@Cirrus's banner p

Cirrus


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 January 14 23:09:28 UTC

				

User ID: 2081

Cirrus


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2023 January 14 23:09:28 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2081

Remember that this is happening as (officially) inflation is 2.7 percent, the unemployment rate is 4.2 percent, the S&P 500 has had a gangbuster year-to-date return of 24 percent, and housing prices have increased by 4.4 percent year-over-year.

Now imagine how much more violent and disorderly the people will get when the economy contracts into a recession next year. A Middle East oil shock, a government shutdown, a tariff war, there are lots of ignition points…

A $1 million donation and some obsequious praise for Trump, in exchange for Trump not going after Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act? Sounds like a pretty darn good return on investment.

I am also so glad they do not seem to understand what happened to them.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” — Upton Sinclair

Money in elections is such a curse, sometimes.

Deepwater Horizon happened due to onerous regulations that crowded out terrestrial oil drilling in favor of offshore drilling, which is inherently less profitable and far more dangerous. A foreign E&P company (BP) outsourced its well driller to a firm that bungled the job and had lax safety standards. That sounds a lot like the circumstances behind the COVID-19 lab leak. Regulations caused the job to be offshored/outsourced… foreign entity screