During the crisis of the third decade, every political event is centrifugal:

The 330 million people living within the borders of the American empire are aware of it. The following graph shows net optimism (pessimism) that “Americans of different political views can still come together and work out their differences”:

Democrats are enjoying a small, ephemeral victory premium now. It won’t last. The sort of goodwill and unity expressed after 9/11 or even at Barack Obama’s first inauguration is ancient history. The country as currently constituted will never return to even those modest, fleeting levels of unity.

It’s a nice thought, the idea that we’re all Americans in this together, but actual public sentiment doesn’t reflect it. It reveals irreconcilable differences:

Perhaps those who do not share similar values and life goals should not share the same country, either. End the hate, separate.

 
Hide 166 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. There is a little rhyme but very little reason to what divides most Americans. A lot of it is a matter of style. It’s the Guelphs vs. the Ghibellines all over again.

    • Disagree: Cloudbuster
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain't the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @MBlanc46
    @Daniel H

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Replies: @Daniel H

  2. The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Normally the way to success is to develop in demand job skills by working harder while living in a country with a free market economy. This usually means getting more education or picking up specific job skills outside an academic setting. IQ, possibly genetic related, may have an influence here in the ability to succeed in this in addition to working hard. White men have excelled in this area. The predominant ideology now is that white males are at the top because of systemic racism or sexism. The solution is affirmative action and a large welfare state to redistribute income and white males can't come together with anyone who believes this.

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left. The dominant belief of the left is what I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Realist, @Brian Reilly

    , @A123
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden's ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    https://twitter.com/MarkFinchem/status/1339248281117806592?s=20

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Dr. Charles Fhandrich, @dfordoom, @Corvinus

    , @TomSchmidt
    @res

    Mark's comment is apropos.

    The Apex fallacy (white men on top get undue benefits from the current arrangement [as in, CEOs making more than 300x what the rank and file make, most being white men] so white men get undue benefits ) has put a target on the white men who aren't at the top, more than any other group. It makes the struggle for primacy that much worse since first prize is a new Cadillac, second prize is a set of steak knives, and third prize means you're fired.

  3. @Daniel H
    There is a little rhyme but very little reason to what divides most Americans. A lot of it is a matter of style. It's the Guelphs vs. the Ghibellines all over again.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @MBlanc46

    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.
     
    I think the main difference between regular reds and blues is that the former by and large still see America as a prosperous meritocracy where a middle-class standard of living is still available to all who work hard and play by the rules. This is why they accept the austerity rhetoric of GOPe, setting aside the unprincipled exception for Social Security and Medicare.

    Blues, on the other hand, see America as an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials that are used to screen job applications, rightly or wrongly.

    I think I heard that only 7% of voters said that "racism" was an important issue for them.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill, @animalogic

  4. @Almost Missouri
    @Daniel H

    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain't the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

    I think the main difference between regular reds and blues is that the former by and large still see America as a prosperous meritocracy where a middle-class standard of living is still available to all who work hard and play by the rules. This is why they accept the austerity rhetoric of GOPe, setting aside the unprincipled exception for Social Security and Medicare.

    Blues, on the other hand, see America as an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials that are used to screen job applications, rightly or wrongly.

    I think I heard that only 7% of voters said that “racism” was an important issue for them.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie

    Isn't that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?

    If America is "an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities", then ... looting what should rightfully be yours and exterminating those who withheld it is justified. This is increasingly openly stated by the Left.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    , @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials

    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion. The gov't should only step in when all else fails, and then only for a limited time. Whatever you subsidize, you get more of, and the US is getting more and more dirtbags that vote for a living as opposed to working for a living.

    A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage. - Alexander Tyler

    You're going to get your bleeding heart wishes good and hard real soon.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    , @animalogic
    @Rosie

    I think US (& international) Elites have done a wonderful job of setting citizen against citizen.
    They have set out to sicken a nation in the knowledge that a sick patient is a passive patient, a confused patient & an easily manipulated patient.
    Gotta give the Devil his due....

  5. anon[414] • Disclaimer says:

    Hence the recent noises made by Creepy Joe Biden about “muh unity”. Quite a bit of effort went into demonizing white men for years, and the effort paid off in an orgy of destruction last summer, however somewhere not too far down the slope there’s a tipping point. At that tipping point some percentage of the populace may decide that they are condemned no matter what they do, and thus they have nothing to lose anymore. I’m sure the Deep State is confident they can control and confine such people, but they’ve been wrong before.

  6. @Daniel H
    There is a little rhyme but very little reason to what divides most Americans. A lot of it is a matter of style. It's the Guelphs vs. the Ghibellines all over again.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @MBlanc46

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    • Replies: @Daniel H
    @MBlanc46

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Let me see....Neither side goes to church that much. Both are addicted to pop culture, sports and the pursuit of money. And both are sentimental sops. When all the heated bullshit fumes off I don't see that much difference between Red and Blue. This is the country they/we want.

    Replies: @Wency, @Bardon Kaldian

  7. Ill be happier when Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran hopefully invade this rotten place. I used to be a patriot. Now i really want to see this place obliterated.

    • Disagree: radicalcenter
  8. @MBlanc46
    @Daniel H

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Replies: @Daniel H

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Let me see….Neither side goes to church that much. Both are addicted to pop culture, sports and the pursuit of money. And both are sentimental sops. When all the heated bullshit fumes off I don’t see that much difference between Red and Blue. This is the country they/we want.

    • Agree: Nodwink
    • Replies: @Wency
    @Daniel H

    I don't fully agree with you, but there certainly is some of this.

    By a happenstance of life, I'm acquainted with a white woman in my county in the South who lives in a trailer and has 4 children by 4 men. Tattoos, obese, looks 10 years older than she is. She is, of course, extremely pro-Trump. But her Trump support would appear to be a pure accident of birth -- you could easily go to the other, black side of town, find her doppelganger living her exact same lifestyle, with her same basic look but darker skin, and find that woman is extremely pro-Biden.

    Replies: @Ryan Andrews

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Daniel H

    Perhaps the underclass. But, the articulate part of the middle classes, which have always been the backbone of any country (not the downtrodden; not the plutocratic ruling elites) are clearly divided over crucial issues: who belongs to the American people? What is American history- a triumph or a shame? Where the past, present & the future of US lies? Who are the good guys & bad guys in US history- and now?

    Clearly, there is a split within middle America.

  9. @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.
     
    I think the main difference between regular reds and blues is that the former by and large still see America as a prosperous meritocracy where a middle-class standard of living is still available to all who work hard and play by the rules. This is why they accept the austerity rhetoric of GOPe, setting aside the unprincipled exception for Social Security and Medicare.

    Blues, on the other hand, see America as an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials that are used to screen job applications, rightly or wrongly.

    I think I heard that only 7% of voters said that "racism" was an important issue for them.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill, @animalogic

    Isn’t that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?

    If America is “an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities”, then … looting what should rightfully be yours and exterminating those who withheld it is justified. This is increasingly openly stated by the Left.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Almost Missouri

    This is increasingly openly stated by the Left

    Yessir!

    https://www.amazon.com/Defense-Looting-Riotous-History-Uncivil/dp/1645036693

    Replies: @radicalcenter

    , @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    Isn’t that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?
     
    I suppose, though it seems to me that the term "looting" connotes something wanton and unjustified, which is not how they see it.
  10. @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie

    Isn't that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?

    If America is "an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities", then ... looting what should rightfully be yours and exterminating those who withheld it is justified. This is increasingly openly stated by the Left.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    This is increasingly openly stated by the Left

    Yessir!

    • Replies: @radicalcenter
    @anon

    Someone will eventually post Osterweil‘s home address and others will interpret her book as consent to her home being looted. An alarming prospect.

  11. The black exception to that graph is very telling on how their mindset operates. They sincerely believe that having the enforced black worship religion will lead to unity and “healing”, this is similar how the neocons thought they would be received with adulation by the Iraqis they conquered.

    • Replies: @Johnny Smoggins
    @neutral

    In their childlike way, they're sure that the gibs will just keep on comin' indefinitely.

    , @Wyatt
    @neutral

    They're dumb enough to think that "melanin" is a magical substance than both empowers someone physically and gives them compassion. Remember, no written word, no wheel, no sail. They were enslaved for a reason.

    , @Pop Warner
    @neutral

    It's the same way they're always harping about having "an honest conversation on race." They don't actually want an honest conversation because they'll have the confront the inadequacies of their own race. What they want is to shout out their quasi-religious talking points to the other person, whose role is to agree and apologize for their white skin. "Unity and healing" is the same as "gibsmedat" in their eyes, the gibs being not just simple wealth redistribution but codification of their dogma into law and the historical record

    Replies: @anon

  12. anonymous[377] • Disclaimer says:

    I wonder what will happen over the next 20 years in America. I think two big picture trends are fairly predictable.

    1. Racial demographics change from 60% white to 50% white. Latinos go from 18% to 26%.
    2. Average economic growth over the next 20 year period is significantly lower than the past 20 year period.

    Any other well-supported predictions that are quantifiable? Will unmarried white women with college degrees have an even bigger say in elections? Just how much will evangelicals shrink? Will m4a likely pass?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @anonymous


    Just how much will evangelicals shrink?
     
    Hopefully a lot.

    Replies: @iffen

    , @Wency
    @anonymous

    I'm guessing the term "Evangelical" will fall into less use due to some of its unfavorable associations, just as the term "Fundamentalist" has fallen out of use, but whatever you choose to call them, theologically conservative Protestants are still by far the most resilient strand of Christianity. However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  13. There are two roads back to unity. One is information and speech control of the kinds we saw for the last 4 years. The reason censorship is getting worse is that so far this strategy has failed to work, but the logic of it seems irresistible (and I don’t think that’s just because the party breaks Winston in 1984). The other road back to unity is to completely break current media models and move to something like crowd-sourced news websites where there is no Rachel-Maddows-megaphone phenomenon. I am quite certain that the current irreconcilability has less to do with values than with disagreements between people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Chrisnonymous

    people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    Wow! Who would've thunk it!

    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.

    (Is that you, Ron? Is Chris one of your sock-puppets?)

    And to think that just a few minutes ago after having read a comment in another thread I thought, "UR is just a meeting space where anti-Semitic WN lonely hearts can get together."

    Replies: @Bill

    , @animalogic
    @Chrisnonymous

    The "road back to unity"...
    "to completely break current media models and move to something like crowd-sourced news websites where there is no Rachel-Maddows-megaphone phenomenon."
    Can't argue with that.... as a first step. .
    Then it's simply a case of wage earners organising themselves in opposition to Elites & their various Tools.... Could be a bit tricky, but I'm all for it.

  14. @Chrisnonymous
    There are two roads back to unity. One is information and speech control of the kinds we saw for the last 4 years. The reason censorship is getting worse is that so far this strategy has failed to work, but the logic of it seems irresistible (and I don't think that's just because the party breaks Winston in 1984). The other road back to unity is to completely break current media models and move to something like crowd-sourced news websites where there is no Rachel-Maddows-megaphone phenomenon. I am quite certain that the current irreconcilability has less to do with values than with disagreements between people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    Replies: @iffen, @animalogic

    people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    Wow! Who would’ve thunk it!

    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.

    (Is that you, Ron? Is Chris one of your sock-puppets?)

    And to think that just a few minutes ago after having read a comment in another thread I thought, “UR is just a meeting space where anti-Semitic WN lonely hearts can get together.”

    • Replies: @Bill
    @iffen


    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.
     
    Imagine a mind which believes that the NPR listening audience is higher quality than the UR commentariat.

    Replies: @iffen

  15. Surely it is not possible for the USA to divide up into separate nations – one black one white – for the simple reason that the black fraction will not be able to manage itself. Within a short period of time those living in the black fraction will be starving and there will be a complete breakdown of civil order. People who call themselves “progressives” or “leftists” must know this, so would never support separation.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @martin_2

    Within a short period of time those living in the black fraction will be starving and there will be a complete breakdown of civil order.

    What, precisely, is so wrong with that? Consider it a teaching moment for those that think the world owes them a living, a comfortable living, and all for doing nothing.

    When some POS comes out of the ghetto to loot what you have, just shoot the bastard. That's where this is heading. People are slowly wising up to the fact that the police are their enemy. The police and the entire justice system protects the criminals and penalizes the decent people to provide for their support.

    Replies: @animalogic

  16. Biden 35% – Trump 32% – neither 33%

    Your country is divided, but I doubt most (D) or (R) voters are invested in the culture wars, or major political figures. It would be interesting to know how many Americans voted for Joe purely on the basis they thought Trump was a bombastic jerk.

    An interesting exercise too would be to know what number of Biden voters could name all of his major appointments, compared to those who tuned out when they realized they wouldn’t have Trump’s face on their TV in a couple of months time.

  17. @martin_2
    Surely it is not possible for the USA to divide up into separate nations - one black one white - for the simple reason that the black fraction will not be able to manage itself. Within a short period of time those living in the black fraction will be starving and there will be a complete breakdown of civil order. People who call themselves "progressives" or "leftists" must know this, so would never support separation.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    Within a short period of time those living in the black fraction will be starving and there will be a complete breakdown of civil order.

    What, precisely, is so wrong with that? Consider it a teaching moment for those that think the world owes them a living, a comfortable living, and all for doing nothing.

    When some POS comes out of the ghetto to loot what you have, just shoot the bastard. That’s where this is heading. People are slowly wising up to the fact that the police are their enemy. The police and the entire justice system protects the criminals and penalizes the decent people to provide for their support.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    @RoatanBill

    An interesting question -- who is the greater enemy? The poor impulse control dark people or the cunning as shit-house rats police, always about their Lords' work?
    The easy answer is --it's both.... but....???

    Replies: @RoatanBill

  18. @res
    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    Replies: @Mark G., @A123, @TomSchmidt

    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    Normally the way to success is to develop in demand job skills by working harder while living in a country with a free market economy. This usually means getting more education or picking up specific job skills outside an academic setting. IQ, possibly genetic related, may have an influence here in the ability to succeed in this in addition to working hard. White men have excelled in this area. The predominant ideology now is that white males are at the top because of systemic racism or sexism. The solution is affirmative action and a large welfare state to redistribute income and white males can’t come together with anyone who believes this.

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left. The dominant belief of the left is what I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

    • Agree: RoatanBill
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Mark G.

    Great comment, Mark!

    , @Realist
    @Mark G.


    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left.
     
    There is no such thing as free-market capitalism in the US...we live in a Plutocratic Oligarchy.
    , @Brian Reilly
    @Mark G.

    Mark, As to white men (with and without college degrees) and social/economic position in the US post war, a couple observations: Colleges doors and seats grew fast, a lot of very smart white men who would not have gone to college got good educations, flew fast and high in the wide open 50's and 60's.

    Their sons (if they were interested)ALL went to college, and overppulated the ranks, driving down both price and quality.

    The skilled laboring men (from dairymen on farms to meat processors, to masons, carpenters, weldersno exceptions anywhere) all faced continually lower wages (after accounting for increased cost of living in absolute terms) from a huge and unending increase in foreign labor at MUCH lower wage rates, with zero enforcement of any of the already easy immigration laws. Same thing happened later (90's to now) with the degreed tech crowd. All lower wages, and doomed to go a lot lower.

    A feminized society, at the point of the government saber. Men do not like being treated like women and do not respect people that insist on it, or put up with it. Among the results of this are a surly withdrawl from contributing to feminized organizations. So men are avoiding education, religion, marriage. Why bust your ass working just for the privilege of being bitched at almost endlessly, and expected to support people and groups that hate you?

    None of this is news, but it is all very under reported and suppressed. When people wonder where this society is going, look at who is in the drivers seat. If you notice that it is a tatted-up, pink/purple haired person with gages and nose rings, and of an indeterminate gender assignment staring at it's phone, don't be surprised if some people decide to get off, and find (or build) another bus.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  19. Guess who’s coming to dinner … must be looking forward to Jefe Máxima Harris’ regime.

  20. @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.
     
    I think the main difference between regular reds and blues is that the former by and large still see America as a prosperous meritocracy where a middle-class standard of living is still available to all who work hard and play by the rules. This is why they accept the austerity rhetoric of GOPe, setting aside the unprincipled exception for Social Security and Medicare.

    Blues, on the other hand, see America as an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials that are used to screen job applications, rightly or wrongly.

    I think I heard that only 7% of voters said that "racism" was an important issue for them.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill, @animalogic

    an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials

    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion. The gov’t should only step in when all else fails, and then only for a limited time. Whatever you subsidize, you get more of, and the US is getting more and more dirtbags that vote for a living as opposed to working for a living.

    A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world’s great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage. – Alexander Tyler

    You’re going to get your bleeding heart wishes good and hard real soon.

    • Agree: Realist, Jay Fink
    • Replies: @anon
    @RoatanBill

    That Alexander Tyler quote has been floating around for years, but nobody ever has been able to find the original source. It's emotionally attractive to some people, but it is probably fake.


    res
    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    But it should not be surprising. White men with degrees are the #1 target for hate in the country. Every streamed show, every advertisement, every Woke political speech, every feminist rant rests on hatred of competent white men. The H1b program explicitly is all about "No White Men Need Apply" in IT and now other fields.

    Social elites in the US want to squeeze the white middle class and working class out of existence, except for a few upper-middle-class servants. We can argue all day about the "why" but the "what" is painfully obvious, and it shows up in various ways. Such as this poll.

    , @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?
     
    Precisely my point. If this is what you think of the poor, then you are a red. You are also increasingly out of touch.

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.
     
    Tried and failed. This didn't work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of,

     

    I'm still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Rattus Norwegius

  21. Perhaps those who do not share similar values and life goals

    An excerpt from Iffen’s Invaluable Guide to Negro Fatigue:

    To the white author of a book about the white working class, “Your book is worthless, if not pernicious, you didn’t write about the black working class.”

    To a different white author of a book about the working class with extensive sections on the black working class, “Your book is worthless, if not pernicious, you are white, you can’t write about black people.”

  22. @neutral
    The black exception to that graph is very telling on how their mindset operates. They sincerely believe that having the enforced black worship religion will lead to unity and "healing", this is similar how the neocons thought they would be received with adulation by the Iraqis they conquered.

    Replies: @Johnny Smoggins, @Wyatt, @Pop Warner

    In their childlike way, they’re sure that the gibs will just keep on comin’ indefinitely.

  23. I wonder how many (or how few) U.S. readers hold sentiments even more seditious than they will display pseudonymously in the comments.

    [MORE]

    Ron Unz bars few thoughtful comments but does bar outright sedition.[*] Moreover, a hypothetically seditious reader might self-censor for all I know. The point is that The Unz Review, as magnificent a free-speech forum as it is, might be unable to reveal seditious sentiment beyond a certain degree, in case such sentiment existed.

    The reason I ask is that I seem to see a growing number of Americans online that predict that other Americans will violently revolt. Now, before the estimable rises to warn against the improbability and futility of violent revolt, that wasn’t my point. I think right, of course. I merely wonder whether the aforementioned predictions reveal something about the predictors the predictors will not or cannot openly say.

    When the president is tweeting things many left-of-center Americans view as seditious, when many right-of-center Americans are hanging on the president’s every tweet, the question seems pertinent.

    [*] (Someone might object, how do you know what Ron does? Answer: I don’t, nor am I acquainted with Ron, except that Ron struck the sole comment I have ever submitted to his attention—a comment that encouraged the murder of a particular public official who, though not named, was specifically described. I have no special knowledge beyond this.)

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The reason I ask is that I seem to see a growing number of Americans online that predict that other Americans will violently revolt.
     
    It would be interesting to know how many of them are Feds. It's possible that most of those predicting violent revolution are Feds.

    Some seem too crazy to be Feds, but on the other hand it's quite plausible that genuine crazies are exactly the people the Feds would recruit, or groom as agents provocateurs.

    You have to ask yourself whether the FBI (or similar nasty government agencies) would see it as being in their interests to encourage a half-assed bungled uprising so that they could cover themselves in glory by saving America from a fascist revolution. And have an excuse to lock up lots of people whom they intensely dislike.

    OK, so it's a conspiracy theory. But you have to admit that unlike most conspiracy theories it's actually plausible.

    Replies: @Justvisiting

  24. The Sovereign Citizen thing is working for black folks!

  25. @Mark G.
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Normally the way to success is to develop in demand job skills by working harder while living in a country with a free market economy. This usually means getting more education or picking up specific job skills outside an academic setting. IQ, possibly genetic related, may have an influence here in the ability to succeed in this in addition to working hard. White men have excelled in this area. The predominant ideology now is that white males are at the top because of systemic racism or sexism. The solution is affirmative action and a large welfare state to redistribute income and white males can't come together with anyone who believes this.

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left. The dominant belief of the left is what I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Realist, @Brian Reilly

    Great comment, Mark!

    • Thanks: Mark G.
  26. @Mark G.
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Normally the way to success is to develop in demand job skills by working harder while living in a country with a free market economy. This usually means getting more education or picking up specific job skills outside an academic setting. IQ, possibly genetic related, may have an influence here in the ability to succeed in this in addition to working hard. White men have excelled in this area. The predominant ideology now is that white males are at the top because of systemic racism or sexism. The solution is affirmative action and a large welfare state to redistribute income and white males can't come together with anyone who believes this.

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left. The dominant belief of the left is what I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Realist, @Brian Reilly

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left.

    There is no such thing as free-market capitalism in the US…we live in a Plutocratic Oligarchy.

    • Agree: botazefa
  27. @res
    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    Replies: @Mark G., @A123, @TomSchmidt

    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden’s ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @A123

    I think this is a dumb graphic, even though I think there was fraud.

    The 20-80 rule would suggest that 20% of counties have 80% of the population. So winning only those 20% would mean an overwhelming victory in votes.

    https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2017/10/26/us-counties-and-power-laws/

    In other words, don't use weak arguments to support a position I hold.

    Replies: @A123

    , @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
    @A123

    Of course it's not credible in the least. The election was stolen by criminals.

    , @dfordoom
    @A123


    If Führer Biden steals the White House
     
    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    I increasingly get the feeling that Unz Review is now a parody site. Recently I've encountered people talking about the ruling class being Satanists, African population growth being a myth, nuclear weapons being a hoax, the vaccine being a plot to depopulate the globe, and now Biden is Literally Hitler.

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund, @Observator

    , @Corvinus
    @A123

    The Mark Finchem post is Fake News.

    https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/dec/15/how-biden-managed-win-far-more-votes-2020-obama-di


    The explanation lies in record high turnout and the growing number of votes in urban centers since 2008. "Voter turnout in 2020 was relatively higher in large battleground states with large urban areas," said DePaul University political scientist Wayne Steger. "Turnout in states won by Biden was 43% greater in 2020 than in 2008.
     

    The impact on Biden’s vote total was particularly strong in reliable Democratic strongholds. In Los Angeles County alone, Biden picked up nearly 1 million votes more than Obama did in 2008. In King County, Wash., Biden did 360,000 votes better. Even in Cook County, Ill., surrounding Obama’s hometown of Chicago, Biden bested Obama’s tally by more than 100,000 votes.

    "It has become easier for Democrats to achieve a majority of the vote with a steadily smaller share of counties," said University of Denver political scientist Seth Masket.
     
  28. As the years go by I become more Right/Conservative while most of the country goes more Left/Liberal. I want nothing from these people. They have nothing to offer me. I am self sustaining, responsible, gainfully employed, talented, smart, healthy. What could the Left possibly offer me?

    I don’t want to be around them. I don’t want to be their friend. I don’t want to go to their parties and be considered one of the good Conservatives. I don’t want to listen to their endless plans on how to fix every unequal outcome in the goddamn Universe.

    It would be so glorious to wake up one day and realize that all Liberals had just vanished.

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    @GiveMeEqualityOrGiveMeDeath

    "As the years go by I become more Right/Conservative while most of the country goes more Left/Liberal."

    That's the way I feel. If I was a state I would be West Virginia who voted for Dukakis in '88 and is now one of the reddest states in Presidential elections. That's me. Most states and people did the opposite.

  29. There is something off about the last graph.

    Liberals do not have values. They manifest shrieking dogmatic hate. Is it plausible that SJW’s are only 78% intolerant? No. This number should be in the upper 90%’s.

    PEACE 😇

  30. anon[133] • Disclaimer says:
    @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials

    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion. The gov't should only step in when all else fails, and then only for a limited time. Whatever you subsidize, you get more of, and the US is getting more and more dirtbags that vote for a living as opposed to working for a living.

    A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage. - Alexander Tyler

    You're going to get your bleeding heart wishes good and hard real soon.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    That Alexander Tyler quote has been floating around for years, but nobody ever has been able to find the original source. It’s emotionally attractive to some people, but it is probably fake.

    res
    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    But it should not be surprising. White men with degrees are the #1 target for hate in the country. Every streamed show, every advertisement, every Woke political speech, every feminist rant rests on hatred of competent white men. The H1b program explicitly is all about “No White Men Need Apply” in IT and now other fields.

    Social elites in the US want to squeeze the white middle class and working class out of existence, except for a few upper-middle-class servants. We can argue all day about the “why” but the “what” is painfully obvious, and it shows up in various ways. Such as this poll.

    • Agree: RoatanBill, Justvisiting
  31. @res
    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.

    Replies: @Mark G., @A123, @TomSchmidt

    Mark’s comment is apropos.

    The Apex fallacy (white men on top get undue benefits from the current arrangement [as in, CEOs making more than 300x what the rank and file make, most being white men] so white men get undue benefits ) has put a target on the white men who aren’t at the top, more than any other group. It makes the struggle for primacy that much worse since first prize is a new Cadillac, second prize is a set of steak knives, and third prize means you’re fired.

  32. @A123
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden's ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    https://twitter.com/MarkFinchem/status/1339248281117806592?s=20

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Dr. Charles Fhandrich, @dfordoom, @Corvinus

    I think this is a dumb graphic, even though I think there was fraud.

    The 20-80 rule would suggest that 20% of counties have 80% of the population. So winning only those 20% would mean an overwhelming victory in votes.

    https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2017/10/26/us-counties-and-power-laws/

    In other words, don’t use weak arguments to support a position I hold.

    • Replies: @A123
    @TomSchmidt

    The point of the graphic is to highlight the statistical issues with Führer Biden's steal.

    Massively more votes with fewer counties won (far exceeding population growth), requires both:

    -- Statistically impossible turnout, plus
    -- Statistically impossible vote split Trump/Biden

    It can only be explained by fraud concentrated in a few locations.
    ____

    Feel free to post your own graphics. There are so many problems, you probably have to own favorite(s) by now.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

  33. @neutral
    The black exception to that graph is very telling on how their mindset operates. They sincerely believe that having the enforced black worship religion will lead to unity and "healing", this is similar how the neocons thought they would be received with adulation by the Iraqis they conquered.

    Replies: @Johnny Smoggins, @Wyatt, @Pop Warner

    They’re dumb enough to think that “melanin” is a magical substance than both empowers someone physically and gives them compassion. Remember, no written word, no wheel, no sail. They were enslaved for a reason.

  34. @Mark G.
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Normally the way to success is to develop in demand job skills by working harder while living in a country with a free market economy. This usually means getting more education or picking up specific job skills outside an academic setting. IQ, possibly genetic related, may have an influence here in the ability to succeed in this in addition to working hard. White men have excelled in this area. The predominant ideology now is that white males are at the top because of systemic racism or sexism. The solution is affirmative action and a large welfare state to redistribute income and white males can't come together with anyone who believes this.

    Some white males are aware that free market capitalism has been increasingly replaced by a corrupt form of crony capitalism that benefits people with the right political connections and we need to return to a more free market economy but that is not the dominant belief on the left. The dominant belief of the left is what I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Realist, @Brian Reilly

    Mark, As to white men (with and without college degrees) and social/economic position in the US post war, a couple observations: Colleges doors and seats grew fast, a lot of very smart white men who would not have gone to college got good educations, flew fast and high in the wide open 50’s and 60’s.

    Their sons (if they were interested)ALL went to college, and overppulated the ranks, driving down both price and quality.

    The skilled laboring men (from dairymen on farms to meat processors, to masons, carpenters, weldersno exceptions anywhere) all faced continually lower wages (after accounting for increased cost of living in absolute terms) from a huge and unending increase in foreign labor at MUCH lower wage rates, with zero enforcement of any of the already easy immigration laws. Same thing happened later (90’s to now) with the degreed tech crowd. All lower wages, and doomed to go a lot lower.

    A feminized society, at the point of the government saber. Men do not like being treated like women and do not respect people that insist on it, or put up with it. Among the results of this are a surly withdrawl from contributing to feminized organizations. So men are avoiding education, religion, marriage. Why bust your ass working just for the privilege of being bitched at almost endlessly, and expected to support people and groups that hate you?

    None of this is news, but it is all very under reported and suppressed. When people wonder where this society is going, look at who is in the drivers seat. If you notice that it is a tatted-up, pink/purple haired person with gages and nose rings, and of an indeterminate gender assignment staring at it’s phone, don’t be surprised if some people decide to get off, and find (or build) another bus.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Brian Reilly

    Man to man, best comment of the week:


    Mark, as to white men (with and without college degrees) and social/economic position in the US post war, a couple observations: Colleges doors and seats grew fast, a lot of very smart white men who would not have gone to college got good educations, flew fast and high in the wide open 50’s and 60’s....
     
    One can read the whole comment above, but I particularly note this part:

    A feminized society, at the point of the government saber. Men do not like being treated like women and do not respect people that insist on it, or put up with it. Among the results of this are a surly withdrawl from contributing to feminized organizations. So men are avoiding education, religion, marriage. Why bust your ass working just for the privilege of being bitched at almost endlessly, and expected to support people and groups that hate you?
     
    I'm long and happily married with several children, but completely see your point.

    A mistake some men make is to try to persuade women at large in such matters. Rather than to persuade women, which in such matters is largely futile, the remedy is to marry one particular woman and then to avoid offloading the concern on her. But this is just your point, isn't it? The very circumstance to which you refer makes the man less likely to marry, whereas not marrying compounds the circumstance. The cycle is vicious.

    Much of the problem would be relieved if more men found a way to support their wives to stay at home.

    I need not say more. You have already said it.

  35. @TomSchmidt
    @A123

    I think this is a dumb graphic, even though I think there was fraud.

    The 20-80 rule would suggest that 20% of counties have 80% of the population. So winning only those 20% would mean an overwhelming victory in votes.

    https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2017/10/26/us-counties-and-power-laws/

    In other words, don't use weak arguments to support a position I hold.

    Replies: @A123

    The point of the graphic is to highlight the statistical issues with Führer Biden’s steal.

    Massively more votes with fewer counties won (far exceeding population growth), requires both:

    — Statistically impossible turnout, plus
    — Statistically impossible vote split Trump/Biden

    It can only be explained by fraud concentrated in a few locations.
    ____

    Feel free to post your own graphics. There are so many problems, you probably have to own favorite(s) by now.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @A123

    I can explain the counties. It's harder to explain how many bellwether counties were wrong this time. I don't have a graphic on that.

    I assume you've seen the video of the guy who wants to run analysis on the scanned ballot images, which must be retained22 months, to see how many had no folds. Spoiled ballots replaced with new would lack a fold, but the process of mailing a ballot necessarily folds it. If there are too many unfolded mail-in ballots then we know they're fraudulent, without worrying about algorithms switching votes.

    That becomes simple, unambiguous, and obvious fraud. My gut sense that that happened would be relieved by seeing the results of that process.

  36. @Brian Reilly
    @Mark G.

    Mark, As to white men (with and without college degrees) and social/economic position in the US post war, a couple observations: Colleges doors and seats grew fast, a lot of very smart white men who would not have gone to college got good educations, flew fast and high in the wide open 50's and 60's.

    Their sons (if they were interested)ALL went to college, and overppulated the ranks, driving down both price and quality.

    The skilled laboring men (from dairymen on farms to meat processors, to masons, carpenters, weldersno exceptions anywhere) all faced continually lower wages (after accounting for increased cost of living in absolute terms) from a huge and unending increase in foreign labor at MUCH lower wage rates, with zero enforcement of any of the already easy immigration laws. Same thing happened later (90's to now) with the degreed tech crowd. All lower wages, and doomed to go a lot lower.

    A feminized society, at the point of the government saber. Men do not like being treated like women and do not respect people that insist on it, or put up with it. Among the results of this are a surly withdrawl from contributing to feminized organizations. So men are avoiding education, religion, marriage. Why bust your ass working just for the privilege of being bitched at almost endlessly, and expected to support people and groups that hate you?

    None of this is news, but it is all very under reported and suppressed. When people wonder where this society is going, look at who is in the drivers seat. If you notice that it is a tatted-up, pink/purple haired person with gages and nose rings, and of an indeterminate gender assignment staring at it's phone, don't be surprised if some people decide to get off, and find (or build) another bus.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Man to man, best comment of the week:

    Mark, as to white men (with and without college degrees) and social/economic position in the US post war, a couple observations: Colleges doors and seats grew fast, a lot of very smart white men who would not have gone to college got good educations, flew fast and high in the wide open 50’s and 60’s….

    One can read the whole comment above, but I particularly note this part:

    A feminized society, at the point of the government saber. Men do not like being treated like women and do not respect people that insist on it, or put up with it. Among the results of this are a surly withdrawl from contributing to feminized organizations. So men are avoiding education, religion, marriage. Why bust your ass working just for the privilege of being bitched at almost endlessly, and expected to support people and groups that hate you?

    I’m long and happily married with several children, but completely see your point.

    A mistake some men make is to try to persuade women at large in such matters. Rather than to persuade women, which in such matters is largely futile, the remedy is to marry one particular woman and then to avoid offloading the concern on her. But this is just your point, isn’t it? The very circumstance to which you refer makes the man less likely to marry, whereas not marrying compounds the circumstance. The cycle is vicious.

    Much of the problem would be relieved if more men found a way to support their wives to stay at home.

    I need not say more. You have already said it.

  37. @A123
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden's ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    https://twitter.com/MarkFinchem/status/1339248281117806592?s=20

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Dr. Charles Fhandrich, @dfordoom, @Corvinus

    Of course it’s not credible in the least. The election was stolen by criminals.

  38. Why is that White Male With Degree bar graph light blue?

    Why shouldn’t the White Male With Degree(WMWD) bar graph be deep blue to red purple with flight or fight white intellectualized rage getting the body and the brain ready to win Civil War II with a minimum of bloodshed and a maximum number of treasonous members of the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire heading for permanent and forcible exile to sub-Saharan Africa?

    The brain and the body require good ability to metabolize fuel and burn oxygen to move and think properly and that means increased blood flow and veins moving the blood around.

    I have increased my muscle mass considerably in the last 6 months and I am a White Male With Degree(WMWD) and Mitch McConnell and the rest of the rancid Republican Party treasonites are the main enemy force that White Core Americans must remove from power in the American Empire.

    Push ups and one arm presses with a stone and pull ups and curls with an iron rail will get your blood pumping and your veins delivering blood and it will increase your muscle mass and that will get you ready to dislodge the evil and treasonous JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire from power and it should have been done a long damn time ago. Even if there isn’t Civil War II it don’t hurt to get some exercise now and again especially if you’re over 50.

    PHYSICALITY AIN’T BEANBAG! DAMMIT!

    I wrote this sentence in 2018 about all the White Core American Ladies getting bashed by Blacks and other non-Whites for this or that:

    The physicality of the current political moment is a prelude to the anti-White animosity erupting into Civil War II.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-medias-war-on-beckys/#comment-2422891

    Tweets from 2014 and 2015:

  39. The White Male With Degree bar graph shows some appreciation and understanding and proper perception by White Core American Men of the rotting cinder block that is the last years of the American Empire but White Core American Women are gonna get more bashing from the corporate media and the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire.

    The law firm of Biden Harris and the rancid Republican Party will not fight for the best interests of patriotic and lovely White Core American Women.

    Blacks and Jews and other non-Whites and the smothering propaganda of the corporate mass media will focus on making sure that White Women know their place and their role as vote mules to keep the Democrat Party in power and the irritating fact is that all the White Women in the Republican Party Ruling Class are globalizer sleezebag whores for nasty and vile GOP donors such as Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and Stephen Schwarzman and the Koch Boys and other horrible plutocrat scoundrels.

    The law firm of Biden Harris will betray and bother and annoy many White voters who voted for Biden Harris to get Trump out of the White House and White Core America must be ready to appeal to White Women with a simple message that Whites have interests as Whites and the Republican Party and the Democrat Party will not advance the interests of Whites as Whites.

    CIVIL WAR II ON THE HORIZON

    WHITE CORE AMERICA RISING

    NATIONALIZE THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK NOW

    IMMIGRATION MORATORIUM NOW

    DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS NOW

    EXTINGUISH ALL STUDENT LOAN DEBT NOW

    GUARANTEED FEDERAL RESERVE BANK MONTHLY INCOME NOW

  40. @neutral
    The black exception to that graph is very telling on how their mindset operates. They sincerely believe that having the enforced black worship religion will lead to unity and "healing", this is similar how the neocons thought they would be received with adulation by the Iraqis they conquered.

    Replies: @Johnny Smoggins, @Wyatt, @Pop Warner

    It’s the same way they’re always harping about having “an honest conversation on race.” They don’t actually want an honest conversation because they’ll have the confront the inadequacies of their own race. What they want is to shout out their quasi-religious talking points to the other person, whose role is to agree and apologize for their white skin. “Unity and healing” is the same as “gibsmedat” in their eyes, the gibs being not just simple wealth redistribution but codification of their dogma into law and the historical record

    • Replies: @anon
    @Pop Warner

    It’s the same way they’re always harping about having “an honest conversation on race.”

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/9662126-3x2-700x467.jpg

  41. TAX THE LIVING CRUD OUT OF BILLIONAIRES NOW!

    Bezos looks normal compared to the other two billionaire slobs!

    • Replies: @Menes
    @Charles Pewitt


    TAX THE LIVING CRUD OUT OF BILLIONAIRES NOW!

     

    If there was common sense in D.C. instead of the Republican/Reaganite Trickle Down Economics (TDE) bullshit then all those who made fortunes in this time of crisis would have to pay a 100% Windfall Tax.

    Trump is actually a better man than the heartless GOP idealogues like Mitch McConnell who worship at the altar of Reaganism.

    Replies: @Menes

  42. @Pop Warner
    @neutral

    It's the same way they're always harping about having "an honest conversation on race." They don't actually want an honest conversation because they'll have the confront the inadequacies of their own race. What they want is to shout out their quasi-religious talking points to the other person, whose role is to agree and apologize for their white skin. "Unity and healing" is the same as "gibsmedat" in their eyes, the gibs being not just simple wealth redistribution but codification of their dogma into law and the historical record

    Replies: @anon

    It’s the same way they’re always harping about having “an honest conversation on race.”

  43. The failure of non Whites is in their genes not magical “racism” crapola.

    The Jews have tied themselves to their own fine cannibals.

    Its just a question of removing the thin blue line that prevents the Eat The Rich outcome.

    Defund the police. Do not support your Anti-White Sheriff.

    Let nature play out. Into the cannibals’ pot with the “chosen”.

    • Replies: @A123
    @Dr. Doom


    Do not support your Anti-White Sheriff.
     
    Support your 2nd Amendment Sheriff: (1)

    Clay County Florida Sheriff Darryl Daniels warned would-be rioters that if they come to his county they will get the brunt force of his sheriff’s department and if they continue, he will deputize every “lawful gun owner” in the county to shut riots down.

    Sheriff Daniels made clear that if protesters come wanting publicity, they are going to get it. But not in the way they want. Rather, they are going to get the publicity of being dealt with quickly by his Sheriff’s Office.
     

    No one cares about his skin color. Everyone appreciates that he believes in guns, and the people who know how to use them.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2020/07/02/watch-florida-sheriff-vows-to-deputize-gun-owners-to-preserve-law-order/
     
    https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2020/07/640/320/Clay-County-Sheriffs-Office-Florida-1.jpg

  44. @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie

    Isn't that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?

    If America is "an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities", then ... looting what should rightfully be yours and exterminating those who withheld it is justified. This is increasingly openly stated by the Left.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    Isn’t that just a longer, media-friendly version of what I said?

    I suppose, though it seems to me that the term “looting” connotes something wanton and unjustified, which is not how they see it.

  45. @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials

    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion. The gov't should only step in when all else fails, and then only for a limited time. Whatever you subsidize, you get more of, and the US is getting more and more dirtbags that vote for a living as opposed to working for a living.

    A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage. - Alexander Tyler

    You're going to get your bleeding heart wishes good and hard real soon.

    Replies: @anon, @Rosie

    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?

    Precisely my point. If this is what you think of the poor, then you are a red. You are also increasingly out of touch.

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.

    Tried and failed. This didn’t work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of,

    I’m still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Another problem with the "whatever you subsidize, you get more of" argument:

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/FT_19.08.02_TeenBirths_Abortion-pregnancy-rates-declined-among-teenagers-US.png

    Teen mothers are eligible for all sorts of welfare benefits, yet their pregnancy rates are trending down, and dramatically so. If it is possible to reduce out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies without punitive "tough love" measures, why wouldn't it be possible to do so with adults?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill

    , @dfordoom
    @Rosie



    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.
     
    Tried and failed. This didn’t work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.
     
    I agree with Rosie on this one.
    , @Rattus Norwegius
    @Rosie

    "I’m still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now."
    Swedish/Nordic policy might positivly impact fertility slightly. Across Scandinavia this idea is accepted as fact. Expecting that such policies will provide a large boost is expecting too much. We may experience an increase of around 0,1-0,3 TFR compared to without the same policies. I think we agree that culture is the main determinant of fertility rates.

  46. @Dr. Doom
    The failure of non Whites is in their genes not magical "racism" crapola.

    The Jews have tied themselves to their own fine cannibals.

    Its just a question of removing the thin blue line that prevents the Eat The Rich outcome.

    Defund the police. Do not support your Anti-White Sheriff.

    Let nature play out. Into the cannibals' pot with the "chosen".

    Replies: @A123

    Do not support your Anti-White Sheriff.

    Support your 2nd Amendment Sheriff: (1)

    Clay County Florida Sheriff Darryl Daniels warned would-be rioters that if they come to his county they will get the brunt force of his sheriff’s department and if they continue, he will deputize every “lawful gun owner” in the county to shut riots down.

    Sheriff Daniels made clear that if protesters come wanting publicity, they are going to get it. But not in the way they want. Rather, they are going to get the publicity of being dealt with quickly by his Sheriff’s Office.

    No one cares about his skin color. Everyone appreciates that he believes in guns, and the people who know how to use them.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2020/07/02/watch-florida-sheriff-vows-to-deputize-gun-owners-to-preserve-law-order/
     

  47. @iffen
    @Chrisnonymous

    people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    Wow! Who would've thunk it!

    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.

    (Is that you, Ron? Is Chris one of your sock-puppets?)

    And to think that just a few minutes ago after having read a comment in another thread I thought, "UR is just a meeting space where anti-Semitic WN lonely hearts can get together."

    Replies: @Bill

    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.

    Imagine a mind which believes that the NPR listening audience is higher quality than the UR commentariat.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Bill

    higher quality

    Definition please.

    And remember, you can't just ignore most of the commenters here and compare what's left over with the NPR audience.

    Replies: @Bill

  48. @Daniel H
    @MBlanc46

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Let me see....Neither side goes to church that much. Both are addicted to pop culture, sports and the pursuit of money. And both are sentimental sops. When all the heated bullshit fumes off I don't see that much difference between Red and Blue. This is the country they/we want.

    Replies: @Wency, @Bardon Kaldian

    I don’t fully agree with you, but there certainly is some of this.

    By a happenstance of life, I’m acquainted with a white woman in my county in the South who lives in a trailer and has 4 children by 4 men. Tattoos, obese, looks 10 years older than she is. She is, of course, extremely pro-Trump. But her Trump support would appear to be a pure accident of birth — you could easily go to the other, black side of town, find her doppelganger living her exact same lifestyle, with her same basic look but darker skin, and find that woman is extremely pro-Biden.

    • Replies: @Ryan Andrews
    @Wency


    By a happenstance of life, I’m acquainted with a white woman in my county in the South who lives in a trailer and has 4 children by 4 men. Tattoos, obese, looks 10 years older than she is. She is, of course, extremely pro-Trump. But her Trump support would appear to be a pure accident of birth — you could easily go to the other, black side of town, find her doppelganger living her exact same lifestyle, with her same basic look but darker skin, and find that woman is extremely pro-Biden.
     
    Sure, but politics is deeper than the happenstance of life. In terms of where they are, in their immediate material life circumstances, the White woman you describe and her hypothetical Black doppelganger may indeed be very similarly situated. But the "accident of birth" is each case is not their races, but their similar life circumstances, those circumstances have only to do with what they live right here, right now. While the race to which each of them belong is much greater than their individual circumstances. This is exactly why race is much superior as a source of identity than class or even culture.
  49. @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?
     
    Precisely my point. If this is what you think of the poor, then you are a red. You are also increasingly out of touch.

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.
     
    Tried and failed. This didn't work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of,

     

    I'm still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Rattus Norwegius

    Another problem with the “whatever you subsidize, you get more of” argument:

    Teen mothers are eligible for all sorts of welfare benefits, yet their pregnancy rates are trending down, and dramatically so. If it is possible to reduce out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies without punitive “tough love” measures, why wouldn’t it be possible to do so with adults?

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie

    You may recall that Clinton campaigned and was elected in 1992 on a platform of welfare reform, which was a polite shorthand for cutting benefits. The bipartisan welfare reform act was the crowning legislative achievement of his first term. And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    Look at the graphs for expenditures over time and then tell me that what you subsidize you get more of is wrong.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230339/

    As long as there's free stuff available, there will be eager takers. The country is becoming one huge army of takers who will keep voting to fleece the people that actually provide all the benefits.

    Replies: @Rosie

  50. “The 330 million people living within the borders of the American empire are aware of it”

    No, 1/3 are aware of 330 million Americans are aware of it.

    “The country as currently constituted will never return to even those modest, fleeting levels of unity.”

    May never return, AE.

    “but actual public sentiment doesn’t reflect it. It reveals irreconcilable differences”

    Americans said that in 1877, in 1919, in 1937, in 1968, in 1994…and today. Basically, it reveals long-standing, continued differences that some would argue irreconcilable.

    “Perhaps those who do not share similar values and life goals should not share the same country, either. End the hate, separate.”

    Not until the questions which I have posed before are thoroughly answered, with a definitive course of action agreed upon by Americans. AE, you’re simply grasping at straws here.

  51. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Another problem with the "whatever you subsidize, you get more of" argument:

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/FT_19.08.02_TeenBirths_Abortion-pregnancy-rates-declined-among-teenagers-US.png

    Teen mothers are eligible for all sorts of welfare benefits, yet their pregnancy rates are trending down, and dramatically so. If it is possible to reduce out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies without punitive "tough love" measures, why wouldn't it be possible to do so with adults?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill

    You may recall that Clinton campaigned and was elected in 1992 on a platform of welfare reform, which was a polite shorthand for cutting benefits. The bipartisan welfare reform act was the crowning legislative achievement of his first term. And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.
     
    Fair enough. Mission accomplished. I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about. We can have a safety net and fairness to taxpayers at the same time.

    Putting teen moms on the street isn't necessary after all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

  52. @anonymous
    I wonder what will happen over the next 20 years in America. I think two big picture trends are fairly predictable.

    1. Racial demographics change from 60% white to 50% white. Latinos go from 18% to 26%.
    2. Average economic growth over the next 20 year period is significantly lower than the past 20 year period.

    Any other well-supported predictions that are quantifiable? Will unmarried white women with college degrees have an even bigger say in elections? Just how much will evangelicals shrink? Will m4a likely pass?

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Wency

    Just how much will evangelicals shrink?

    Hopefully a lot.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @dfordoom

    Hey doom, you got any extra coal you can sell me?

    When the Red Chinese really drop the hammer, don't you f*cking dare come running to Uncle Sam. You just smile and bend over and take it like you deserve it.

  53. @V. K. Ovelund
    I wonder how many (or how few) U.S. readers hold sentiments even more seditious than they will display pseudonymously in the comments.

    Ron Unz bars few thoughtful comments but does bar outright sedition.[*] Moreover, a hypothetically seditious reader might self-censor for all I know. The point is that The Unz Review, as magnificent a free-speech forum as it is, might be unable to reveal seditious sentiment beyond a certain degree, in case such sentiment existed.

    The reason I ask is that I seem to see a growing number of Americans online that predict that other Americans will violently revolt. Now, before the estimable @dfordoom rises to warn against the improbability and futility of violent revolt, that wasn't my point. I think @dfordoom right, of course. I merely wonder whether the aforementioned predictions reveal something about the predictors the predictors will not or cannot openly say.

    When the president is tweeting things many left-of-center Americans view as seditious, when many right-of-center Americans are hanging on the president's every tweet, the question seems pertinent.

    [*] (Someone might object, how do you know what Ron does? Answer: I don't, nor am I acquainted with Ron, except that Ron struck the sole comment I have ever submitted to his attention—a comment that encouraged the murder of a particular public official who, though not named, was specifically described. I have no special knowledge beyond this.)

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The reason I ask is that I seem to see a growing number of Americans online that predict that other Americans will violently revolt.

    It would be interesting to know how many of them are Feds. It’s possible that most of those predicting violent revolution are Feds.

    Some seem too crazy to be Feds, but on the other hand it’s quite plausible that genuine crazies are exactly the people the Feds would recruit, or groom as agents provocateurs.

    You have to ask yourself whether the FBI (or similar nasty government agencies) would see it as being in their interests to encourage a half-assed bungled uprising so that they could cover themselves in glory by saving America from a fascist revolution. And have an excuse to lock up lots of people whom they intensely dislike.

    OK, so it’s a conspiracy theory. But you have to admit that unlike most conspiracy theories it’s actually plausible.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    @dfordoom

    A Terence McKenna quote for today:

    "The only ones that are really good at assassinations and drug running conspiracies are governments."

  54. @A123
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden's ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    https://twitter.com/MarkFinchem/status/1339248281117806592?s=20

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Dr. Charles Fhandrich, @dfordoom, @Corvinus

    If Führer Biden steals the White House

    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    I increasingly get the feeling that Unz Review is now a parody site. Recently I’ve encountered people talking about the ruling class being Satanists, African population growth being a myth, nuclear weapons being a hoax, the vaccine being a plot to depopulate the globe, and now Biden is Literally Hitler.

    • Replies: @A123
    @dfordoom


    Biden is Literally Hitler.
     
    Hitler died in 1945. What sort of wacky reincarnation / reanimation mythology are you advocating????

    You are 100% responsible for your own deranged & inapplicable parody.
    ___

    The title "Führer" is attached to the head of any National Socialist [Nazi] party. The SJWastika screaming loyalists of the National Socialist DNC have openly confirmed its Nazi beliefs.

    -- How is calling Nazi Führer-Elect Biden by his proper title inappropriate?
    -- Is there an equally evocative title that we should be using to warn of the horrors of Biden's anti-Christian regime?

    PEACE 😇
    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?
     
    The one and only @A123 is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one. He has taught me that I am in Tehran, for example, which is valuable information, since the darned subway system here is hard to figure out until one realizes that one is not in Chicago or New York.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

    , @Observator
    @dfordoom

    I'm starting to see Biden as another James Buchanan, a third-rate hack who ended up at the top spot after decades in politics because he was a nonentity, a useful tool for special interests. Another ominous parallel is that Buchanan succeeded a man, the unhappy Frank Pierce, whose advancing alcoholism rendered him yearly more irrational, just the way Trump’s astonishing mania has reduced him to a sulking cipher brooding over his rejection at the polls. Into the leadership vacuum of the 1850s stepped the most determined enemies of the American people, moving unopposed into positions of power everywhere, silencing voices of reason in the south, diverting weapons from US arsenals in the north for the war they had long plotted, with foreign encouragement, to destroy the world’s only experiment in self-government. All for what, so arrogant aristocrats could establish plantations where they were not welcome, in Kansas and Nebraska and Dakota - the pity of it is just overwhelming, that some today imagine those lying traitors were some kind of heroes .

  55. @Daniel H
    @MBlanc46

    You must live in a different United States to the one that I live in.

    Let me see....Neither side goes to church that much. Both are addicted to pop culture, sports and the pursuit of money. And both are sentimental sops. When all the heated bullshit fumes off I don't see that much difference between Red and Blue. This is the country they/we want.

    Replies: @Wency, @Bardon Kaldian

    Perhaps the underclass. But, the articulate part of the middle classes, which have always been the backbone of any country (not the downtrodden; not the plutocratic ruling elites) are clearly divided over crucial issues: who belongs to the American people? What is American history- a triumph or a shame? Where the past, present & the future of US lies? Who are the good guys & bad guys in US history- and now?

    Clearly, there is a split within middle America.

    • Agree: iffen
  56. @A123
    @TomSchmidt

    The point of the graphic is to highlight the statistical issues with Führer Biden's steal.

    Massively more votes with fewer counties won (far exceeding population growth), requires both:

    -- Statistically impossible turnout, plus
    -- Statistically impossible vote split Trump/Biden

    It can only be explained by fraud concentrated in a few locations.
    ____

    Feel free to post your own graphics. There are so many problems, you probably have to own favorite(s) by now.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

    I can explain the counties. It’s harder to explain how many bellwether counties were wrong this time. I don’t have a graphic on that.

    I assume you’ve seen the video of the guy who wants to run analysis on the scanned ballot images, which must be retained22 months, to see how many had no folds. Spoiled ballots replaced with new would lack a fold, but the process of mailing a ballot necessarily folds it. If there are too many unfolded mail-in ballots then we know they’re fraudulent, without worrying about algorithms switching votes.

    That becomes simple, unambiguous, and obvious fraud. My gut sense that that happened would be relieved by seeing the results of that process.

  57. @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie

    You may recall that Clinton campaigned and was elected in 1992 on a platform of welfare reform, which was a polite shorthand for cutting benefits. The bipartisan welfare reform act was the crowning legislative achievement of his first term. And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.

    Replies: @Rosie

    And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.

    Fair enough. Mission accomplished. I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about. We can have a safety net and fairness to taxpayers at the same time.

    Putting teen moms on the street isn’t necessary after all.

    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Rosie

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn't happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It's as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William's of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don't really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America's ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the "economic gains" from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @iffen

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Rosie


    I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about.
     
    The Obama administration quietly undid the mainspring of welfare reform.

    Nevertheless, I largely agree with your comment below.
  58. @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?
     
    Precisely my point. If this is what you think of the poor, then you are a red. You are also increasingly out of touch.

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.
     
    Tried and failed. This didn't work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of,

     

    I'm still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Rattus Norwegius

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.

    Tried and failed. This didn’t work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    I agree with Rosie on this one.

  59. @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.
     
    Fair enough. Mission accomplished. I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about. We can have a safety net and fairness to taxpayers at the same time.

    Putting teen moms on the street isn't necessary after all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn’t happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It’s as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William’s of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don’t really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America’s ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the “economic gains” from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Why White working-class women shouldn't bother with marriage, welfare or not.

    https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/04/white-working-class-women-should-stay-single-mothers-argue-the-authors-of-marriage-markets-how-inequality-is-remaking-the-american-family.html

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Rosie


    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now.
     
    I hate it when people do that. Too many of us over a certain age keep trying to solve problems that largely ceased to be pertinent decades ago.

    What was your take on Andrew Yang's Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?

    As long as I ask the question I should state my own tentative answer: it had seemed to me that the UBI concept, if instituted in moderation, were elegant and had theoretical merit; but the stimulus-fueled riots during the summer have severely discouraged me. Mainly, however, I would like to read your answer, because your answer might illuminate some other comments you have given here.

    Replies: @Supply and Demand, @Rosie

    , @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    It’s as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William’s of the National Review.
     
    People who hate welfare do so for one of two reasons. Firstly, they just don't like paying taxes because they're greedy a*holes. Or secondly, they genuinely hate poor people and want to punish them. You'll find both motivations are common among the Swine Right.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @Jay Fink

    , @iffen
    @Rosie

    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.

    Replies: @Rosie

  60. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn't happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It's as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William's of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don't really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America's ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the "economic gains" from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @iffen

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    That's got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read. "See the results of policies that are destructive to the family? Obviously the only thing to do is to double down on policies that are destructive to the family!"

  61. @dfordoom
    @A123


    If Führer Biden steals the White House
     
    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    I increasingly get the feeling that Unz Review is now a parody site. Recently I've encountered people talking about the ruling class being Satanists, African population growth being a myth, nuclear weapons being a hoax, the vaccine being a plot to depopulate the globe, and now Biden is Literally Hitler.

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund, @Observator

    Biden is Literally Hitler.

    Hitler died in 1945. What sort of wacky reincarnation / reanimation mythology are you advocating????

    You are 100% responsible for your own deranged & inapplicable parody.
    ___

    The title “Führer” is attached to the head of any National Socialist [Nazi] party. The SJWastika screaming loyalists of the National Socialist DNC have openly confirmed its Nazi beliefs.

    — How is calling Nazi Führer-Elect Biden by his proper title inappropriate?
    — Is there an equally evocative title that we should be using to warn of the horrors of Biden’s anti-Christian regime?

    PEACE 😇

  62. Hate your enemies. Turn to the Dark Enlightenment.

    You will see the power of Darkness. The light is false, a trick.

    Like moths drawn to a flame, they will be consumed by fire.

    Do not subsidize your hated foes. Boycott all big corporations.

    Bankrupt them and they are powerless cowards.

    Trade local with only your own kind. Do not assist charities.

    Fight smarter. Do not trust the badges. They are hired for being corrupt and DUMB.

    Form into small leaderless groups. Self defense and mutual aid.

    Pool your resources. Barter and do not pay any tax you can avoid.

    Do not trust aliens. Especially the tribe. The FBI and CIA will seek you.

    Let them eat static. Do not comply. Resist. Sabotage. Do not assist.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    @Dr. Doom


    Sabotage
     
    Especially this.

    Small acts of sabotage add up, especially in networked systems where they ramify if they trip a key node.

    The future will feature a lot of SolarWinds-type destabilisation of fragile systems that have been systematically under-resourced for decades.

    I've been saying this for almost 20 years: the C-suite views sysadmin and back-end as cost, and the result is that the guy keeping the server patched is on $80k and working 60 hours a week... meanwhile the 50-something CTO 0n $250k + stock, just got an interesting e-mail with a PDF attachment that he is about to open.

    On SolarWinds: nation-state adversary my arse - far more likely to have been a rebooted LulzSec-style "Ohai. Fuck you. kthxbai!" op. Cybersecurity clowns have literally the worst datasec: they are all hat and no cattle.

    The world needed to be shown that shitty overpriced datasec ramifies, and that talentless fuckwits in "cybersecurity" roles are a waste of funds... because the plodders in HR apply an ideological overlay as a first-filter, which means they're starting outside the top talent quintile.

    Palantir; Equifax; SolarWinds; it's just getting interesting.

    Meanwhile, Microsoft took 17 years to patch SigRed... it's almost as if leaving server exploits open for over a decade might have some relevance to recent events. Naaaah...
  63. @dfordoom
    @A123


    If Führer Biden steals the White House
     
    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    I increasingly get the feeling that Unz Review is now a parody site. Recently I've encountered people talking about the ruling class being Satanists, African population growth being a myth, nuclear weapons being a hoax, the vaccine being a plot to depopulate the globe, and now Biden is Literally Hitler.

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund, @Observator

    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    The one and only is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one. He has taught me that I am in Tehran, for example, which is valuable information, since the darned subway system here is hard to figure out until one realizes that one is not in Chicago or New York.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The one and only @A123 is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one.
     
    He provides fine entertainment value. Some of his recent posts have been comedy gold. Say what you like about Jews but you must admit they're brilliant at comedy.

    I think Ron should give him his own column.
    , @A123
    @V. K. Ovelund

    VK,

    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?

    Let us examine the facts You have provided. You state
    -- Your son's military unit is targeted by Israeli forces.
    -- The only units currently so targeted by Israeli forces are Iranian.

    Ergo, your son must be in the Iranian military or paramilirary.

    The facts you claim can lead to no other logical endpoint.
    ____

    If you retired from the same military your son saves in, you must also be Iraian. Tehran is admittedly a guess, you could be another part of Iran.

    It also explains your hatred of God and his Judeo-Christian values. The Covenant of Taqiyya requires you, as a Muslim, to lies to Infidels (Jews & Christians).

    Again simple logic reveals the truth.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  64. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn't happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It's as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William's of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don't really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America's ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the "economic gains" from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @iffen

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now.

    I hate it when people do that. Too many of us over a certain age keep trying to solve problems that largely ceased to be pertinent decades ago.

    What was your take on Andrew Yang’s Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?

    As long as I ask the question I should state my own tentative answer: it had seemed to me that the UBI concept, if instituted in moderation, were elegant and had theoretical merit; but the stimulus-fueled riots during the summer have severely discouraged me. Mainly, however, I would like to read your answer, because your answer might illuminate some other comments you have given here.

    • Replies: @Supply and Demand
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The people who were out protesting weren’t job holders anyway, and would’ve been out regardless of the money printer going brrrrrr. It seemed to me to be mainly composed of black thugs, male to female transgenders, and white non-tranny female college students. None of those demographics work if they can, and if they do, they worked at service jobs or “internships” that ceased to exist 3 months before the death of Santa Giorgio Mundi.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    , @Rosie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    What was your take on Andrew Yang’s Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?
     
    I think it is absolutely essential to have UBI with a gig economy.

    Employers decided at some point that it's too expensive to support employees and their families on an ongoing basis, regular, permanent basis. Fine. Then they'll have to pay more taxes to provide a regular income for people. Otherwise, people will never be able to build wealth, because they'll have to spend all their savings to get by when they're between gigs.
  65. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Rosie


    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now.
     
    I hate it when people do that. Too many of us over a certain age keep trying to solve problems that largely ceased to be pertinent decades ago.

    What was your take on Andrew Yang's Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?

    As long as I ask the question I should state my own tentative answer: it had seemed to me that the UBI concept, if instituted in moderation, were elegant and had theoretical merit; but the stimulus-fueled riots during the summer have severely discouraged me. Mainly, however, I would like to read your answer, because your answer might illuminate some other comments you have given here.

    Replies: @Supply and Demand, @Rosie

    The people who were out protesting weren’t job holders anyway, and would’ve been out regardless of the money printer going brrrrrr. It seemed to me to be mainly composed of black thugs, male to female transgenders, and white non-tranny female college students. None of those demographics work if they can, and if they do, they worked at service jobs or “internships” that ceased to exist 3 months before the death of Santa Giorgio Mundi.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Supply and Demand


    The people who were out protesting weren’t job holders anyway....
     
    Perhaps you are right, but I suppose that I have an unusually low tolerance for counterempiricism. My preëxisting biases stood all in favor of your position, but what I saw was stimulus money followed by riots.

    Riots are not okay with me. It takes a long time to rebuild that which is so quickly torn down.

    My share of the stimulus money even happened to come at a somewhat convenient time for me, but I still saw videos of riots. One would want hard numbers gathered by a credible, trustworthy person (rather than by a person merely seeking corrupt research funding to bolster his own bias) to change one's mind.

  66. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn't happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It's as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William's of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don't really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America's ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the "economic gains" from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @iffen

    It’s as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William’s of the National Review.

    People who hate welfare do so for one of two reasons. Firstly, they just don’t like paying taxes because they’re greedy a*holes. Or secondly, they genuinely hate poor people and want to punish them. You’ll find both motivations are common among the Swine Right.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @dfordoom

    Gosh, there couldn't possibly be any other reasons, such as they don't think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don't agree with your solutions.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Jay Fink
    @dfordoom

    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don't receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    Another reason I don't like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn't exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn't exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

  67. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?
     
    The one and only @A123 is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one. He has taught me that I am in Tehran, for example, which is valuable information, since the darned subway system here is hard to figure out until one realizes that one is not in Chicago or New York.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

    The one and only is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one.

    He provides fine entertainment value. Some of his recent posts have been comedy gold. Say what you like about Jews but you must admit they’re brilliant at comedy.

    I think Ron should give him his own column.

  68. @GiveMeEqualityOrGiveMeDeath
    As the years go by I become more Right/Conservative while most of the country goes more Left/Liberal. I want nothing from these people. They have nothing to offer me. I am self sustaining, responsible, gainfully employed, talented, smart, healthy. What could the Left possibly offer me?

    I don't want to be around them. I don't want to be their friend. I don't want to go to their parties and be considered one of the good Conservatives. I don't want to listen to their endless plans on how to fix every unequal outcome in the goddamn Universe.

    It would be so glorious to wake up one day and realize that all Liberals had just vanished.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    “As the years go by I become more Right/Conservative while most of the country goes more Left/Liberal.”

    That’s the way I feel. If I was a state I would be West Virginia who voted for Dukakis in ’88 and is now one of the reddest states in Presidential elections. That’s me. Most states and people did the opposite.

  69. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Rosie


    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now.
     
    I hate it when people do that. Too many of us over a certain age keep trying to solve problems that largely ceased to be pertinent decades ago.

    What was your take on Andrew Yang's Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?

    As long as I ask the question I should state my own tentative answer: it had seemed to me that the UBI concept, if instituted in moderation, were elegant and had theoretical merit; but the stimulus-fueled riots during the summer have severely discouraged me. Mainly, however, I would like to read your answer, because your answer might illuminate some other comments you have given here.

    Replies: @Supply and Demand, @Rosie

    What was your take on Andrew Yang’s Universal Basic Income (UBI) or “Freedom Dividend”?

    I think it is absolutely essential to have UBI with a gig economy.

    Employers decided at some point that it’s too expensive to support employees and their families on an ongoing basis, regular, permanent basis. Fine. Then they’ll have to pay more taxes to provide a regular income for people. Otherwise, people will never be able to build wealth, because they’ll have to spend all their savings to get by when they’re between gigs.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon, dfordoom
    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  70. @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    It’s as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William’s of the National Review.
     
    People who hate welfare do so for one of two reasons. Firstly, they just don't like paying taxes because they're greedy a*holes. Or secondly, they genuinely hate poor people and want to punish them. You'll find both motivations are common among the Swine Right.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @Jay Fink

    Gosh, there couldn’t possibly be any other reasons, such as they don’t think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don’t agree with your solutions.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Cloudbuster


    Gosh, there couldn’t possibly be any other reasons, such as they don’t think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don’t agree with your solutions.
     
    I've never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor's own good.

    Replies: @iffen, @Mark G.

  71. @Cloudbuster
    @dfordoom

    Gosh, there couldn't possibly be any other reasons, such as they don't think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don't agree with your solutions.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Gosh, there couldn’t possibly be any other reasons, such as they don’t think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don’t agree with your solutions.

    I’ve never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.

    • Disagree: iffen, V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @iffen
    @dfordoom

    although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.

    In the US, lazy fair conservatives insist that poverty was created by The Great Society. They are technically correct for it was LBJ's administration that created the official poverty level statistic. According to some, and these frequently overlap with the lazy fairs, if something doesn't have a number it doesn't exist.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    , @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    I’ve never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.
     
    Is someone wanting to keep the money they earned engaged in screwing someone else or is the person who wants to forcibly take the money possibly the one who is doing the screwing here?

    I've come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn't theirs. They are psychologically unable to admit to themselves that what they are advocating is stupid or evil. I will argue with them if there is possibly someone undecided in the vicinity who can hear the argument but won't waste a second arguing with them if we are alone. It would be like telling a rabbit or a deer that they shouldn't be eating the vegetables in your vegetable garden or telling someone holding a gun on you while asking for your wallet that they shouldn't be doing that.

    For everyone who is not a socialist, I would advocate trying to keep them from getting control of the government. If they do get control, there are things you can do at a personal level. The socialist government in Sweden instituted high taxes on the rich but Sweden later had to reduce them again because rich people either left the country, engaged in tax evasion, or worked less in order to reduce income and put themselves in a lower tax bracket. Sometimes, though, this fails. If the socialist government persists in continuing its policies you end up with something like Zimbabwe or Venezuela where all the productive people have either fled the country or stopped working and you have starving poor people. I think someone who wants to prevent something like that by opposing socialism cares more about their fellow humans than the socialist leaders like Mugabe or Chavez do.

    Replies: @Rosie

  72. @dfordoom
    @anonymous


    Just how much will evangelicals shrink?
     
    Hopefully a lot.

    Replies: @iffen

    Hey doom, you got any extra coal you can sell me?

    When the Red Chinese really drop the hammer, don’t you f*cking dare come running to Uncle Sam. You just smile and bend over and take it like you deserve it.

  73. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    What I find particularly disturbing about the anti welfare sentiment is that people are using exactly the same arguments and rhetoric as people did 25 years ago when the economy was much different than it is now. The tech boom was just beginning and there was reason for optimism that high tech jobs would replace declining manufacturing jobs.

    That didn't happen, of course, and the anti welfare Scrooges are still going on as if the whole deindustrialization of America, along with the H1b scandal, never even happened. It's as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William's of the National Review.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    OK, they don't really expect WWC people to drop dead. They can just be phased out over a couple of generations. In no event should they expect any share of the loot America's ruling elite got out of selling the country to China so that they can raise a family with a first world standard of living, despite repeated promises over the years that the "economic gains" from globalization would be shared equitably with those who got the shortened of the offshoringstick. That would be subsidizing useless degenerate subhumans or whatever.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom, @iffen

    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @iffen


    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.
     
    If it's OK to tell Americans to pick up and move, why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    Replies: @iffen

  74. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Another problem with the "whatever you subsidize, you get more of" argument:

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/FT_19.08.02_TeenBirths_Abortion-pregnancy-rates-declined-among-teenagers-US.png

    Teen mothers are eligible for all sorts of welfare benefits, yet their pregnancy rates are trending down, and dramatically so. If it is possible to reduce out-of-wedlock teen pregnancies without punitive "tough love" measures, why wouldn't it be possible to do so with adults?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill

    Look at the graphs for expenditures over time and then tell me that what you subsidize you get more of is wrong.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230339/

    As long as there’s free stuff available, there will be eager takers. The country is becoming one huge army of takers who will keep voting to fleece the people that actually provide all the benefits.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Look at the graphs for expenditures over time and then tell me that what you subsidize you get more of is wrong.
     
    It looks as though AFDC expenditures have held steady while food stamp expenditures have gone up. How do we know that has anything to do with getting more of what you subsidize as opposed to more people needing food assistance because of increased low-skilled immigration and associated unemployment or some other factor?

    keep voting to fleece the people that actually provide all the benefits.
     
    This is a distinct argument, and it rests on the assumption that the haves are the solution rather than the problem. In many cases, that's true of course. In some cases, it is not. We can argue about who should bear the tax burden without attacking the idea of social welfare as such.
  75. @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    Eh? One side wants to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. The other side wants to loot it all and exterminate the natives in both blood and memory. This ain’t the Guelphs and Ghibellines.
     
    I think the main difference between regular reds and blues is that the former by and large still see America as a prosperous meritocracy where a middle-class standard of living is still available to all who work hard and play by the rules. This is why they accept the austerity rhetoric of GOPe, setting aside the unprincipled exception for Social Security and Medicare.

    Blues, on the other hand, see America as an inhumane place that leaves the less fortunate without basic human dignities like decent housing, affordable health care, and free access to educational credentials that are used to screen job applications, rightly or wrongly.

    I think I heard that only 7% of voters said that "racism" was an important issue for them.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @RoatanBill, @animalogic

    I think US (& international) Elites have done a wonderful job of setting citizen against citizen.
    They have set out to sicken a nation in the knowledge that a sick patient is a passive patient, a confused patient & an easily manipulated patient.
    Gotta give the Devil his due….

  76. Sorry, for the off-topic post, but AE, you promised around six months ago to do a post on COVID and seasonality and that never happened. Now seasonality is more clear than ever before.

    I know I sound like Rain Man, but here I go again on humidity —

    In February and March of 2020, as I read all I could about respiratory infections and watched where COVID-19 was having its worst impact, I realized that the dry indoor air of winter makes viral respiratory infections much worse (this is not the only factor, but it is a very big one). The data have born this out.

    The mechanisms are simple:
    (1) Mucociliary clearance, the mechanism by which foreign particles are carried out of the lungs, functions poorly in very dry air as mucus dries out.
    (2) Dry air can lead to damage of surfaces of the throat and lungs (in the same way that dry air gives you cracked lips). This makes you vulnerable to inflammation and infections at the site of the injury. The virus can enter through such fissures.

    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.

    Since nobody will listen to me, here is leading COVID-19 expert Prof. Akiko Iwasaki of the Iwasaki virology lab at Yale Medical school and her team speaking:

    For those who like to read scientific papers, a 2020 review of respiratory virus seasonality with some 130 citations explains things well (figure 4 says it all):
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    And for the lay person:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/winter-covid-19-humidity/

    The effects of humidity are dramatic. Florida and Texas have been almost completely open while New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan have been largely locked down, and yet those lockdown states have had much worse disease and death than those humid states. Humidity is the difference because indoor air is generally temperature controlled everywhere.

    A few hundred thousand lives will be saved this winter if this becomes widely known.

    • Thanks: Chrisnonymous
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @DanHessinMD


    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.
     
    Pseudonymity being the style, no one here knows which commenter has which credential. However, your comment has the ring of expertise. One does not doubt that you are an M.D.

    Thank you. My family will start humidifying the house. It'll mean a little more mold to clean off the baseboards, but that's all right.

    , @Chrisnonymous
    @DanHessinMD

    Do you have any prescription for use of the hunidifier? Is there anything people can measure in their bodies to know if their environmental humidity is adequate?

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @DanHessinMD

    We did a couple of posts highlighting what you wrote. Put something thorough together that is accessible for non-specialists and it'll be run here. I don't trust case numbers, hospitalizations, or death numbers wrt Covid enough to do it myself.

  77. @Chrisnonymous
    There are two roads back to unity. One is information and speech control of the kinds we saw for the last 4 years. The reason censorship is getting worse is that so far this strategy has failed to work, but the logic of it seems irresistible (and I don't think that's just because the party breaks Winston in 1984). The other road back to unity is to completely break current media models and move to something like crowd-sourced news websites where there is no Rachel-Maddows-megaphone phenomenon. I am quite certain that the current irreconcilability has less to do with values than with disagreements between people who listen to NPR vs people who read alternative news outlets.

    Replies: @iffen, @animalogic

    The “road back to unity”…
    “to completely break current media models and move to something like crowd-sourced news websites where there is no Rachel-Maddows-megaphone phenomenon.”
    Can’t argue with that…. as a first step. .
    Then it’s simply a case of wage earners organising themselves in opposition to Elites & their various Tools…. Could be a bit tricky, but I’m all for it.

  78. @Bill
    @iffen


    The UR readership and commentariat is equal to the NPR listening audience.
     
    Imagine a mind which believes that the NPR listening audience is higher quality than the UR commentariat.

    Replies: @iffen

    higher quality

    Definition please.

    And remember, you can’t just ignore most of the commenters here and compare what’s left over with the NPR audience.

    • Replies: @Bill
    @iffen

    You're the one making the claim. You define it.

    Replies: @iffen

  79. @RoatanBill
    @martin_2

    Within a short period of time those living in the black fraction will be starving and there will be a complete breakdown of civil order.

    What, precisely, is so wrong with that? Consider it a teaching moment for those that think the world owes them a living, a comfortable living, and all for doing nothing.

    When some POS comes out of the ghetto to loot what you have, just shoot the bastard. That's where this is heading. People are slowly wising up to the fact that the police are their enemy. The police and the entire justice system protects the criminals and penalizes the decent people to provide for their support.

    Replies: @animalogic

    An interesting question — who is the greater enemy? The poor impulse control dark people or the cunning as shit-house rats police, always about their Lords’ work?
    The easy answer is –it’s both…. but….???

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @animalogic

    The greater enemy is the gov't that creates the problem with the dregs of the society by supporting them via looting the productive people.

  80. @Supply and Demand
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The people who were out protesting weren’t job holders anyway, and would’ve been out regardless of the money printer going brrrrrr. It seemed to me to be mainly composed of black thugs, male to female transgenders, and white non-tranny female college students. None of those demographics work if they can, and if they do, they worked at service jobs or “internships” that ceased to exist 3 months before the death of Santa Giorgio Mundi.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    The people who were out protesting weren’t job holders anyway….

    Perhaps you are right, but I suppose that I have an unusually low tolerance for counterempiricism. My preëxisting biases stood all in favor of your position, but what I saw was stimulus money followed by riots.

    Riots are not okay with me. It takes a long time to rebuild that which is so quickly torn down.

    My share of the stimulus money even happened to come at a somewhat convenient time for me, but I still saw videos of riots. One would want hard numbers gathered by a credible, trustworthy person (rather than by a person merely seeking corrupt research funding to bolster his own bias) to change one’s mind.

  81. A big influx of Indians might help. Cleveland could keep its old handle but change the mascot to a player sporting a turban and holding a viper versus a bat .

  82. Perhaps those who do not share similar values and life goals should not share the same country, either. End the hate, separate.

    Exactly. And the second chart shows that White men with a degree have the most accurate view of reality…at least on this issue.

  83. @DanHessinMD
    Sorry, for the off-topic post, but AE, you promised around six months ago to do a post on COVID and seasonality and that never happened. Now seasonality is more clear than ever before.

    I know I sound like Rain Man, but here I go again on humidity --

    In February and March of 2020, as I read all I could about respiratory infections and watched where COVID-19 was having its worst impact, I realized that the dry indoor air of winter makes viral respiratory infections much worse (this is not the only factor, but it is a very big one). The data have born this out.

    The mechanisms are simple:
    (1) Mucociliary clearance, the mechanism by which foreign particles are carried out of the lungs, functions poorly in very dry air as mucus dries out.
    (2) Dry air can lead to damage of surfaces of the throat and lungs (in the same way that dry air gives you cracked lips). This makes you vulnerable to inflammation and infections at the site of the injury. The virus can enter through such fissures.

    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.

    Since nobody will listen to me, here is leading COVID-19 expert Prof. Akiko Iwasaki of the Iwasaki virology lab at Yale Medical school and her team speaking:

    For those who like to read scientific papers, a 2020 review of respiratory virus seasonality with some 130 citations explains things well (figure 4 says it all):
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    And for the lay person:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/winter-covid-19-humidity/

    The effects of humidity are dramatic. Florida and Texas have been almost completely open while New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan have been largely locked down, and yet those lockdown states have had much worse disease and death than those humid states. Humidity is the difference because indoor air is generally temperature controlled everywhere.

    A few hundred thousand lives will be saved this winter if this becomes widely known.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Chrisnonymous, @Audacious Epigone

    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.

    Pseudonymity being the style, no one here knows which commenter has which credential. However, your comment has the ring of expertise. One does not doubt that you are an M.D.

    Thank you. My family will start humidifying the house. It’ll mean a little more mold to clean off the baseboards, but that’s all right.

  84. @dfordoom
    @Cloudbuster


    Gosh, there couldn’t possibly be any other reasons, such as they don’t think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don’t agree with your solutions.
     
    I've never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor's own good.

    Replies: @iffen, @Mark G.

    although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.

    In the US, lazy fair conservatives insist that poverty was created by The Great Society. They are technically correct for it was LBJ’s administration that created the official poverty level statistic. According to some, and these frequently overlap with the lazy fairs, if something doesn’t have a number it doesn’t exist.

    • LOL: Cloudbuster
    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    @iffen

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general. Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Replies: @Catdog, @iffen, @dfordoom

  85. @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    It’s as if our very own unz commentators want working-class White America to just go die already, rather like Kevin William’s of the National Review.
     
    People who hate welfare do so for one of two reasons. Firstly, they just don't like paying taxes because they're greedy a*holes. Or secondly, they genuinely hate poor people and want to punish them. You'll find both motivations are common among the Swine Right.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @Jay Fink

    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don’t receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    Another reason I don’t like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn’t exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn’t exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Jay Fink


    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don’t receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.
     
    Here again is a criticism of welfare that doesn't really go to the heart of the issue. It is literally impossible to have the working poor have a quality of life "magnitudes higher" than welfare recipients unless you're going to impose some sort of draconian minimum wage requirement. What you can do is incentivize work by gradually phasing out benefits as people earn more.

    Of course, the earned income tax credit is designed to provide a boost to the working poor. Maybe it should be higher.


    Another reason I don’t like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn’t exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn’t exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.
     
    The foil to Roatan Bill's argument that you get more of what you subsidize. Bill's argument misses the mark because it fails to take account of irrational factors like culture and morality. Yours misses the mark because you don't even consider the possibility that less food would be produced in the absence of food stamp subsidies. Likewise with housing, which costs money to maintain in good repair.

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.
     
    It is if the father is unemployable and/or an abusive drunk.
    , @dfordoom
    @Jay Fink


    The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.
     
    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that's not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they're not only doing jobs that are worthless, they're doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.

    I'd love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Kratoklastes

  86. @dfordoom
    @A123


    If Führer Biden steals the White House
     
    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?

    I increasingly get the feeling that Unz Review is now a parody site. Recently I've encountered people talking about the ruling class being Satanists, African population growth being a myth, nuclear weapons being a hoax, the vaccine being a plot to depopulate the globe, and now Biden is Literally Hitler.

    Replies: @A123, @V. K. Ovelund, @Observator

    I’m starting to see Biden as another James Buchanan, a third-rate hack who ended up at the top spot after decades in politics because he was a nonentity, a useful tool for special interests. Another ominous parallel is that Buchanan succeeded a man, the unhappy Frank Pierce, whose advancing alcoholism rendered him yearly more irrational, just the way Trump’s astonishing mania has reduced him to a sulking cipher brooding over his rejection at the polls. Into the leadership vacuum of the 1850s stepped the most determined enemies of the American people, moving unopposed into positions of power everywhere, silencing voices of reason in the south, diverting weapons from US arsenals in the north for the war they had long plotted, with foreign encouragement, to destroy the world’s only experiment in self-government. All for what, so arrogant aristocrats could establish plantations where they were not welcome, in Kansas and Nebraska and Dakota – the pity of it is just overwhelming, that some today imagine those lying traitors were some kind of heroes .

  87. @iffen
    @dfordoom

    although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.

    In the US, lazy fair conservatives insist that poverty was created by The Great Society. They are technically correct for it was LBJ's administration that created the official poverty level statistic. According to some, and these frequently overlap with the lazy fairs, if something doesn't have a number it doesn't exist.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general. Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Catdog
    @Jay Fink

    Complaining about Great Society is the conservative's version of blaming the white man for all the black man's problems. The daydream that black men were once all hard-working, God-fearing family men in nice checkered suits and hats until a Democrat snake introduced original sin in the shape of a welfare check has great appeal to a certain set.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    , @iffen
    @Jay Fink

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.

    Replies: @A123

    , @dfordoom
    @Jay Fink


    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general.
     
    The decline of the traditional family among blacks and downscale whites was certainly a tragedy. But it was a tragedy caused by a number of different factors - drugs, the decline of Christianity, the collapse of the manufacturing sector, consumerism, the promotion of liberal individualism, the removal of the stigma of illegitimacy, these were all factors. The biggest single factor was undoubtedly drugs.

    Seeing the Great Society programs as the sole cause of the problem is like blaming the Great Depression on the existence of soup kitchens. Or blaming out-of-wedlock births on the existence of orphanages.

    Replies: @Menes

  88. @iffen
    @Rosie

    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.

    If it’s OK to tell Americans to pick up and move, why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    It's okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I'm okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.

    Replies: @Rosie

  89. @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    Look at the graphs for expenditures over time and then tell me that what you subsidize you get more of is wrong.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230339/

    As long as there's free stuff available, there will be eager takers. The country is becoming one huge army of takers who will keep voting to fleece the people that actually provide all the benefits.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Look at the graphs for expenditures over time and then tell me that what you subsidize you get more of is wrong.

    It looks as though AFDC expenditures have held steady while food stamp expenditures have gone up. How do we know that has anything to do with getting more of what you subsidize as opposed to more people needing food assistance because of increased low-skilled immigration and associated unemployment or some other factor?

    keep voting to fleece the people that actually provide all the benefits.

    This is a distinct argument, and it rests on the assumption that the haves are the solution rather than the problem. In many cases, that’s true of course. In some cases, it is not. We can argue about who should bear the tax burden without attacking the idea of social welfare as such.

  90. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    So Biden is now Literally Hitler? When did that happen?
     
    The one and only @A123 is a Jewish prankster. Many of the things he says are said for effect.

    He bothered me at first, but he grows on one. He has taught me that I am in Tehran, for example, which is valuable information, since the darned subway system here is hard to figure out until one realizes that one is not in Chicago or New York.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @A123

    VK,

    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?

    Let us examine the facts You have provided. You state
    — Your son’s military unit is targeted by Israeli forces.
    — The only units currently so targeted by Israeli forces are Iranian.

    Ergo, your son must be in the Iranian military or paramilirary.

    The facts you claim can lead to no other logical endpoint.
    ____

    If you retired from the same military your son saves in, you must also be Iraian. Tehran is admittedly a guess, you could be another part of Iran.

    It also explains your hatred of God and his Judeo-Christian values. The Covenant of Taqiyya requires you, as a Muslim, to lies to Infidels (Jews & Christians).

    Again simple logic reveals the truth.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @A123


    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?
     
    If you say so. I know nothing about you.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  91. @Jay Fink
    @dfordoom

    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don't receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    Another reason I don't like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn't exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn't exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don’t receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    Here again is a criticism of welfare that doesn’t really go to the heart of the issue. It is literally impossible to have the working poor have a quality of life “magnitudes higher” than welfare recipients unless you’re going to impose some sort of draconian minimum wage requirement. What you can do is incentivize work by gradually phasing out benefits as people earn more.

    Of course, the earned income tax credit is designed to provide a boost to the working poor. Maybe it should be higher.

    Another reason I don’t like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn’t exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn’t exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.

    The foil to Roatan Bill’s argument that you get more of what you subsidize. Bill’s argument misses the mark because it fails to take account of irrational factors like culture and morality. Yours misses the mark because you don’t even consider the possibility that less food would be produced in the absence of food stamp subsidies. Likewise with housing, which costs money to maintain in good repair.

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    It is if the father is unemployable and/or an abusive drunk.

  92. @anonymous
    I wonder what will happen over the next 20 years in America. I think two big picture trends are fairly predictable.

    1. Racial demographics change from 60% white to 50% white. Latinos go from 18% to 26%.
    2. Average economic growth over the next 20 year period is significantly lower than the past 20 year period.

    Any other well-supported predictions that are quantifiable? Will unmarried white women with college degrees have an even bigger say in elections? Just how much will evangelicals shrink? Will m4a likely pass?

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Wency

    I’m guessing the term “Evangelical” will fall into less use due to some of its unfavorable associations, just as the term “Fundamentalist” has fallen out of use, but whatever you choose to call them, theologically conservative Protestants are still by far the most resilient strand of Christianity. However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Wency


    However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.
     
    But isn't that just going to make the Evangelicals more of a marginalised minority? They'll be left without any allies and will therefore be much more vulnerable.

    Replies: @Wency

  93. @Rosie
    @iffen


    Kevin Williamson again?

    Do you WNs have a list of names?

    Okay, so he told hillbillies to throw their belongings in a U-Haul and drive to the land of milk and honey and jump out and start working at unskilled labor for $30 an hour. What’s the problem? Didn’t he also tell blacks in the slums of NYC to throw their best finery in a Gucci tote, take a subsidized commuter line to its terminus and jump out and start coding at $30 an hour? What’s the race problem? He gives even-handed advice.
     
    If it's OK to tell Americans to pick up and move, why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    Replies: @iffen

    why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    It’s okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I’m okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @iffen


    It’s okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I’m okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.
     
    You're missing the point. Why is it okay to ask hillbillies to leave the only life they've ever known?

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

  94. @Jay Fink
    @iffen

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general. Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Replies: @Catdog, @iffen, @dfordoom

    Complaining about Great Society is the conservative’s version of blaming the white man for all the black man’s problems. The daydream that black men were once all hard-working, God-fearing family men in nice checkered suits and hats until a Democrat snake introduced original sin in the shape of a welfare check has great appeal to a certain set.

    • Replies: @Jay Fink
    @Catdog

    If you look at the actual marriage statistics it shows the black family was largely intact before LBJ and his war on poverty. In 1960 61% of blacks were married. It fell dramatically post LBJ. Today only around a third of blacks are married.

  95. @dfordoom
    @Cloudbuster


    Gosh, there couldn’t possibly be any other reasons, such as they don’t think providing massive amounts of unearned income via a huge out-of-touch bureaucracy is the best way to help the poor. Nothing like assuming the worst possible motives of people that don’t agree with your solutions.
     
    I've never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor's own good.

    Replies: @iffen, @Mark G.

    I’ve never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.

    Is someone wanting to keep the money they earned engaged in screwing someone else or is the person who wants to forcibly take the money possibly the one who is doing the screwing here?

    I’ve come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn’t theirs. They are psychologically unable to admit to themselves that what they are advocating is stupid or evil. I will argue with them if there is possibly someone undecided in the vicinity who can hear the argument but won’t waste a second arguing with them if we are alone. It would be like telling a rabbit or a deer that they shouldn’t be eating the vegetables in your vegetable garden or telling someone holding a gun on you while asking for your wallet that they shouldn’t be doing that.

    For everyone who is not a socialist, I would advocate trying to keep them from getting control of the government. If they do get control, there are things you can do at a personal level. The socialist government in Sweden instituted high taxes on the rich but Sweden later had to reduce them again because rich people either left the country, engaged in tax evasion, or worked less in order to reduce income and put themselves in a lower tax bracket. Sometimes, though, this fails. If the socialist government persists in continuing its policies you end up with something like Zimbabwe or Venezuela where all the productive people have either fled the country or stopped working and you have starving poor people. I think someone who wants to prevent something like that by opposing socialism cares more about their fellow humans than the socialist leaders like Mugabe or Chavez do.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Mark G.


    I’ve come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn’t theirs.
     
    Sometimes it is okay to take something that isn't yours, no elaborate rationalizations needed.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Valjean

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

  96. @iffen
    @Rosie

    why is it not okay to tell immigrants to go back whence they came?

    It's okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I'm okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.

    Replies: @Rosie

    It’s okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I’m okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.

    You’re missing the point. Why is it okay to ask hillbillies to leave the only life they’ve ever known?

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    You’re missing the point.

    Apparently.

    It is okay to ask (force) illegal immigrants to leave because they do not have the same rights as citizens (or shouldn't have).

    I didn't say that it was okay or not okay, and as a matter of law hillbillies are not forced to move. It's a matter of economic reality. One could say that they are "forced" by economic forces beyond their control. If they wish to pursue economic opportunities not available in the hills then they must decide to leave, otherwise they can stay and make the best of it.

    , @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Most hillbillies *do* leave. There are a lot of ghost towns near me. Leaving the only life you've ever known is better than being a charity case. A lot of guys get up early every morning and drive an hour and a half into the city or suburbs for work so they can have some semblance of both worlds (the more grueling the drive to someplace with job opportunities, the poorer the area).

    You can't just make this area prosperous by wishing it so, and all the Appalachian development grant money in the world won't change that. That money is just a an elaborate payola system for liberal grifters who are experts in grant-applications and do stuff like run money-losing community art centers and job training centers as a front.

    As long as the economy runs on coal less and less, there is less and less reason to be out here. It's cruel to make promises of prosperity that will never arrive.

  97. @Rosie
    @iffen


    It’s okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I’m okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.
     
    You're missing the point. Why is it okay to ask hillbillies to leave the only life they've ever known?

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

    You’re missing the point.

    Apparently.

    It is okay to ask (force) illegal immigrants to leave because they do not have the same rights as citizens (or shouldn’t have).

    I didn’t say that it was okay or not okay, and as a matter of law hillbillies are not forced to move. It’s a matter of economic reality. One could say that they are “forced” by economic forces beyond their control. If they wish to pursue economic opportunities not available in the hills then they must decide to leave, otherwise they can stay and make the best of it.

  98. @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    I’ve never seen any evidence whatsoever that people who want to eliminate welfare have the slightest interest in helping the poor, although they will sometimes claim that their efforts to screw the poor are done for the poor’s own good.
     
    Is someone wanting to keep the money they earned engaged in screwing someone else or is the person who wants to forcibly take the money possibly the one who is doing the screwing here?

    I've come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn't theirs. They are psychologically unable to admit to themselves that what they are advocating is stupid or evil. I will argue with them if there is possibly someone undecided in the vicinity who can hear the argument but won't waste a second arguing with them if we are alone. It would be like telling a rabbit or a deer that they shouldn't be eating the vegetables in your vegetable garden or telling someone holding a gun on you while asking for your wallet that they shouldn't be doing that.

    For everyone who is not a socialist, I would advocate trying to keep them from getting control of the government. If they do get control, there are things you can do at a personal level. The socialist government in Sweden instituted high taxes on the rich but Sweden later had to reduce them again because rich people either left the country, engaged in tax evasion, or worked less in order to reduce income and put themselves in a lower tax bracket. Sometimes, though, this fails. If the socialist government persists in continuing its policies you end up with something like Zimbabwe or Venezuela where all the productive people have either fled the country or stopped working and you have starving poor people. I think someone who wants to prevent something like that by opposing socialism cares more about their fellow humans than the socialist leaders like Mugabe or Chavez do.

    Replies: @Rosie

    I’ve come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn’t theirs.

    Sometimes it is okay to take something that isn’t yours, no elaborate rationalizations needed.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Valjean

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn't an argument. A person stealing a loaf of bread to stave off starvation is a straw man in this era of confiscatory government.

    I believe in helping the poor, and I believe a certain amount of taxes, by one means or another, are necessary in a large nation. However, I don't believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.

    On another site, someone was advocating UBI, and what I said there is applicable to here:

    "It is a mistake to think of people as economic units that can be pacified by a monetary handout. The people who receive the handout and the people who give the handout always come to view each other in contempt when the handout doesn't result in the recipient obtaining independence.

    "People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says "You produce nothing of value. Here's some cash to pacify you."

    "American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households."

    People don't need handouts, they need jobs. People will generally rise to the occasion when it comes to putting food in their mouths, if they have to. But people are also often lazy and will take that free ride when available even if it is harmful to them mentally and spiritually in the long run. I know a *lot* of people like this. I've seen people become better people, more proud of themselves, when they are providing for themselves, and I've seen them fall back into dependency. It's like an addiction. I have feet in both Appalachia and the inner city. I've seen the enervation.

    I hire a lot of people from the impoverished classes. The work I give them for a fair wage is better than any government handout. Some of them make good use of that, others don't. Others will actively throw away every advantage they are given and piss away every bit of help that comes their way. I see many cases, especially out in Appalachia, where family and friends step up to help, and that, too, is better than any government check -- it strengthens family and community ties. Family is also best situated to practice "tough love." Families know, if anyone does, when they're throwing good money after bad.

    As for a social safety net, I think almost all administration should be at the local and county level, and private charity should be incentivized as much as possible. It should be targeted and largely temporary, except in the case of permanent disability. I feel our current disability system is actively gamed and corrupt -- I know people who've gamed it, or depended on it so long and made so many bad decisions that they made life choices that led to actual disability through obesity. I watched a good family friend destroy himself through government dependency and it wasn't any less heartbreaking than if he'd been a heroin addict. So I am skeptical that it will ever be done well, but I understand why a society wants one.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

  99. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The reason I ask is that I seem to see a growing number of Americans online that predict that other Americans will violently revolt.
     
    It would be interesting to know how many of them are Feds. It's possible that most of those predicting violent revolution are Feds.

    Some seem too crazy to be Feds, but on the other hand it's quite plausible that genuine crazies are exactly the people the Feds would recruit, or groom as agents provocateurs.

    You have to ask yourself whether the FBI (or similar nasty government agencies) would see it as being in their interests to encourage a half-assed bungled uprising so that they could cover themselves in glory by saving America from a fascist revolution. And have an excuse to lock up lots of people whom they intensely dislike.

    OK, so it's a conspiracy theory. But you have to admit that unlike most conspiracy theories it's actually plausible.

    Replies: @Justvisiting

    A Terence McKenna quote for today:

    “The only ones that are really good at assassinations and drug running conspiracies are governments.”

  100. @Rosie
    @Mark G.


    I’ve come to the conclusion that all the socialist arguments are elaborate rationalizations for why it is ok to take something that isn’t theirs.
     
    Sometimes it is okay to take something that isn't yours, no elaborate rationalizations needed.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Valjean

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn’t an argument. A person stealing a loaf of bread to stave off starvation is a straw man in this era of confiscatory government.

    I believe in helping the poor, and I believe a certain amount of taxes, by one means or another, are necessary in a large nation. However, I don’t believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.

    On another site, someone was advocating UBI, and what I said there is applicable to here:

    “It is a mistake to think of people as economic units that can be pacified by a monetary handout. The people who receive the handout and the people who give the handout always come to view each other in contempt when the handout doesn’t result in the recipient obtaining independence.

    “People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says “You produce nothing of value. Here’s some cash to pacify you.”

    “American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households.”

    People don’t need handouts, they need jobs. People will generally rise to the occasion when it comes to putting food in their mouths, if they have to. But people are also often lazy and will take that free ride when available even if it is harmful to them mentally and spiritually in the long run. I know a *lot* of people like this. I’ve seen people become better people, more proud of themselves, when they are providing for themselves, and I’ve seen them fall back into dependency. It’s like an addiction. I have feet in both Appalachia and the inner city. I’ve seen the enervation.

    I hire a lot of people from the impoverished classes. The work I give them for a fair wage is better than any government handout. Some of them make good use of that, others don’t. Others will actively throw away every advantage they are given and piss away every bit of help that comes their way. I see many cases, especially out in Appalachia, where family and friends step up to help, and that, too, is better than any government check — it strengthens family and community ties. Family is also best situated to practice “tough love.” Families know, if anyone does, when they’re throwing good money after bad.

    As for a social safety net, I think almost all administration should be at the local and county level, and private charity should be incentivized as much as possible. It should be targeted and largely temporary, except in the case of permanent disability. I feel our current disability system is actively gamed and corrupt — I know people who’ve gamed it, or depended on it so long and made so many bad decisions that they made life choices that led to actual disability through obesity. I watched a good family friend destroy himself through government dependency and it wasn’t any less heartbreaking than if he’d been a heroin addict. So I am skeptical that it will ever be done well, but I understand why a society wants one.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn’t an argument.
     
    But it certainly is an argument. The point is that there are some circumstances where taking something that is not yours is fully justified.

    The question is what are those circumstances? I assume that the rest of your lengthy post is a good-faith attempt at answering that question. I'll read and respond when I get a chance.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @dfordoom

    , @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    However, I don’t believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.
     
    I don't see why not. You seem to be presuming that the status quo, in terms of wealth inequality, is legitimate and defensible, failing to take into account that the elite classes have profited massively from selling the country's industrial base and technology to China. Those profits belong t the citizenry.

    “People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says “You produce nothing of value. Here’s some cash to pacify you.”
     
    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    “American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households.”
     
    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway. To ensure full employment, you'd have to repress automation. I suppose in theory you might try artificially pumping up artificial demand for crap nobody wants, but why? What dignity is there in selling people things they don't need?

    Marx was wrong about most things, but not everything. An inherent contradiction of capitalism is that producers have an incentive to reduce their own labor costs as much as possible. In so doing, they undermine the labor market along with aggregate demand, including demand for their own products. An enlightened elite of Henry Fords would build an economy where permanent wealth transfers wouldn't be necessary except in rare cases of true disability. But that is not the reality we face.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

  101. @Rosie
    @iffen


    It’s okay with me if they are not citizens, or if they were dependent children brought here by their parents and if this is the only life they have known. I’m okay with sending back dependent children and their parents apprehended today.
     
    You're missing the point. Why is it okay to ask hillbillies to leave the only life they've ever known?

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

    Most hillbillies *do* leave. There are a lot of ghost towns near me. Leaving the only life you’ve ever known is better than being a charity case. A lot of guys get up early every morning and drive an hour and a half into the city or suburbs for work so they can have some semblance of both worlds (the more grueling the drive to someplace with job opportunities, the poorer the area).

    You can’t just make this area prosperous by wishing it so, and all the Appalachian development grant money in the world won’t change that. That money is just a an elaborate payola system for liberal grifters who are experts in grant-applications and do stuff like run money-losing community art centers and job training centers as a front.

    As long as the economy runs on coal less and less, there is less and less reason to be out here. It’s cruel to make promises of prosperity that will never arrive.

  102. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn't an argument. A person stealing a loaf of bread to stave off starvation is a straw man in this era of confiscatory government.

    I believe in helping the poor, and I believe a certain amount of taxes, by one means or another, are necessary in a large nation. However, I don't believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.

    On another site, someone was advocating UBI, and what I said there is applicable to here:

    "It is a mistake to think of people as economic units that can be pacified by a monetary handout. The people who receive the handout and the people who give the handout always come to view each other in contempt when the handout doesn't result in the recipient obtaining independence.

    "People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says "You produce nothing of value. Here's some cash to pacify you."

    "American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households."

    People don't need handouts, they need jobs. People will generally rise to the occasion when it comes to putting food in their mouths, if they have to. But people are also often lazy and will take that free ride when available even if it is harmful to them mentally and spiritually in the long run. I know a *lot* of people like this. I've seen people become better people, more proud of themselves, when they are providing for themselves, and I've seen them fall back into dependency. It's like an addiction. I have feet in both Appalachia and the inner city. I've seen the enervation.

    I hire a lot of people from the impoverished classes. The work I give them for a fair wage is better than any government handout. Some of them make good use of that, others don't. Others will actively throw away every advantage they are given and piss away every bit of help that comes their way. I see many cases, especially out in Appalachia, where family and friends step up to help, and that, too, is better than any government check -- it strengthens family and community ties. Family is also best situated to practice "tough love." Families know, if anyone does, when they're throwing good money after bad.

    As for a social safety net, I think almost all administration should be at the local and county level, and private charity should be incentivized as much as possible. It should be targeted and largely temporary, except in the case of permanent disability. I feel our current disability system is actively gamed and corrupt -- I know people who've gamed it, or depended on it so long and made so many bad decisions that they made life choices that led to actual disability through obesity. I watched a good family friend destroy himself through government dependency and it wasn't any less heartbreaking than if he'd been a heroin addict. So I am skeptical that it will ever be done well, but I understand why a society wants one.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn’t an argument.

    But it certainly is an argument. The point is that there are some circumstances where taking something that is not yours is fully justified.

    The question is what are those circumstances? I assume that the rest of your lengthy post is a good-faith attempt at answering that question. I’ll read and respond when I get a chance.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    If we're going to get all theoretical here, I don't think stealing bread to feed your family is "fully justified." It's just excusable. I mean, you just took a loaf of bread out of someone else's mouth, or denied the baker the money he'd use to buy other necessities for his family. It is, however, excusable -- if you truly had no other resort, then you still did something wrong, and you owe the person from whom you stole a debt, but it would be wrong to heap additional punishment on top of the debt you owe. If I was the baker, a loaf's worth of labor on my behalf would be justified.

    If the person chooses to forgive that debt, that's a kindness, but not something which you are owed.

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these "loaf of bread to feed the family" types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don't mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Justvisiting

    , @dfordoom
    @Rosie

    One argument that has been advanced is that welfare programs are a way of buying social peace. They're a way of keeping social chaos at bay. I think there's something to the argument.

    And I think social peace is worth buying. However bad you think things are now they could be a whole lot worse. It's not worth risking a complete collapse of the social order, which is what you'd get if you eliminated welfare.

    People who are doing fine and who resent paying taxes to support welfare programs might want to consider that those taxes are a form of insurance premium. They're insurance against social collapse and if there's social collapse you won't be doing fine any more.

    A UBI can be considered to be another form of insurance against social collapse.

    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand). If you have a good job and you're financially secure maybe it's worth paying insurance to make sure that society continues to function because if society ceases to function you can kiss your good job and your financial security goodbye.

    Replies: @Rosie

  103. @Jay Fink
    @iffen

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general. Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Replies: @Catdog, @iffen, @dfordoom

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.

    • Replies: @A123
    @iffen



    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.
     
    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.
     
    You are commingling:

    -- Societal impact of policy (net across all cases), with
    -- Individual impact (in a single case)

    While individual experiences are important, unless you advocate extensive government intrusiveness and meddling at that individual level, discussions of policy need to look at the aggregate impact.

    The negative consequences of ill constructed government programs has been disastrous at the level of society and policy. These failures were accurately foreseen by a well known, rather liberal, Democrat.

    There is one unmistakable lesson in American history; a community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future - that community asks for and gets chaos.

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan
     
    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @iffen

  104. The corporations and the Rich get more government assistance than the poor.

    Elon Musk has made his ENTIRE FORTUNE with government grants.

    Corporate welfare is hardly ever mentioned because its heavily Jewish.

    Also, Hasidic Jews are notorious for welfare fraud.

    Your tax dollars aren’t supporting poor Americans at all.

    It subsidizes the Rich, the Jews and their wage slaves from South of the border.

    This poverty is a function of offshoring and insourcing of CHEAP LABOR.

    They do not pay enough to live so YOU GET TO PAY.

    SEE HOW CORRUPT THIS SYSTEM IS NOW?

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
  105. @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn’t an argument.
     
    But it certainly is an argument. The point is that there are some circumstances where taking something that is not yours is fully justified.

    The question is what are those circumstances? I assume that the rest of your lengthy post is a good-faith attempt at answering that question. I'll read and respond when I get a chance.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @dfordoom

    If we’re going to get all theoretical here, I don’t think stealing bread to feed your family is “fully justified.” It’s just excusable. I mean, you just took a loaf of bread out of someone else’s mouth, or denied the baker the money he’d use to buy other necessities for his family. It is, however, excusable — if you truly had no other resort, then you still did something wrong, and you owe the person from whom you stole a debt, but it would be wrong to heap additional punishment on top of the debt you owe. If I was the baker, a loaf’s worth of labor on my behalf would be justified.

    If the person chooses to forgive that debt, that’s a kindness, but not something which you are owed.

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don’t mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don’t mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.
     
    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive. We definitely should not decriminalize bread-stealing, precisely because we have a welfare system that legitimizes the system. Your theoretical Baker is fully entitled to be paid for his bread, and shoplifters can/should be prosecuted precisely because, with the food stamps the baker pays for with his taxes, there is no excuse.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    , @Justvisiting
    @Cloudbuster


    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.
     
    Actually, it is a recipe for "bread-selling" businesses to close their doors.

    The business may move to other jurisdictions if those jurisdictions choose to criminalize theft--otherwise the business owners will just move into a business where theft is not legalized.
  106. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn't an argument. A person stealing a loaf of bread to stave off starvation is a straw man in this era of confiscatory government.

    I believe in helping the poor, and I believe a certain amount of taxes, by one means or another, are necessary in a large nation. However, I don't believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.

    On another site, someone was advocating UBI, and what I said there is applicable to here:

    "It is a mistake to think of people as economic units that can be pacified by a monetary handout. The people who receive the handout and the people who give the handout always come to view each other in contempt when the handout doesn't result in the recipient obtaining independence.

    "People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says "You produce nothing of value. Here's some cash to pacify you."

    "American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households."

    People don't need handouts, they need jobs. People will generally rise to the occasion when it comes to putting food in their mouths, if they have to. But people are also often lazy and will take that free ride when available even if it is harmful to them mentally and spiritually in the long run. I know a *lot* of people like this. I've seen people become better people, more proud of themselves, when they are providing for themselves, and I've seen them fall back into dependency. It's like an addiction. I have feet in both Appalachia and the inner city. I've seen the enervation.

    I hire a lot of people from the impoverished classes. The work I give them for a fair wage is better than any government handout. Some of them make good use of that, others don't. Others will actively throw away every advantage they are given and piss away every bit of help that comes their way. I see many cases, especially out in Appalachia, where family and friends step up to help, and that, too, is better than any government check -- it strengthens family and community ties. Family is also best situated to practice "tough love." Families know, if anyone does, when they're throwing good money after bad.

    As for a social safety net, I think almost all administration should be at the local and county level, and private charity should be incentivized as much as possible. It should be targeted and largely temporary, except in the case of permanent disability. I feel our current disability system is actively gamed and corrupt -- I know people who've gamed it, or depended on it so long and made so many bad decisions that they made life choices that led to actual disability through obesity. I watched a good family friend destroy himself through government dependency and it wasn't any less heartbreaking than if he'd been a heroin addict. So I am skeptical that it will ever be done well, but I understand why a society wants one.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Rosie

    However, I don’t believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.

    I don’t see why not. You seem to be presuming that the status quo, in terms of wealth inequality, is legitimate and defensible, failing to take into account that the elite classes have profited massively from selling the country’s industrial base and technology to China. Those profits belong t the citizenry.

    “People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says “You produce nothing of value. Here’s some cash to pacify you.”

    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    “American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households.”

    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway. To ensure full employment, you’d have to repress automation. I suppose in theory you might try artificially pumping up artificial demand for crap nobody wants, but why? What dignity is there in selling people things they don’t need?

    Marx was wrong about most things, but not everything. An inherent contradiction of capitalism is that producers have an incentive to reduce their own labor costs as much as possible. In so doing, they undermine the labor market along with aggregate demand, including demand for their own products. An enlightened elite of Henry Fords would build an economy where permanent wealth transfers wouldn’t be necessary except in rare cases of true disability. But that is not the reality we face.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    You tell'em Rosie, or am I supposed to say, "You go, girl."

    , @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway.

    Arguments about public policy are not one time things we can never revisit. If we can discuss UBI, then we can discuss my solutions. Those battles can always be fought.

    Arguments that "those gains belong to the citizenry" suffer from the same problems as any other "social justice" argument. "The citizenry" is an abstract. Any particular individual may never have done anything to earn it. What the tech companies did was legal. If we want to stop it, we have to make it illegal and/or unprofitable in the ways I suggested and move forward.

    There is a reason we had a prohibition against ex post facto laws. Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution. Wealth transfers are like reparations. They're ex post facto remedies that penalize the innocent along with the guilty and reward the undeserving along with the deserving.

    "The sentiment that ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the United States, that few, if any, of the State constitutions have failed to proscribe them. The federal constitution indeed interdicts them in criminal cases only; but they are equally unjust in civil as in criminal cases, and the omission of a caution which would have been right, does not justify the doing what is wrong. Nor ought it to be presumed that the legislature meant to use a phrase in an unjustifiable sense, if by rules of construction it can be ever strained to what is just." — Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813

    Taking money away from everyone you think is "rich enough" makes no distinction between the innocent and the guilty. Many rich people never harmed poor people at all. Instead they provided jobs and opportunities for millions. A feature of social justice is that it always wants to punish people in the present for things they never did in the past and give rewards in the present to people who never suffered the injustice in the past.

    Massive wealth transfers have been hugely destructive wherever they've been tried. They're causing tremendous destruction in the US.

    Claims that all labor will soon be automated are overblown. There is a tremendous amount of human labor that still needs to be done. We simply offshore most of it -- massive Chinese factoties for Nike and Apple, Mexican shoe and guitar factories, etc. It will be centuries before the world of fully automated AI factories is a reality, and if there was an immigration moratorium, the currently declining native US population would be tracking pretty nicely with that diminishing need for labor.

    I don't know if you disagree with me about an immigration moratorium or not, but you can't seriously be interested in improving the lot of workers in this country if you don't address it.

    Replies: @Rosie

  107. @iffen
    @Bill

    higher quality

    Definition please.

    And remember, you can't just ignore most of the commenters here and compare what's left over with the NPR audience.

    Replies: @Bill

    You’re the one making the claim. You define it.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Bill

    You’re the one making the claim. You define it.

    I assumed that he was talking about numbers. NPR claims 20-30 million listeners. I don't believe even R. Unz claims that many readers for the UR. You introduced "quality". I assumed numbers. If you are not talking about numbers, define what you mean by "quality".

  108. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    If we're going to get all theoretical here, I don't think stealing bread to feed your family is "fully justified." It's just excusable. I mean, you just took a loaf of bread out of someone else's mouth, or denied the baker the money he'd use to buy other necessities for his family. It is, however, excusable -- if you truly had no other resort, then you still did something wrong, and you owe the person from whom you stole a debt, but it would be wrong to heap additional punishment on top of the debt you owe. If I was the baker, a loaf's worth of labor on my behalf would be justified.

    If the person chooses to forgive that debt, that's a kindness, but not something which you are owed.

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these "loaf of bread to feed the family" types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don't mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Justvisiting

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don’t mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.

    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive. We definitely should not decriminalize bread-stealing, precisely because we have a welfare system that legitimizes the system. Your theoretical Baker is fully entitled to be paid for his bread, and shoplifters can/should be prosecuted precisely because, with the food stamps the baker pays for with his taxes, there is no excuse.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive.

    How so? I've said multiple times that I don't object to a social safety net, and that people generally don't object to a certain amount of helping people in need.

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don't support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    That I think the current system is bad or that a particular solution isn't good doesn't mean I don't think we should have a system at all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund

  109. @iffen
    @Jay Fink

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.

    Replies: @A123

    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.

    You are commingling:

    — Societal impact of policy (net across all cases), with
    — Individual impact (in a single case)

    While individual experiences are important, unless you advocate extensive government intrusiveness and meddling at that individual level, discussions of policy need to look at the aggregate impact.

    The negative consequences of ill constructed government programs has been disastrous at the level of society and policy. These failures were accurately foreseen by a well known, rather liberal, Democrat.

    There is one unmistakable lesson in American history; a community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future – that community asks for and gets chaos.

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    PEACE 😇

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
    • Replies: @iffen
    @A123

    You are commingling:

    Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled, but I don't want anything other than my fork touching my sweet potato casserole.

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.

    Replies: @A123

  110. @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    However, I don’t believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.
     
    I don't see why not. You seem to be presuming that the status quo, in terms of wealth inequality, is legitimate and defensible, failing to take into account that the elite classes have profited massively from selling the country's industrial base and technology to China. Those profits belong t the citizenry.

    “People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says “You produce nothing of value. Here’s some cash to pacify you.”
     
    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    “American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households.”
     
    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway. To ensure full employment, you'd have to repress automation. I suppose in theory you might try artificially pumping up artificial demand for crap nobody wants, but why? What dignity is there in selling people things they don't need?

    Marx was wrong about most things, but not everything. An inherent contradiction of capitalism is that producers have an incentive to reduce their own labor costs as much as possible. In so doing, they undermine the labor market along with aggregate demand, including demand for their own products. An enlightened elite of Henry Fords would build an economy where permanent wealth transfers wouldn't be necessary except in rare cases of true disability. But that is not the reality we face.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    You tell’em Rosie, or am I supposed to say, “You go, girl.”

  111. @A123
    @iffen



    Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.
     
    Kind of depends upon the merits of the said father.
     
    You are commingling:

    -- Societal impact of policy (net across all cases), with
    -- Individual impact (in a single case)

    While individual experiences are important, unless you advocate extensive government intrusiveness and meddling at that individual level, discussions of policy need to look at the aggregate impact.

    The negative consequences of ill constructed government programs has been disastrous at the level of society and policy. These failures were accurately foreseen by a well known, rather liberal, Democrat.

    There is one unmistakable lesson in American history; a community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future - that community asks for and gets chaos.

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan
     
    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @iffen

    You are commingling:

    Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled, but I don’t want anything other than my fork touching my sweet potato casserole.

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.

    • Replies: @A123
    @iffen


    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.
     
    Your ideal is admirable.

    Please explain how government will administer your idealism.

    -- Are you arguing that "society" should have "absolute control for absolute protection"?
    -- Are you really for total eradication of all parental authority in every circumstance?
    -- Why not let CPS confiscate all children from all parents, for the "greater good" of eliminating 100% of the threat that one child might become victim to one psychopath parent?
    -- Do you believe we need Child Protective Protective Services [CPPS] to protect children from psychopathic CPS employees?
    -- Do we need Child Protective Protective Protective Services [CPPPS] to 100% eliminate the chance of a single error by CPPS?
    -- Do we need a CPPPPS to protect from problems with CPPPS?

    Again, your ideal is laudible... The problem is government actioning any idealism to yield 100% enforcement of outcome.

    PEACE 😇

  112. @iffen
    @A123

    You are commingling:

    Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled, but I don't want anything other than my fork touching my sweet potato casserole.

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.

    Replies: @A123

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.

    Your ideal is admirable.

    Please explain how government will administer your idealism.

    — Are you arguing that “society” should have “absolute control for absolute protection”?
    — Are you really for total eradication of all parental authority in every circumstance?
    — Why not let CPS confiscate all children from all parents, for the “greater good” of eliminating 100% of the threat that one child might become victim to one psychopath parent?
    — Do you believe we need Child Protective Protective Services [CPPS] to protect children from psychopathic CPS employees?
    — Do we need Child Protective Protective Protective Services [CPPPS] to 100% eliminate the chance of a single error by CPPS?
    — Do we need a CPPPPS to protect from problems with CPPPS?

    Again, your ideal is laudible… The problem is government actioning any idealism to yield 100% enforcement of outcome.

    PEACE 😇

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
    • LOL: iffen
  113. @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    However, I don’t believe massive wealth transfers are the best way.
     
    I don't see why not. You seem to be presuming that the status quo, in terms of wealth inequality, is legitimate and defensible, failing to take into account that the elite classes have profited massively from selling the country's industrial base and technology to China. Those profits belong t the citizenry.

    “People need dignity, and a UBI can never provide that. Instead it says “You produce nothing of value. Here’s some cash to pacify you.”
     
    Giving people their due does not violate their dignity.

    “American workers need an immigration moratorium and tariffs and other penalties on off-shoring of labor to raise the demand for and the price of American labor. It needs policies that encourage stay-at-home mothers, traditional two parent families and single wage-earner households.”
     
    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway. To ensure full employment, you'd have to repress automation. I suppose in theory you might try artificially pumping up artificial demand for crap nobody wants, but why? What dignity is there in selling people things they don't need?

    Marx was wrong about most things, but not everything. An inherent contradiction of capitalism is that producers have an incentive to reduce their own labor costs as much as possible. In so doing, they undermine the labor market along with aggregate demand, including demand for their own products. An enlightened elite of Henry Fords would build an economy where permanent wealth transfers wouldn't be necessary except in rare cases of true disability. But that is not the reality we face.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster

    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway.

    Arguments about public policy are not one time things we can never revisit. If we can discuss UBI, then we can discuss my solutions. Those battles can always be fought.

    Arguments that “those gains belong to the citizenry” suffer from the same problems as any other “social justice” argument. “The citizenry” is an abstract. Any particular individual may never have done anything to earn it. What the tech companies did was legal. If we want to stop it, we have to make it illegal and/or unprofitable in the ways I suggested and move forward.

    There is a reason we had a prohibition against ex post facto laws. Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution. Wealth transfers are like reparations. They’re ex post facto remedies that penalize the innocent along with the guilty and reward the undeserving along with the deserving.

    “The sentiment that ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the United States, that few, if any, of the State constitutions have failed to proscribe them. The federal constitution indeed interdicts them in criminal cases only; but they are equally unjust in civil as in criminal cases, and the omission of a caution which would have been right, does not justify the doing what is wrong. Nor ought it to be presumed that the legislature meant to use a phrase in an unjustifiable sense, if by rules of construction it can be ever strained to what is just.” — Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813

    Taking money away from everyone you think is “rich enough” makes no distinction between the innocent and the guilty. Many rich people never harmed poor people at all. Instead they provided jobs and opportunities for millions. A feature of social justice is that it always wants to punish people in the present for things they never did in the past and give rewards in the present to people who never suffered the injustice in the past.

    Massive wealth transfers have been hugely destructive wherever they’ve been tried. They’re causing tremendous destruction in the US.

    Claims that all labor will soon be automated are overblown. There is a tremendous amount of human labor that still needs to be done. We simply offshore most of it — massive Chinese factoties for Nike and Apple, Mexican shoe and guitar factories, etc. It will be centuries before the world of fully automated AI factories is a reality, and if there was an immigration moratorium, the currently declining native US population would be tracking pretty nicely with that diminishing need for labor.

    I don’t know if you disagree with me about an immigration moratorium or not, but you can’t seriously be interested in improving the lot of workers in this country if you don’t address it.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    I don’t know if you disagree with me about an immigration moratorium or not, but you can’t seriously be interested in improving the lot of workers in this country if you don’t address it.
     
    I certainly do. I agree with everything you say about tariffs and immigration, but they are still beside the point that, in time, there will not be enough work to keep people employed all year round. That is a reality you need to face. At the very least, you need to acknowledge that this is a possibility and prepare to set your ideological commitments aside. Moreover, even now, people are suffering from the effects of these decisions. That we might reverse course does nothing to help them now. We are talking about real people here.


    Arguments that “those gains belong to the citizenry” suffer from the same problems as any other “social justice” argument. “The citizenry” is an abstract. Any particular individual may never have done anything to earn it.
     
    Here again you falsely claim, like the plutocrats, that citizens have no property right in their nations' inherited wealth. Citizens don't need to do anything to "earn" their rights as citizens.

    Taking money away from everyone you think is “rich enough” makes no distinction between the innocent and the guilty. Many rich people never harmed poor people at all. Instead they provided jobs and opportunities for millions. A feature of social justice is that it always wants to punish people in the present for things they never did in the past and give rewards in the present to people who never suffered the injustice in the past.
     
    How is the White working-class not suffering from the injustices of globalization right now as we speak? It is clearly a continuing harm.

    “The sentiment that ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the United States, that few, if any, of the State constitutions have failed to proscribe them.
     
    This analogy is totally inapt. First of all, we're not talking about criminally punishing anyone. We are talking about the question of how to distribute the economic gains from globalization. This is a debate that we have always been told would happen. The bean counters told us that the question of distribution is one of policy to be sorted out by politicians. Of course, now nobody wants to talk about it, with you taking this absolutist position to a new extreme by comparing the question to ex post facto criminal punishment.

    Moreover, the prohibition on ex post facto laws is based on the idea that people are entitled to notice that their conduct is prescribed beforehand. I don't care about notice for traitors. Traitors know they are engaging in treason. They do it anyway. My concern is for the wellbeing of the White working-class they have brought to ruin, in technical compliance with the letter of the law or not.

    Finally, you are not even correct that the elites enjoy the cover of law for their wrongdoings. They never had a legitimate democratic mandate for their actions, and indeed, globalization has been accomplished as much by flatly refusing to enforce the law, seek redress for trade violations, etc., at the behest of their corporate donors.
  114. @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don’t mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.
     
    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive. We definitely should not decriminalize bread-stealing, precisely because we have a welfare system that legitimizes the system. Your theoretical Baker is fully entitled to be paid for his bread, and shoplifters can/should be prosecuted precisely because, with the food stamps the baker pays for with his taxes, there is no excuse.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive.

    How so? I’ve said multiple times that I don’t object to a social safety net, and that people generally don’t object to a certain amount of helping people in need.

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    That I think the current system is bad or that a particular solution isn’t good doesn’t mean I don’t think we should have a system at all.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.
     
    That it is indiscriminate is precisely it's greatest merit.

    White people will not have kids if neither partner has a steady job, or fail0that, a regular UBI check. Other races will. The gig economy will have a disastroys and massively disproportionate demographic impact on White people, possibly the final nail in the coffin.
    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Cloudbuster

    All your points are good, including this one:


    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.
     
    You are already aware that the summer's riots have turned me against UBI, but is there not merit to the concept? One wants the layabout poor to become the working poor (and, hopefully, eventually, not to be poor at all). Conceptually, UBI reverses the present system's disincentives for the layabout poor to start work.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

  115. Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled

    But have you tried corn and mashed potatoes all mixed up? Yum!

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.

    Let’s just throw those poor kids right under the trolley, says A123, for the good of society.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    It is obvious that the people devising these scenarios have never tried to push a fat man.

    , @A123
    @Rosie


    Let’s just throw those poor kids right under the trolley, says A123, for the good of society.
     
    Absurd. All Wheels should be banned, thus 100% preventing the horror of trolleys. No one can be killed by trolley if government abolishes all forms of mechanized transport.

    100% Perfection -- A Government Utopia
     
    No more skateboard riding punks.

    PEACE 😇
     
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sg-hKu0-5Ds/ThS1sta1o8I/AAAAAAAAAiI/N9rqkN4pNwI/s1600/Bioshock+2+-+Rapture.png
  116. @Bill
    @iffen

    You're the one making the claim. You define it.

    Replies: @iffen

    You’re the one making the claim. You define it.

    I assumed that he was talking about numbers. NPR claims 20-30 million listeners. I don’t believe even R. Unz claims that many readers for the UR. You introduced “quality”. I assumed numbers. If you are not talking about numbers, define what you mean by “quality”.

  117. @Jay Fink
    @dfordoom

    I hate welfare because it is unfair to members of the working poor who don't receive welfare. The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    Another reason I don't like welfare is it causes inflation. For example if food stamps didn't exist in the U.S food prices would have to go down as too much food would sit on the shelves unless prices went down. Same thing with housing. If Section 8 didn't exist there would be too much empty housing unless prices went down.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

    The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.

    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that’s not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they’re not only doing jobs that are worthless, they’re doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.

    I’d love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    One could quibble with the word “right-wing,” but otherwise the following seems right:


    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that’s not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they’re not only doing jobs that are worthless, they’re doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.
     
    See, that's the problem, isn't it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.

    It seems a reasonable demand under the circumstance.

    It does no good to pretend that we still lived in the wide-open, honest, industrious days of Horatio Alger. We don't. Bootstrap exhortations are of little use to an ordinary working citizen whose cost of housing, among other costs, has been artificially driven through the proverbial roof—especially if work skills he might develop are liable at any time to be offshored. The culture either sneers at him for lacking a college degree or financially bleeds him to pay off the nearly worthless degree he has (the debt for which he was lured into by pious liars when too young to appreciate the magnitude of the fraud).

    No, maybe UBI as such does not quite work, but something is needed. I'm with @Rosie. Libertarian bootstrapism is a theoretical solution that evades the real problem that exists on the ground.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

    , @Kratoklastes
    @dfordoom


    I’d love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.
     
    The last three (personal trainer, naturopath and forex trader) stand or fall based on whether the market values their output. They 'deserve' whatever they get. Grievance Studies professors are like priests - they exploit gullible children - so they can suck eggs.

    However contrast the three private sector examples with literally any bureaucrat. (And define 'bureaucrat' broadly: any activity where more than 70% of compensation is paid for out of taxes. Raytheon employees, for example, are bureaucrats in my taxonomy).

    1 in 6 people in the paid labour force, work for government. They get paid, on average, 20% more than private sector workers; their other employment conditions are superior to private sector conditions, meaning that the overall labour cost per public sector employee is roughly 75% more than for the average productive-sector employee.

    Bear in mind: nobody gets to decide "Fuck you - I'll get my shit sorted without you parasites". You don't get to choose to consume their product - which is always of lower quality and more expensive than a private-sector alternative. You don't get to decide that the price is too damn high. You don't get to demand a refund when their shitful output fails in some critical feature.

    Until we wise up and do away with coercive government entirely, one of the few functions I absolutely support is income transfers to the bottom quintile, funded by progressive taxation of income. Not food stamps or tied grants; just straight-up cash transfers to the bottom decile.

    Those are justified both theoretically and morally; prior to wasteful and bloated administrative/bureaucratic costs, such transfers unambiguously increase social welfare because they transfer dollars from low marginal-utility holders, to high marginal-utility recipients.

    (The administrative wedge pretty much eliminates plausible estimates of the social welfare gain... mostly because non-cash transfers reach well above the bottom quintile - for example the public funding of education for children of people right up to the top decile - and administering entitlements by conditions other than household income requires a gigantic army of bureaucrats: glorified clerks that have salaries at the 70th percentile).

    $300k a year for a judge? Nope. $200k for a general? Nup. None of those roles require skills as rare as is made out: they get a 'pageantry premium' for being part of the government's set piece theatrics. A good half of their salaries and other benefits, are basically welfare by another name.

    Ask yourself how much the government workforce costs the economy. It's an order of magnitude more than what people ordinarily think of when they think about 'welfare'; and a very large proportion of the government wage bill (including he wage bill at government contractors) is outright waste and graft.
  118. @Rosie

    Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled
     
    But have you tried corn and mashed potatoes all mixed up? Yum!

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.
     
    Let's just throw those poor kids right under the trolley, says A123, for the good of society.

    https://youtu.be/bOpf6KcWYyw

    Replies: @iffen, @A123

    It is obvious that the people devising these scenarios have never tried to push a fat man.

  119. @Rosie

    Well, I do like my peas and mashed potatoes commingled
     
    But have you tried corn and mashed potatoes all mixed up? Yum!

    It is not good for society to let psychopaths torture children.
     
    Let's just throw those poor kids right under the trolley, says A123, for the good of society.

    https://youtu.be/bOpf6KcWYyw

    Replies: @iffen, @A123

    Let’s just throw those poor kids right under the trolley, says A123, for the good of society.

    Absurd. All Wheels should be banned, thus 100% preventing the horror of trolleys. No one can be killed by trolley if government abolishes all forms of mechanized transport.

    100% Perfection — A Government Utopia

    No more skateboard riding punks.

    PEACE 😇
     

  120. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Those battles have been lost, and they would only be temporary solutions anyway.

    Arguments about public policy are not one time things we can never revisit. If we can discuss UBI, then we can discuss my solutions. Those battles can always be fought.

    Arguments that "those gains belong to the citizenry" suffer from the same problems as any other "social justice" argument. "The citizenry" is an abstract. Any particular individual may never have done anything to earn it. What the tech companies did was legal. If we want to stop it, we have to make it illegal and/or unprofitable in the ways I suggested and move forward.

    There is a reason we had a prohibition against ex post facto laws. Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution. Wealth transfers are like reparations. They're ex post facto remedies that penalize the innocent along with the guilty and reward the undeserving along with the deserving.

    "The sentiment that ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the United States, that few, if any, of the State constitutions have failed to proscribe them. The federal constitution indeed interdicts them in criminal cases only; but they are equally unjust in civil as in criminal cases, and the omission of a caution which would have been right, does not justify the doing what is wrong. Nor ought it to be presumed that the legislature meant to use a phrase in an unjustifiable sense, if by rules of construction it can be ever strained to what is just." — Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813

    Taking money away from everyone you think is "rich enough" makes no distinction between the innocent and the guilty. Many rich people never harmed poor people at all. Instead they provided jobs and opportunities for millions. A feature of social justice is that it always wants to punish people in the present for things they never did in the past and give rewards in the present to people who never suffered the injustice in the past.

    Massive wealth transfers have been hugely destructive wherever they've been tried. They're causing tremendous destruction in the US.

    Claims that all labor will soon be automated are overblown. There is a tremendous amount of human labor that still needs to be done. We simply offshore most of it -- massive Chinese factoties for Nike and Apple, Mexican shoe and guitar factories, etc. It will be centuries before the world of fully automated AI factories is a reality, and if there was an immigration moratorium, the currently declining native US population would be tracking pretty nicely with that diminishing need for labor.

    I don't know if you disagree with me about an immigration moratorium or not, but you can't seriously be interested in improving the lot of workers in this country if you don't address it.

    Replies: @Rosie

    I don’t know if you disagree with me about an immigration moratorium or not, but you can’t seriously be interested in improving the lot of workers in this country if you don’t address it.

    I certainly do. I agree with everything you say about tariffs and immigration, but they are still beside the point that, in time, there will not be enough work to keep people employed all year round. That is a reality you need to face. At the very least, you need to acknowledge that this is a possibility and prepare to set your ideological commitments aside. Moreover, even now, people are suffering from the effects of these decisions. That we might reverse course does nothing to help them now. We are talking about real people here.

    Arguments that “those gains belong to the citizenry” suffer from the same problems as any other “social justice” argument. “The citizenry” is an abstract. Any particular individual may never have done anything to earn it.

    Here again you falsely claim, like the plutocrats, that citizens have no property right in their nations’ inherited wealth. Citizens don’t need to do anything to “earn” their rights as citizens.

    Taking money away from everyone you think is “rich enough” makes no distinction between the innocent and the guilty. Many rich people never harmed poor people at all. Instead they provided jobs and opportunities for millions. A feature of social justice is that it always wants to punish people in the present for things they never did in the past and give rewards in the present to people who never suffered the injustice in the past.

    How is the White working-class not suffering from the injustices of globalization right now as we speak? It is clearly a continuing harm.

    “The sentiment that ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the United States, that few, if any, of the State constitutions have failed to proscribe them.

    This analogy is totally inapt. First of all, we’re not talking about criminally punishing anyone. We are talking about the question of how to distribute the economic gains from globalization. This is a debate that we have always been told would happen. The bean counters told us that the question of distribution is one of policy to be sorted out by politicians. Of course, now nobody wants to talk about it, with you taking this absolutist position to a new extreme by comparing the question to ex post facto criminal punishment.

    Moreover, the prohibition on ex post facto laws is based on the idea that people are entitled to notice that their conduct is prescribed beforehand. I don’t care about notice for traitors. Traitors know they are engaging in treason. They do it anyway. My concern is for the wellbeing of the White working-class they have brought to ruin, in technical compliance with the letter of the law or not.

    Finally, you are not even correct that the elites enjoy the cover of law for their wrongdoings. They never had a legitimate democratic mandate for their actions, and indeed, globalization has been accomplished as much by flatly refusing to enforce the law, seek redress for trade violations, etc., at the behest of their corporate donors.

  121. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive.

    How so? I've said multiple times that I don't object to a social safety net, and that people generally don't object to a certain amount of helping people in need.

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don't support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    That I think the current system is bad or that a particular solution isn't good doesn't mean I don't think we should have a system at all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    That it is indiscriminate is precisely it’s greatest merit.

    White people will not have kids if neither partner has a steady job, or fail0that, a regular UBI check. Other races will. The gig economy will have a disastroys and massively disproportionate demographic impact on White people, possibly the final nail in the coffin.

  122. @A123
    @V. K. Ovelund

    VK,

    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?

    Let us examine the facts You have provided. You state
    -- Your son's military unit is targeted by Israeli forces.
    -- The only units currently so targeted by Israeli forces are Iranian.

    Ergo, your son must be in the Iranian military or paramilirary.

    The facts you claim can lead to no other logical endpoint.
    ____

    If you retired from the same military your son saves in, you must also be Iraian. Tehran is admittedly a guess, you could be another part of Iran.

    It also explains your hatred of God and his Judeo-Christian values. The Covenant of Taqiyya requires you, as a Muslim, to lies to Infidels (Jews & Christians).

    Again simple logic reveals the truth.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?

    If you say so. I know nothing about you.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund



    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?
     
    If you say so. I know nothing about you.
     
    I assumed A123 was a Christian Zionist.
  123. @Jay Fink
    @iffen

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general. Welfare replaced the father which is not good for the children or society.

    Replies: @Catdog, @iffen, @dfordoom

    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general.

    The decline of the traditional family among blacks and downscale whites was certainly a tragedy. But it was a tragedy caused by a number of different factors – drugs, the decline of Christianity, the collapse of the manufacturing sector, consumerism, the promotion of liberal individualism, the removal of the stigma of illegitimacy, these were all factors. The biggest single factor was undoubtedly drugs.

    Seeing the Great Society programs as the sole cause of the problem is like blaming the Great Depression on the existence of soup kitchens. Or blaming out-of-wedlock births on the existence of orphanages.

    • Replies: @Menes
    @dfordoom


    The decline of the traditional family among blacks and downscale whites was certainly a tragedy. But it was a tragedy caused by a number of different factors – drugs, the decline of Christianity, the collapse of the manufacturing sector, consumerism, the promotion of liberal individualism, the removal of the stigma of illegitimacy, these were all factors. The biggest single factor was undoubtedly drugs.
     
    You neglect to mention a major reason, perhaps the biggest reason, for single motherhood among both blacks and whites:

    https://ifstudies.org/blog/family-breakdown-and-americas-welfare-system

    In the words of Harvard’s Paul Peterson, “some programs actively discouraged marriage,” because “welfare assistance went to mothers so long as no male was boarding in the household… Marriage to an employed male, even one earning the minimum wage, placed at risk a mother’s economic well-being.” Infamous “man in the house” rules meant that welfare workers would randomly appear in homes to check and see if the mother was accurately reporting her family-status......“the government paid mothers to keep fathers out of the home—and paid them well.”

    In today’s America, four-in-10 families with children receive support from at least one means-tested transfer program. One study found that almost a third of Americans said they personally know someone who chose not to marry due to the fear of losing a benefit.
     
  124. @animalogic
    @RoatanBill

    An interesting question -- who is the greater enemy? The poor impulse control dark people or the cunning as shit-house rats police, always about their Lords' work?
    The easy answer is --it's both.... but....???

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    The greater enemy is the gov’t that creates the problem with the dregs of the society by supporting them via looting the productive people.

  125. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    Your conception of a public good that justifies taxation is too restrictive.

    How so? I've said multiple times that I don't object to a social safety net, and that people generally don't object to a certain amount of helping people in need.

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don't support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    That I think the current system is bad or that a particular solution isn't good doesn't mean I don't think we should have a system at all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @V. K. Ovelund

    All your points are good, including this one:

    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.

    You are already aware that the summer’s riots have turned me against UBI, but is there not merit to the concept? One wants the layabout poor to become the working poor (and, hopefully, eventually, not to be poor at all). Conceptually, UBI reverses the present system’s disincentives for the layabout poor to start work.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I tink that concept relies on a type of human that doesn't exist in sufficient numbers.

  126. @Wency
    @anonymous

    I'm guessing the term "Evangelical" will fall into less use due to some of its unfavorable associations, just as the term "Fundamentalist" has fallen out of use, but whatever you choose to call them, theologically conservative Protestants are still by far the most resilient strand of Christianity. However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.

    But isn’t that just going to make the Evangelicals more of a marginalised minority? They’ll be left without any allies and will therefore be much more vulnerable.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity. Politically speaking, it would be better for conservative Christians if they all apostatized and went atheist. The Mainline message is "The Bible doesn't say we can't condone gay marriage -- that's purely their HATE speaking!" Their mere existence weakens the notion that Christian social conservatism is a First Amendment, freedom of religion issue. And at every opportunity they ally with the secular/non-Christian left against conservative Christians, while at no point do they ever ally with conservative Christians on anything.

    Roman Catholicism is another matter though, and the fact that it's an ancient, international organization that, at least officially, is even more socially conservative than Evangelicalism is probably a good thing for Evangelicalism, giving cover to it, so long as Rome remains socially conservative.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don't know precisely how vicious it will be. A lot probably depends on the degree to which the West remains a sclerotic, decadent, stagnant mess in which nothing -- good or evil -- can really be accomplished politically.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

  127. @Catdog
    @Jay Fink

    Complaining about Great Society is the conservative's version of blaming the white man for all the black man's problems. The daydream that black men were once all hard-working, God-fearing family men in nice checkered suits and hats until a Democrat snake introduced original sin in the shape of a welfare check has great appeal to a certain set.

    Replies: @Jay Fink

    If you look at the actual marriage statistics it shows the black family was largely intact before LBJ and his war on poverty. In 1960 61% of blacks were married. It fell dramatically post LBJ. Today only around a third of blacks are married.

  128. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Cloudbuster

    All your points are good, including this one:


    But our current system is inefficient, indiscriminate and wasteful. I certainly don’t support replacing it with a system that is even *more* indiscriminate and wasteful, like UBI.
     
    You are already aware that the summer's riots have turned me against UBI, but is there not merit to the concept? One wants the layabout poor to become the working poor (and, hopefully, eventually, not to be poor at all). Conceptually, UBI reverses the present system's disincentives for the layabout poor to start work.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    I tink that concept relies on a type of human that doesn’t exist in sufficient numbers.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  129. @dfordoom
    @Jay Fink


    The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.
     
    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that's not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they're not only doing jobs that are worthless, they're doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.

    I'd love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Kratoklastes

    One could quibble with the word “right-wing,” but otherwise the following seems right:

    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that’s not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they’re not only doing jobs that are worthless, they’re doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.

    See, that’s the problem, isn’t it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.

    It seems a reasonable demand under the circumstance.

    It does no good to pretend that we still lived in the wide-open, honest, industrious days of Horatio Alger. We don’t. Bootstrap exhortations are of little use to an ordinary working citizen whose cost of housing, among other costs, has been artificially driven through the proverbial roof—especially if work skills he might develop are liable at any time to be offshored. The culture either sneers at him for lacking a college degree or financially bleeds him to pay off the nearly worthless degree he has (the debt for which he was lured into by pious liars when too young to appreciate the magnitude of the fraud).

    No, maybe UBI as such does not quite work, but something is needed. I’m with . Libertarian bootstrapism is a theoretical solution that evades the real problem that exists on the ground.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @V. K. Ovelund


    See, that’s the problem, isn’t it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.
     
    The fact that a person collects a paycheck in no way demonstrates that their work is of any social value whatsoever. It just means that they make more money for their employer than they cost.

    Are telemarketers providing a valuable service by calling people in the middle of dinner trying to sell them magazines or whatever? Or how about the guy who shows up at your door wanting to demonstrate a $5,000 vacuum cleaner?
    , @Almost Missouri
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside
     
    Sorry but I thought you were some kind of university professor. S0 l0ng as what a professor teaches is true, it is not grift. Only you can comment on the truthfulness of your professions, but let us not succumb to dull material determinist theories of value. Besides that truth is a real thing in itself, imparting true knowledge has real economic/material value.

    Sailer likes to say that Claude Shannon found a "trillion dollar bill" by applying Boolean logic to electricity and creating Information Theory, and I agree with that metaphor, more or less. Yet Shannon's monumental contribution to truth and value pales next to earlier giants such as Newton and Leibniz inventing calculus, opening quadrilllion dollar prospects.

    Or maybe you were a history professor. That's cool. So long as one future policy-making student learned, say, never start a land war in Asia, your career paid for itself many times over.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  130. @A123
    @res


    The pessimism of white men with degrees (second chart) is striking.
     
    Trump finally got some restrictions on H1B visas, such as sharply increasing their cost, despite Deep State resistance. If Führer Biden steals the White House, with the help of GOP(e) predators like Romney, they will take away the tiny gains that were made.

    The only possible hope is resistance against Führer Biden's ascendancy.

    #StopTheSteal

    PEACE 😇

    https://twitter.com/MarkFinchem/status/1339248281117806592?s=20

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @Dr. Charles Fhandrich, @dfordoom, @Corvinus

    The Mark Finchem post is Fake News.

    https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/dec/15/how-biden-managed-win-far-more-votes-2020-obama-di

    The explanation lies in record high turnout and the growing number of votes in urban centers since 2008. “Voter turnout in 2020 was relatively higher in large battleground states with large urban areas,” said DePaul University political scientist Wayne Steger. “Turnout in states won by Biden was 43% greater in 2020 than in 2008.

    The impact on Biden’s vote total was particularly strong in reliable Democratic strongholds. In Los Angeles County alone, Biden picked up nearly 1 million votes more than Obama did in 2008. In King County, Wash., Biden did 360,000 votes better. Even in Cook County, Ill., surrounding Obama’s hometown of Chicago, Biden bested Obama’s tally by more than 100,000 votes.

    “It has become easier for Democrats to achieve a majority of the vote with a steadily smaller share of counties,” said University of Denver political scientist Seth Masket.

  131. @Rosie
    @Cloudbuster


    A fictional character in an overwrought melodrama isn’t an argument.
     
    But it certainly is an argument. The point is that there are some circumstances where taking something that is not yours is fully justified.

    The question is what are those circumstances? I assume that the rest of your lengthy post is a good-faith attempt at answering that question. I'll read and respond when I get a chance.

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @dfordoom

    One argument that has been advanced is that welfare programs are a way of buying social peace. They’re a way of keeping social chaos at bay. I think there’s something to the argument.

    And I think social peace is worth buying. However bad you think things are now they could be a whole lot worse. It’s not worth risking a complete collapse of the social order, which is what you’d get if you eliminated welfare.

    People who are doing fine and who resent paying taxes to support welfare programs might want to consider that those taxes are a form of insurance premium. They’re insurance against social collapse and if there’s social collapse you won’t be doing fine any more.

    A UBI can be considered to be another form of insurance against social collapse.

    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand). If you have a good job and you’re financially secure maybe it’s worth paying insurance to make sure that society continues to function because if society ceases to function you can kiss your good job and your financial security goodbye.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand).
     
    Indeed. If you don't tax the wealthy for transfer payments, what happens to all that money? In theory, it trickles down to regular people through investment and and job creation, but is that true? Warren Buffet doesn't think so.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/warren-buffett-on-the-failure-of-trickle-down-economics.html

    Replies: @Adam Smith

  132. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    One could quibble with the word “right-wing,” but otherwise the following seems right:


    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that’s not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they’re not only doing jobs that are worthless, they’re doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.
     
    See, that's the problem, isn't it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.

    It seems a reasonable demand under the circumstance.

    It does no good to pretend that we still lived in the wide-open, honest, industrious days of Horatio Alger. We don't. Bootstrap exhortations are of little use to an ordinary working citizen whose cost of housing, among other costs, has been artificially driven through the proverbial roof—especially if work skills he might develop are liable at any time to be offshored. The culture either sneers at him for lacking a college degree or financially bleeds him to pay off the nearly worthless degree he has (the debt for which he was lured into by pious liars when too young to appreciate the magnitude of the fraud).

    No, maybe UBI as such does not quite work, but something is needed. I'm with @Rosie. Libertarian bootstrapism is a theoretical solution that evades the real problem that exists on the ground.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

    See, that’s the problem, isn’t it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.

    The fact that a person collects a paycheck in no way demonstrates that their work is of any social value whatsoever. It just means that they make more money for their employer than they cost.

    Are telemarketers providing a valuable service by calling people in the middle of dinner trying to sell them magazines or whatever? Or how about the guy who shows up at your door wanting to demonstrate a $5,000 vacuum cleaner?

  133. @dfordoom
    @Rosie

    One argument that has been advanced is that welfare programs are a way of buying social peace. They're a way of keeping social chaos at bay. I think there's something to the argument.

    And I think social peace is worth buying. However bad you think things are now they could be a whole lot worse. It's not worth risking a complete collapse of the social order, which is what you'd get if you eliminated welfare.

    People who are doing fine and who resent paying taxes to support welfare programs might want to consider that those taxes are a form of insurance premium. They're insurance against social collapse and if there's social collapse you won't be doing fine any more.

    A UBI can be considered to be another form of insurance against social collapse.

    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand). If you have a good job and you're financially secure maybe it's worth paying insurance to make sure that society continues to function because if society ceases to function you can kiss your good job and your financial security goodbye.

    Replies: @Rosie

    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand).

    Indeed. If you don’t tax the wealthy for transfer payments, what happens to all that money? In theory, it trickles down to regular people through investment and and job creation, but is that true? Warren Buffet doesn’t think so.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/warren-buffett-on-the-failure-of-trickle-down-economics.html

    • Replies: @Adam Smith
    @Rosie

    https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/411/962/027.jpg

    https://i.imgflip.com/2synyb.jpg

    Replies: @A123

  134. @DanHessinMD
    Sorry, for the off-topic post, but AE, you promised around six months ago to do a post on COVID and seasonality and that never happened. Now seasonality is more clear than ever before.

    I know I sound like Rain Man, but here I go again on humidity --

    In February and March of 2020, as I read all I could about respiratory infections and watched where COVID-19 was having its worst impact, I realized that the dry indoor air of winter makes viral respiratory infections much worse (this is not the only factor, but it is a very big one). The data have born this out.

    The mechanisms are simple:
    (1) Mucociliary clearance, the mechanism by which foreign particles are carried out of the lungs, functions poorly in very dry air as mucus dries out.
    (2) Dry air can lead to damage of surfaces of the throat and lungs (in the same way that dry air gives you cracked lips). This makes you vulnerable to inflammation and infections at the site of the injury. The virus can enter through such fissures.

    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.

    Since nobody will listen to me, here is leading COVID-19 expert Prof. Akiko Iwasaki of the Iwasaki virology lab at Yale Medical school and her team speaking:

    For those who like to read scientific papers, a 2020 review of respiratory virus seasonality with some 130 citations explains things well (figure 4 says it all):
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    And for the lay person:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/winter-covid-19-humidity/

    The effects of humidity are dramatic. Florida and Texas have been almost completely open while New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan have been largely locked down, and yet those lockdown states have had much worse disease and death than those humid states. Humidity is the difference because indoor air is generally temperature controlled everywhere.

    A few hundred thousand lives will be saved this winter if this becomes widely known.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Chrisnonymous, @Audacious Epigone

    Do you have any prescription for use of the hunidifier? Is there anything people can measure in their bodies to know if their environmental humidity is adequate?

  135. @V. K. Ovelund
    @A123


    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?
     
    If you say so. I know nothing about you.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I am Christian. Why do you keep lying about me?

    If you say so. I know nothing about you.

    I assumed A123 was a Christian Zionist.

  136. @Rosie
    @Almost Missouri


    And lo and behold, as the subsidies diminished, so did the behavior those subsidies paid for.
     
    Fair enough. Mission accomplished. I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about. We can have a safety net and fairness to taxpayers at the same time.

    Putting teen moms on the street isn't necessary after all.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

    I suppose then that the welfare alarmists have nothing more to complain about.

    The Obama administration quietly undid the mainspring of welfare reform.

    Nevertheless, I largely agree with your comment below.

  137. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    One could quibble with the word “right-wing,” but otherwise the following seems right:


    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that’s not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they’re not only doing jobs that are worthless, they’re doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.
     
    See, that's the problem, isn't it? In the U.S. at any rate, one can hardly avoid the impression that a large and growing fraction of the national wealth is shaved away by grifters. The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside to make room for grifters that are less white than I.

    So ordinary citizens want their cut of the grift.

    It seems a reasonable demand under the circumstance.

    It does no good to pretend that we still lived in the wide-open, honest, industrious days of Horatio Alger. We don't. Bootstrap exhortations are of little use to an ordinary working citizen whose cost of housing, among other costs, has been artificially driven through the proverbial roof—especially if work skills he might develop are liable at any time to be offshored. The culture either sneers at him for lacking a college degree or financially bleeds him to pay off the nearly worthless degree he has (the debt for which he was lured into by pious liars when too young to appreciate the magnitude of the fraud).

    No, maybe UBI as such does not quite work, but something is needed. I'm with @Rosie. Libertarian bootstrapism is a theoretical solution that evades the real problem that exists on the ground.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Almost Missouri

    The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside

    Sorry but I thought you were some kind of university professor. S0 l0ng as what a professor teaches is true, it is not grift. Only you can comment on the truthfulness of your professions, but let us not succumb to dull material determinist theories of value. Besides that truth is a real thing in itself, imparting true knowledge has real economic/material value.

    Sailer likes to say that Claude Shannon found a “trillion dollar bill” by applying Boolean logic to electricity and creating Information Theory, and I agree with that metaphor, more or less. Yet Shannon’s monumental contribution to truth and value pales next to earlier giants such as Newton and Leibniz inventing calculus, opening quadrilllion dollar prospects.

    Or maybe you were a history professor. That’s cool. So long as one future policy-making student learned, say, never start a land war in Asia, your career paid for itself many times over.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Almost Missouri


    Sorry but I thought you were some kind of university professor.
     
    I was a nontenured instructor of freshman-, sophomore- and junior-level courses in a STEM department at one of the United States' hundred or so tier-one public research universities.

    S0 l0ng as what a professor teaches is true, it is not grift.
     
    Your kind sentiment is appreciated more than you realize.

    Unfortunately, people hate university professors for a reason. I didn't think that pleading my own innocence would succeed. The fact is, I was overpaid for pleasant duties which required a certain level of competence but which were little supervised and bore little liability. Unless very ill, I always had to be present in the lecture hall at lecture time (I missed a total of three lectures in ten years), but otherwise I was largely left free to set my own schedule. It was a plum job.

    Some other faculty vainly refused to recognize the tremendous privilege such a position conferred. I hope that I never did that, but I never argued with the other faculty about it, either. For what it's worth, I consistently requested the largest lecture halls with the greatest numbers of seats to drive down per-student costs, and I spent extra hours whenever required in the evenings to make time to meet with students one-on-one, because I knew that I was a well-paid antagonist in a wasteful, abusive system, and I wanted to do what I could (without risking the anger of colleagues) to minimize the abuse. I needed to be able to look at myself in the mirror.

    I justified my grift by the (true) observation that, had I withdrawn, my place would only be filled by someone more abusive and more avaricious, but it's not much of a justification, really.

    I did maintain industry contacts to help to place some of my better students in well-paid employment with favorable working conditions upon graduation. I do not think that that was abusive. Like about half my department's faculty, I also composed fresh homework assignments each semester (this took about five hours per week per course) rather than assigning problems out of the textbook, for the solutions to most textbook problems these days can be found online. I used to let students use old textbook editions, which took a little extra work for me to manage reading assignments in two editions in parallel, but which saved the students collectively a ton of money. On the other hand, I occasionally took on courses I was not fully qualified to teach, which was indeed abusive, rather than risking letting my department hire someone else who might displace me; so I'll let you decide.

    After ten years of doing it, I don't think that the job of teaching college students in the United States in the early 21st century is an honorable calling. This is my opinion. I was never proud of myself for doing it, but I am certain that my loathesome dean—who purged me, in a furious fit of political correctness, against the unanimous advice of my fellow faculty, without ever even having met me, due to some stupid spat the university's president was having with the university's board of trustees at the time—I am certain that the dean willfully increased the abuse of students when she replaced me. All I can say in my own defense meanwhile is that I had minimized the systemic abuse where I could. Nevertheless, I remained a well-paid participant in and beneficiary of an abusive system.


    Only you can comment on the truthfulness of your professions, but let us not succumb to dull material determinist theories of value. Besides that truth is a real thing in itself, imparting true knowledge has real economic/material value.
     
    U.S. universities no longer impart much truth, unfortunately.
  138. @Charles Pewitt
    TAX THE LIVING CRUD OUT OF BILLIONAIRES NOW!

    Bezos looks normal compared to the other two billionaire slobs!

    https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1339309210820108291?s=20

    Replies: @Menes

    TAX THE LIVING CRUD OUT OF BILLIONAIRES NOW!

    If there was common sense in D.C. instead of the Republican/Reaganite Trickle Down Economics (TDE) bullshit then all those who made fortunes in this time of crisis would have to pay a 100% Windfall Tax.

    Trump is actually a better man than the heartless GOP idealogues like Mitch McConnell who worship at the altar of Reaganism.

    • Replies: @Menes
    @Menes

    Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has a similar idea:

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/18/tulsi-gabbard-redirect-profits-from-corporations-allowed-to-remain-open-to-small-businesses-forced-to-close/#disqus_thread


    A plan by Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) would redirect excess profits from multinational corporations allowed to remain open during the Chinese coronavirus crisis to small businesses that have been forced to close due to economic shutdowns.

    Gabbard released legislation on Friday, known as the Pandemic Crisis Excess Profits Tax, to ensure that corporations such as Amazon, Facebook, Walmart, and Google are not profiting off economic shutdowns that have helped clear the market of their competition.

    The legislation — first adopted during World War I and World War II to prevent corporations from profiting off the wars — would add a 95 percent tax on corporations’ excess profits calculated by subtracting their 2020 gross earnings from their average gross earnings from 2016 to 2019, before the coronavirus.

     

    A few days ago Gabbard introduced a bill that would ban transgender athletes from women's sports. Again, common sense which is so lacking in both parties.

    The Democrats need to get rid of Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein et al and embrace fresh young bloods like Gabbard and Yang who are far more intelligent, free-thinking, compassionate, rational and pragmatic. America needs such politicians on both sides of the aisle.
  139. @dfordoom
    @Jay Fink


    I am in the minority of conservatives then as I know poverty has existed long before LBJ. What the Great Society programs did however was destroy the traditional family among blacks and the lower class in general.
     
    The decline of the traditional family among blacks and downscale whites was certainly a tragedy. But it was a tragedy caused by a number of different factors - drugs, the decline of Christianity, the collapse of the manufacturing sector, consumerism, the promotion of liberal individualism, the removal of the stigma of illegitimacy, these were all factors. The biggest single factor was undoubtedly drugs.

    Seeing the Great Society programs as the sole cause of the problem is like blaming the Great Depression on the existence of soup kitchens. Or blaming out-of-wedlock births on the existence of orphanages.

    Replies: @Menes

    The decline of the traditional family among blacks and downscale whites was certainly a tragedy. But it was a tragedy caused by a number of different factors – drugs, the decline of Christianity, the collapse of the manufacturing sector, consumerism, the promotion of liberal individualism, the removal of the stigma of illegitimacy, these were all factors. The biggest single factor was undoubtedly drugs.

    You neglect to mention a major reason, perhaps the biggest reason, for single motherhood among both blacks and whites:

    https://ifstudies.org/blog/family-breakdown-and-americas-welfare-system

    In the words of Harvard’s Paul Peterson, “some programs actively discouraged marriage,” because “welfare assistance went to mothers so long as no male was boarding in the household… Marriage to an employed male, even one earning the minimum wage, placed at risk a mother’s economic well-being.” Infamous “man in the house” rules meant that welfare workers would randomly appear in homes to check and see if the mother was accurately reporting her family-status……“the government paid mothers to keep fathers out of the home—and paid them well.”

    In today’s America, four-in-10 families with children receive support from at least one means-tested transfer program. One study found that almost a third of Americans said they personally know someone who chose not to marry due to the fear of losing a benefit.

    • Thanks: Jay Fink
  140. @Menes
    @Charles Pewitt


    TAX THE LIVING CRUD OUT OF BILLIONAIRES NOW!

     

    If there was common sense in D.C. instead of the Republican/Reaganite Trickle Down Economics (TDE) bullshit then all those who made fortunes in this time of crisis would have to pay a 100% Windfall Tax.

    Trump is actually a better man than the heartless GOP idealogues like Mitch McConnell who worship at the altar of Reaganism.

    Replies: @Menes

    Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has a similar idea:

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/18/tulsi-gabbard-redirect-profits-from-corporations-allowed-to-remain-open-to-small-businesses-forced-to-close/#disqus_thread

    A plan by Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) would redirect excess profits from multinational corporations allowed to remain open during the Chinese coronavirus crisis to small businesses that have been forced to close due to economic shutdowns.

    Gabbard released legislation on Friday, known as the Pandemic Crisis Excess Profits Tax, to ensure that corporations such as Amazon, Facebook, Walmart, and Google are not profiting off economic shutdowns that have helped clear the market of their competition.

    The legislation — first adopted during World War I and World War II to prevent corporations from profiting off the wars — would add a 95 percent tax on corporations’ excess profits calculated by subtracting their 2020 gross earnings from their average gross earnings from 2016 to 2019, before the coronavirus.

    A few days ago Gabbard introduced a bill that would ban transgender athletes from women’s sports. Again, common sense which is so lacking in both parties.

    The Democrats need to get rid of Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein et al and embrace fresh young bloods like Gabbard and Yang who are far more intelligent, free-thinking, compassionate, rational and pragmatic. America needs such politicians on both sides of the aisle.

  141. @Rosie
    @Rosie

    Why White working-class women shouldn't bother with marriage, welfare or not.

    https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/04/white-working-class-women-should-stay-single-mothers-argue-the-authors-of-marriage-markets-how-inequality-is-remaking-the-american-family.html

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    That’s got to be one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. “See the results of policies that are destructive to the family? Obviously the only thing to do is to double down on policies that are destructive to the family!”

  142. The COVID pandemic could have been an occasion for coming together—but the Democrats, the MSM, and the left were so obsessed with taking Trump down that they immediately tried to exploit it as a wedge issue.

    One of the problems with having a lap-dog press is that it incentivizes the politicization of everything, because the left knows it will never be called out for shamelessly doing so—in fact, what happens is the Republican response is immediately denounced as having dragged politics into the debate.

    The second Trump instituted travel restrictions, Democrats “pounced”—most notably, Biden.

    And let’s not forget what Democrats were solely focused on when the pandemic struck: the impeachment of a US President over entirely trumped-up charges.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @edkpyros

    They weren't even trumped up charges. They impeached him for asking Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden while the US intelligence agencies were clandestinely... investigating Hunter Biden.

  143. @Almost Missouri
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The kind of worker you describe is a grifter, too, as was I the past ten years before I got pushed aside
     
    Sorry but I thought you were some kind of university professor. S0 l0ng as what a professor teaches is true, it is not grift. Only you can comment on the truthfulness of your professions, but let us not succumb to dull material determinist theories of value. Besides that truth is a real thing in itself, imparting true knowledge has real economic/material value.

    Sailer likes to say that Claude Shannon found a "trillion dollar bill" by applying Boolean logic to electricity and creating Information Theory, and I agree with that metaphor, more or less. Yet Shannon's monumental contribution to truth and value pales next to earlier giants such as Newton and Leibniz inventing calculus, opening quadrilllion dollar prospects.

    Or maybe you were a history professor. That's cool. So long as one future policy-making student learned, say, never start a land war in Asia, your career paid for itself many times over.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Sorry but I thought you were some kind of university professor.

    I was a nontenured instructor of freshman-, sophomore- and junior-level courses in a STEM department at one of the United States’ hundred or so tier-one public research universities.

    S0 l0ng as what a professor teaches is true, it is not grift.

    Your kind sentiment is appreciated more than you realize.

    Unfortunately, people hate university professors for a reason. I didn’t think that pleading my own innocence would succeed. The fact is, I was overpaid for pleasant duties which required a certain level of competence but which were little supervised and bore little liability. Unless very ill, I always had to be present in the lecture hall at lecture time (I missed a total of three lectures in ten years), but otherwise I was largely left free to set my own schedule. It was a plum job.

    [MORE]

    Some other faculty vainly refused to recognize the tremendous privilege such a position conferred. I hope that I never did that, but I never argued with the other faculty about it, either. For what it’s worth, I consistently requested the largest lecture halls with the greatest numbers of seats to drive down per-student costs, and I spent extra hours whenever required in the evenings to make time to meet with students one-on-one, because I knew that I was a well-paid antagonist in a wasteful, abusive system, and I wanted to do what I could (without risking the anger of colleagues) to minimize the abuse. I needed to be able to look at myself in the mirror.

    I justified my grift by the (true) observation that, had I withdrawn, my place would only be filled by someone more abusive and more avaricious, but it’s not much of a justification, really.

    I did maintain industry contacts to help to place some of my better students in well-paid employment with favorable working conditions upon graduation. I do not think that that was abusive. Like about half my department’s faculty, I also composed fresh homework assignments each semester (this took about five hours per week per course) rather than assigning problems out of the textbook, for the solutions to most textbook problems these days can be found online. I used to let students use old textbook editions, which took a little extra work for me to manage reading assignments in two editions in parallel, but which saved the students collectively a ton of money. On the other hand, I occasionally took on courses I was not fully qualified to teach, which was indeed abusive, rather than risking letting my department hire someone else who might displace me; so I’ll let you decide.

    After ten years of doing it, I don’t think that the job of teaching college students in the United States in the early 21st century is an honorable calling. This is my opinion. I was never proud of myself for doing it, but I am certain that my loathesome dean—who purged me, in a furious fit of political correctness, against the unanimous advice of my fellow faculty, without ever even having met me, due to some stupid spat the university’s president was having with the university’s board of trustees at the time—I am certain that the dean willfully increased the abuse of students when she replaced me. All I can say in my own defense meanwhile is that I had minimized the systemic abuse where I could. Nevertheless, I remained a well-paid participant in and beneficiary of an abusive system.

    Only you can comment on the truthfulness of your professions, but let us not succumb to dull material determinist theories of value. Besides that truth is a real thing in itself, imparting true knowledge has real economic/material value.

    U.S. universities no longer impart much truth, unfortunately.

  144. @Wency
    @Daniel H

    I don't fully agree with you, but there certainly is some of this.

    By a happenstance of life, I'm acquainted with a white woman in my county in the South who lives in a trailer and has 4 children by 4 men. Tattoos, obese, looks 10 years older than she is. She is, of course, extremely pro-Trump. But her Trump support would appear to be a pure accident of birth -- you could easily go to the other, black side of town, find her doppelganger living her exact same lifestyle, with her same basic look but darker skin, and find that woman is extremely pro-Biden.

    Replies: @Ryan Andrews

    By a happenstance of life, I’m acquainted with a white woman in my county in the South who lives in a trailer and has 4 children by 4 men. Tattoos, obese, looks 10 years older than she is. She is, of course, extremely pro-Trump. But her Trump support would appear to be a pure accident of birth — you could easily go to the other, black side of town, find her doppelganger living her exact same lifestyle, with her same basic look but darker skin, and find that woman is extremely pro-Biden.

    Sure, but politics is deeper than the happenstance of life. In terms of where they are, in their immediate material life circumstances, the White woman you describe and her hypothetical Black doppelganger may indeed be very similarly situated. But the “accident of birth” is each case is not their races, but their similar life circumstances, those circumstances have only to do with what they live right here, right now. While the race to which each of them belong is much greater than their individual circumstances. This is exactly why race is much superior as a source of identity than class or even culture.

  145. @Dr. Doom
    Hate your enemies. Turn to the Dark Enlightenment.

    You will see the power of Darkness. The light is false, a trick.

    Like moths drawn to a flame, they will be consumed by fire.

    Do not subsidize your hated foes. Boycott all big corporations.

    Bankrupt them and they are powerless cowards.

    Trade local with only your own kind. Do not assist charities.

    Fight smarter. Do not trust the badges. They are hired for being corrupt and DUMB.

    Form into small leaderless groups. Self defense and mutual aid.

    Pool your resources. Barter and do not pay any tax you can avoid.

    Do not trust aliens. Especially the tribe. The FBI and CIA will seek you.

    Let them eat static. Do not comply. Resist. Sabotage. Do not assist.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes

    Sabotage

    Especially this.

    Small acts of sabotage add up, especially in networked systems where they ramify if they trip a key node.

    The future will feature a lot of SolarWinds-type destabilisation of fragile systems that have been systematically under-resourced for decades.

    I’ve been saying this for almost 20 years: the C-suite views sysadmin and back-end as cost, and the result is that the guy keeping the server patched is on $80k and working 60 hours a week… meanwhile the 50-something CTO 0n $250k + stock, just got an interesting e-mail with a PDF attachment that he is about to open.

    On SolarWinds: nation-state adversary my arse – far more likely to have been a rebooted LulzSec-style “Ohai. Fuck you. kthxbai!” op. Cybersecurity clowns have literally the worst datasec: they are all hat and no cattle.

    The world needed to be shown that shitty overpriced datasec ramifies, and that talentless fuckwits in “cybersecurity” roles are a waste of funds… because the plodders in HR apply an ideological overlay as a first-filter, which means they’re starting outside the top talent quintile.

    Palantir; Equifax; SolarWinds; it’s just getting interesting.

    Meanwhile, Microsoft took 17 years to patch SigRed… it’s almost as if leaving server exploits open for over a decade might have some relevance to recent events. Naaaah

  146. @dfordoom
    @Jay Fink


    The quality of life of the lowest income person not collecting welfare should be magnitudes higher than the welfare class, otherwise we make a mockery of work.
     
    That would make sense if right-wing fantasies about work were true. If people with jobs really were all doing something useful to society and something that gave their lives meaning and dignity. Maybe that was the case long ago but but that's not the case today. A large proportion of people who work are doing bullshit jobs. In many cases they're not only doing jobs that are worthless, they're doing jobs that are actually harmful to society.

    I'd love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Kratoklastes

    I’d love to see people on welfare having a quality of life and a standard of living magnitudes higher than a professor of gender studies or a personal trainer or a naturopath or a foreign exchange trader.

    The last three (personal trainer, naturopath and forex trader) stand or fall based on whether the market values their output. They ‘deserve’ whatever they get. Grievance Studies professors are like priests – they exploit gullible children – so they can suck eggs.

    However contrast the three private sector examples with literally any bureaucrat. (And define ‘bureaucrat‘ broadly: any activity where more than 70% of compensation is paid for out of taxes. Raytheon employees, for example, are bureaucrats in my taxonomy).

    1 in 6 people in the paid labour force, work for government. They get paid, on average, 20% more than private sector workers; their other employment conditions are superior to private sector conditions, meaning that the overall labour cost per public sector employee is roughly 75% more than for the average productive-sector employee.

    Bear in mind: nobody gets to decide “Fuck you – I’ll get my shit sorted without you parasites“. You don’t get to choose to consume their product – which is always of lower quality and more expensive than a private-sector alternative. You don’t get to decide that the price is too damn high. You don’t get to demand a refund when their shitful output fails in some critical feature.

    Until we wise up and do away with coercive government entirely, one of the few functions I absolutely support is income transfers to the bottom quintile, funded by progressive taxation of income. Not food stamps or tied grants; just straight-up cash transfers to the bottom decile.

    Those are justified both theoretically and morally; prior to wasteful and bloated administrative/bureaucratic costs, such transfers unambiguously increase social welfare because they transfer dollars from low marginal-utility holders, to high marginal-utility recipients.

    (The administrative wedge pretty much eliminates plausible estimates of the social welfare gain… mostly because non-cash transfers reach well above the bottom quintile – for example the public funding of education for children of people right up to the top decile – and administering entitlements by conditions other than household income requires a gigantic army of bureaucrats: glorified clerks that have salaries at the 70th percentile).

    $300k a year for a judge? Nope. $200k for a general? Nup. None of those roles require skills as rare as is made out: they get a ‘pageantry premium’ for being part of the government’s set piece theatrics. A good half of their salaries and other benefits, are basically welfare by another name.

    Ask yourself how much the government workforce costs the economy. It’s an order of magnitude more than what people ordinarily think of when they think about ‘welfare’; and a very large proportion of the government wage bill (including he wage bill at government contractors) is outright waste and graft.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  147. @anon
    @Almost Missouri

    This is increasingly openly stated by the Left

    Yessir!

    https://www.amazon.com/Defense-Looting-Riotous-History-Uncivil/dp/1645036693

    Replies: @radicalcenter

    Someone will eventually post Osterweil‘s home address and others will interpret her book as consent to her home being looted. An alarming prospect.

  148. @Cloudbuster
    @Rosie

    If we're going to get all theoretical here, I don't think stealing bread to feed your family is "fully justified." It's just excusable. I mean, you just took a loaf of bread out of someone else's mouth, or denied the baker the money he'd use to buy other necessities for his family. It is, however, excusable -- if you truly had no other resort, then you still did something wrong, and you owe the person from whom you stole a debt, but it would be wrong to heap additional punishment on top of the debt you owe. If I was the baker, a loaf's worth of labor on my behalf would be justified.

    If the person chooses to forgive that debt, that's a kindness, but not something which you are owed.

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these "loaf of bread to feed the family" types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    We have to be responsible for the actions we take and for when we deprive other people of their property.

    In the larger case of a government, if government is going to tax us, then the government has an obligation to use that money for things from which we all benefit. Other than a few wacky anarchists, nobody is much upset that people have to pay taxes to get the roads fixed. Most people don't mind a certain amount of helping people in need, but people are rightly more upset that we are taxed to provide massive bailouts to rich banking institutions, or that we pour money into a welfare system that is merely self-perpetuating.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Justvisiting

    Both Seattle and LA are actually trying to implement the decriminalization of what they see as these “loaf of bread to feed the family” types of crimes and I never thought I would actually see it. It is a recipe for societal chaos.

    Actually, it is a recipe for “bread-selling” businesses to close their doors.

    The business may move to other jurisdictions if those jurisdictions choose to criminalize theft–otherwise the business owners will just move into a business where theft is not legalized.

  149. @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    So you can defend welfare without relying on bleeding heart arguments. You can appeal to self-interest (something that even libertarians can understand).
     
    Indeed. If you don't tax the wealthy for transfer payments, what happens to all that money? In theory, it trickles down to regular people through investment and and job creation, but is that true? Warren Buffet doesn't think so.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/warren-buffett-on-the-failure-of-trickle-down-economics.html

    Replies: @Adam Smith

    • Replies: @A123
    @Adam Smith

    Unsurprisingly, the worst tax cheats are all affiliated with SJW Globalist DNC.

    PEACE 😇

     
    https://thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Sharpton-soros1.jpg

     
    https://patpgmr.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/grinchandtaxes.jpg

  150. @Adam Smith
    @Rosie

    https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/411/962/027.jpg

    https://i.imgflip.com/2synyb.jpg

    Replies: @A123

    Unsurprisingly, the worst tax cheats are all affiliated with SJW Globalist DNC.

    PEACE 😇

     

     

  151. @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Who are these less fortunate individuals? Could they be the people on welfare for years? Could they be the families that are on welfare for several generations? Could it be the baby factories that pop out a new generation of dolts that keep the prison system profitable?
     
    Precisely my point. If this is what you think of the poor, then you are a red. You are also increasingly out of touch.

    The truly needy should be looked after by their families or the bogus house of worship of their persuasion.
     
    Tried and failed. This didn't work even when the population was overwhelmingly Christian, precisely because it is much less painful to blame the victim than open your own wallet.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of,

     

    I'm still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Rattus Norwegius

    “I’m still waiting for that bumper crop of Swedish babies that should be coming along real soon now.”
    Swedish/Nordic policy might positivly impact fertility slightly. Across Scandinavia this idea is accepted as fact. Expecting that such policies will provide a large boost is expecting too much. We may experience an increase of around 0,1-0,3 TFR compared to without the same policies. I think we agree that culture is the main determinant of fertility rates.

  152. A question for AE (or anyone else who cares to chime in). Let’s assume that political dissolution happens. How many successor states do you expect to end up with?

    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans? How long before the neoliberal and progressive wings of the Democrats are tearing each other’s throats out?

    Should the Evangelicals get their own country? What about the libertarians?

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans?
     
    For the most part, about as well as modest, ordinary, decent people usually get along when they're minding their own business. (Undoubtedly, one could produce a rightward counterexample of failure to mind business—though, if I may anticipate, such an example might prove to be outdated—but the degree is in any case greater by an order of magnitude on the left. Administrative busibodyism exists everywhere but is not a peculiarly distinguishing characteristic of today's American right.)

    As after the Great Depression and in today's post-Soviet Russia, memories of bad times shared should persist 50 years or so, with salutary effects.

    I hasten to add that I have not converted to AE's separationist program. If separation occurs, it occurs. I am content to take it as it come; but if it come, the MAGA/GOP(e) would hardly sink it.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @dfordoom

    I don't claim to know. The least creative and so most likely successor countries will be groups of states. Some counties in current states may join new countries comprised of other states. Using current governmental boundaries will be the simplest logistically, so that's my bet.

    Regarding new countries being at each other's throats, the US has a neighbor to the north that has been politically at odds with us at various points in our respective histories. Have we ever been at Canada's throat (in the last two centuries, anyway)?

    Regarding the federal government's potential military response to secession, it's worth noting that the mere news of a serious attempt at separation being made will send the already weak dollar hurtling towards the ground (if a broken dollar isn't the impetus of separation in the first place, which I tend to think it will be). That alone will significantly hamper the ability of DC to keep things together.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  153. @dfordoom
    A question for AE (or anyone else who cares to chime in). Let's assume that political dissolution happens. How many successor states do you expect to end up with?

    I can't see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans? How long before the neoliberal and progressive wings of the Democrats are tearing each other's throats out?

    Should the Evangelicals get their own country? What about the libertarians?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Audacious Epigone

    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans?

    For the most part, about as well as modest, ordinary, decent people usually get along when they’re minding their own business. (Undoubtedly, one could produce a rightward counterexample of failure to mind business—though, if I may anticipate, such an example might prove to be outdated—but the degree is in any case greater by an order of magnitude on the left. Administrative busibodyism exists everywhere but is not a peculiarly distinguishing characteristic of today’s American right.)

    As after the Great Depression and in today’s post-Soviet Russia, memories of bad times shared should persist 50 years or so, with salutary effects.

    I hasten to add that I have not converted to AE’s separationist program. If separation occurs, it occurs. I am content to take it as it come; but if it come, the MAGA/GOP(e) would hardly sink it.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund



    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans?
     
    For the most part, about as well as modest, ordinary, decent people usually get along when they’re minding their own business.
     
    You think GOP(e) Republicans are modest, ordinary, decent people? They're the ones who have enthusiastically screwed the very people who have now become MAGA hat wearers. They'd screw those people with even greater zeal if they had the chance.
  154. @dfordoom
    @Wency


    However much Evangelicalism declines, Mainline Protestantism and Catholicism (excluding effects of immigration) will continue to decline far faster.
     
    But isn't that just going to make the Evangelicals more of a marginalised minority? They'll be left without any allies and will therefore be much more vulnerable.

    Replies: @Wency

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity. Politically speaking, it would be better for conservative Christians if they all apostatized and went atheist. The Mainline message is “The Bible doesn’t say we can’t condone gay marriage — that’s purely their HATE speaking!” Their mere existence weakens the notion that Christian social conservatism is a First Amendment, freedom of religion issue. And at every opportunity they ally with the secular/non-Christian left against conservative Christians, while at no point do they ever ally with conservative Christians on anything.

    Roman Catholicism is another matter though, and the fact that it’s an ancient, international organization that, at least officially, is even more socially conservative than Evangelicalism is probably a good thing for Evangelicalism, giving cover to it, so long as Rome remains socially conservative.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don’t know precisely how vicious it will be. A lot probably depends on the degree to which the West remains a sclerotic, decadent, stagnant mess in which nothing — good or evil — can really be accomplished politically.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Wency


    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity.
     
    I agree.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don’t know precisely how vicious it will be.
     
    Again I agree.

    The problem is that Christianity has often been a persecuting religion itself. If Evangelicals ever gained a significant degree of political power would they become persecutors again? Sadly I think the answer is yes, many of them would.

    So one big problem that Christians are going to confront when they do face persecution is that most moderate non-Christians are not going to feel much sympathy for them. There'll be a widespread attitude that "what goes around comes around."
    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Wency

    You never miss the target, do you?


    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity....
     
    In the unlikely event that you had time, have you considered opening your own blog?

    Replies: @Wency

    , @iffen
    @Wency

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West,

    About to?

    Replies: @dfordoom

  155. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans?
     
    For the most part, about as well as modest, ordinary, decent people usually get along when they're minding their own business. (Undoubtedly, one could produce a rightward counterexample of failure to mind business—though, if I may anticipate, such an example might prove to be outdated—but the degree is in any case greater by an order of magnitude on the left. Administrative busibodyism exists everywhere but is not a peculiarly distinguishing characteristic of today's American right.)

    As after the Great Depression and in today's post-Soviet Russia, memories of bad times shared should persist 50 years or so, with salutary effects.

    I hasten to add that I have not converted to AE's separationist program. If separation occurs, it occurs. I am content to take it as it come; but if it come, the MAGA/GOP(e) would hardly sink it.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I can’t see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans?

    For the most part, about as well as modest, ordinary, decent people usually get along when they’re minding their own business.

    You think GOP(e) Republicans are modest, ordinary, decent people? They’re the ones who have enthusiastically screwed the very people who have now become MAGA hat wearers. They’d screw those people with even greater zeal if they had the chance.

  156. @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity. Politically speaking, it would be better for conservative Christians if they all apostatized and went atheist. The Mainline message is "The Bible doesn't say we can't condone gay marriage -- that's purely their HATE speaking!" Their mere existence weakens the notion that Christian social conservatism is a First Amendment, freedom of religion issue. And at every opportunity they ally with the secular/non-Christian left against conservative Christians, while at no point do they ever ally with conservative Christians on anything.

    Roman Catholicism is another matter though, and the fact that it's an ancient, international organization that, at least officially, is even more socially conservative than Evangelicalism is probably a good thing for Evangelicalism, giving cover to it, so long as Rome remains socially conservative.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don't know precisely how vicious it will be. A lot probably depends on the degree to which the West remains a sclerotic, decadent, stagnant mess in which nothing -- good or evil -- can really be accomplished politically.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity.

    I agree.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don’t know precisely how vicious it will be.

    Again I agree.

    The problem is that Christianity has often been a persecuting religion itself. If Evangelicals ever gained a significant degree of political power would they become persecutors again? Sadly I think the answer is yes, many of them would.

    So one big problem that Christians are going to confront when they do face persecution is that most moderate non-Christians are not going to feel much sympathy for them. There’ll be a widespread attitude that “what goes around comes around.”

  157. @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity. Politically speaking, it would be better for conservative Christians if they all apostatized and went atheist. The Mainline message is "The Bible doesn't say we can't condone gay marriage -- that's purely their HATE speaking!" Their mere existence weakens the notion that Christian social conservatism is a First Amendment, freedom of religion issue. And at every opportunity they ally with the secular/non-Christian left against conservative Christians, while at no point do they ever ally with conservative Christians on anything.

    Roman Catholicism is another matter though, and the fact that it's an ancient, international organization that, at least officially, is even more socially conservative than Evangelicalism is probably a good thing for Evangelicalism, giving cover to it, so long as Rome remains socially conservative.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don't know precisely how vicious it will be. A lot probably depends on the degree to which the West remains a sclerotic, decadent, stagnant mess in which nothing -- good or evil -- can really be accomplished politically.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

    You never miss the target, do you?

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity….

    In the unlikely event that you had time, have you considered opening your own blog?

    • Replies: @Wency
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Ha, glad to know I have at least one fan. But as it is, I can barely keep up with Unz.com, tending to visit in bursts and then disappear for a week or two. I'm currently growing both a family and a small business. Check back with me in 20 years, if there's still a free Internet to post on.

  158. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Wency

    You never miss the target, do you?


    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity....
     
    In the unlikely event that you had time, have you considered opening your own blog?

    Replies: @Wency

    Ha, glad to know I have at least one fan. But as it is, I can barely keep up with Unz.com, tending to visit in bursts and then disappear for a week or two. I’m currently growing both a family and a small business. Check back with me in 20 years, if there’s still a free Internet to post on.

  159. @Wency
    @dfordoom

    Mainline Protestantism is, at this point, entirely an enemy of conservative Christianity. Politically speaking, it would be better for conservative Christians if they all apostatized and went atheist. The Mainline message is "The Bible doesn't say we can't condone gay marriage -- that's purely their HATE speaking!" Their mere existence weakens the notion that Christian social conservatism is a First Amendment, freedom of religion issue. And at every opportunity they ally with the secular/non-Christian left against conservative Christians, while at no point do they ever ally with conservative Christians on anything.

    Roman Catholicism is another matter though, and the fact that it's an ancient, international organization that, at least officially, is even more socially conservative than Evangelicalism is probably a good thing for Evangelicalism, giving cover to it, so long as Rome remains socially conservative.

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West, we all know it, we just don't know precisely how vicious it will be. A lot probably depends on the degree to which the West remains a sclerotic, decadent, stagnant mess in which nothing -- good or evil -- can really be accomplished politically.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West,

    About to?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @iffen



    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West,
     
    About to?
     
    What's happening at the moment is more low-level harassment than persecution. Of course out-and-out persecution might be on the way.

    It will be interesting to see which way the Kumbaya Christians jump. Will they support the persecution of conservative Christians? If the persecution is aimed mostly at conservative Christians it's a possibility.

    It would be in the interests of conservative Christians to support calls for political dissolution. Having their own country might be their only good option at this stage. But of course American conservative Christians won't support such calls, because God Bless America.
  160. @iffen
    @Wency

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West,

    About to?

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Christianity is about to face some sort of persecution in the West,

    About to?

    What’s happening at the moment is more low-level harassment than persecution. Of course out-and-out persecution might be on the way.

    It will be interesting to see which way the Kumbaya Christians jump. Will they support the persecution of conservative Christians? If the persecution is aimed mostly at conservative Christians it’s a possibility.

    It would be in the interests of conservative Christians to support calls for political dissolution. Having their own country might be their only good option at this stage. But of course American conservative Christians won’t support such calls, because God Bless America.

  161. @DanHessinMD
    Sorry, for the off-topic post, but AE, you promised around six months ago to do a post on COVID and seasonality and that never happened. Now seasonality is more clear than ever before.

    I know I sound like Rain Man, but here I go again on humidity --

    In February and March of 2020, as I read all I could about respiratory infections and watched where COVID-19 was having its worst impact, I realized that the dry indoor air of winter makes viral respiratory infections much worse (this is not the only factor, but it is a very big one). The data have born this out.

    The mechanisms are simple:
    (1) Mucociliary clearance, the mechanism by which foreign particles are carried out of the lungs, functions poorly in very dry air as mucus dries out.
    (2) Dry air can lead to damage of surfaces of the throat and lungs (in the same way that dry air gives you cracked lips). This makes you vulnerable to inflammation and infections at the site of the injury. The virus can enter through such fissures.

    I made it my goal to let the world know about winter humidifiers against COVID and I mostly failed as I am not well-known and the level of noise on this is extreme. But alas. Once more into the breach.

    Since nobody will listen to me, here is leading COVID-19 expert Prof. Akiko Iwasaki of the Iwasaki virology lab at Yale Medical school and her team speaking:

    For those who like to read scientific papers, a 2020 review of respiratory virus seasonality with some 130 citations explains things well (figure 4 says it all):
    https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-virology-012420-022445

    And for the lay person:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/winter-covid-19-humidity/

    The effects of humidity are dramatic. Florida and Texas have been almost completely open while New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan have been largely locked down, and yet those lockdown states have had much worse disease and death than those humid states. Humidity is the difference because indoor air is generally temperature controlled everywhere.

    A few hundred thousand lives will be saved this winter if this becomes widely known.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Chrisnonymous, @Audacious Epigone

    We did a couple of posts highlighting what you wrote. Put something thorough together that is accessible for non-specialists and it’ll be run here. I don’t trust case numbers, hospitalizations, or death numbers wrt Covid enough to do it myself.

  162. @edkpyros
    The COVID pandemic could have been an occasion for coming together—but the Democrats, the MSM, and the left were so obsessed with taking Trump down that they immediately tried to exploit it as a wedge issue.

    One of the problems with having a lap-dog press is that it incentivizes the politicization of everything, because the left knows it will never be called out for shamelessly doing so—in fact, what happens is the Republican response is immediately denounced as having dragged politics into the debate.

    The second Trump instituted travel restrictions, Democrats "pounced"—most notably, Biden.

    And let's not forget what Democrats were solely focused on when the pandemic struck: the impeachment of a US President over entirely trumped-up charges.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    They weren’t even trumped up charges. They impeached him for asking Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden while the US intelligence agencies were clandestinely… investigating Hunter Biden.

  163. @dfordoom
    A question for AE (or anyone else who cares to chime in). Let's assume that political dissolution happens. How many successor states do you expect to end up with?

    I can't see a straight Red/Blue split being workable. How well will the MAGA brigade get along with GOP(e) Republicans? How long before the neoliberal and progressive wings of the Democrats are tearing each other's throats out?

    Should the Evangelicals get their own country? What about the libertarians?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Audacious Epigone

    I don’t claim to know. The least creative and so most likely successor countries will be groups of states. Some counties in current states may join new countries comprised of other states. Using current governmental boundaries will be the simplest logistically, so that’s my bet.

    Regarding new countries being at each other’s throats, the US has a neighbor to the north that has been politically at odds with us at various points in our respective histories. Have we ever been at Canada’s throat (in the last two centuries, anyway)?

    Regarding the federal government’s potential military response to secession, it’s worth noting that the mere news of a serious attempt at separation being made will send the already weak dollar hurtling towards the ground (if a broken dollar isn’t the impetus of separation in the first place, which I tend to think it will be). That alone will significantly hamper the ability of DC to keep things together.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Audacious Epigone

    Your rhetorical question inadvertently admits an interesting, off-topic answer:


    Have we ever been at Canada’s throat (in the last two centuries, anyway)?
     
    Yes, during the Venezuelan border crisis of 1895.

    The British navy was still too strong in 1895 for the U.S. directly to enforce its Venezuelan interests, but a coy President Cleveland found it convenient to let U.S. congressmen threaten Canada by proxy, the White House lending the threats vague credence by inscrutable nods and an ominous silence—the silence punctuated by a single, blistering letter to Westminster by the U.S. secretary of state. The completion of the Union Pacific Railroad had left the vast, nearly empty territory of Canada practically indefensible against a U.S. invasion, a circumstance which—since Canada was more important to Britain than Venezuela was—forced Britain's Prime Minister Salisbury to deal.

  164. @Audacious Epigone
    @dfordoom

    I don't claim to know. The least creative and so most likely successor countries will be groups of states. Some counties in current states may join new countries comprised of other states. Using current governmental boundaries will be the simplest logistically, so that's my bet.

    Regarding new countries being at each other's throats, the US has a neighbor to the north that has been politically at odds with us at various points in our respective histories. Have we ever been at Canada's throat (in the last two centuries, anyway)?

    Regarding the federal government's potential military response to secession, it's worth noting that the mere news of a serious attempt at separation being made will send the already weak dollar hurtling towards the ground (if a broken dollar isn't the impetus of separation in the first place, which I tend to think it will be). That alone will significantly hamper the ability of DC to keep things together.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Your rhetorical question inadvertently admits an interesting, off-topic answer:

    Have we ever been at Canada’s throat (in the last two centuries, anyway)?

    Yes, during the Venezuelan border crisis of 1895.

    The British navy was still too strong in 1895 for the U.S. directly to enforce its Venezuelan interests, but a coy President Cleveland found it convenient to let U.S. congressmen threaten Canada by proxy, the White House lending the threats vague credence by inscrutable nods and an ominous silence—the silence punctuated by a single, blistering letter to Westminster by the U.S. secretary of state. The completion of the Union Pacific Railroad had left the vast, nearly empty territory of Canada practically indefensible against a U.S. invasion, a circumstance which—since Canada was more important to Britain than Venezuela was—forced Britain’s Prime Minister Salisbury to deal.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS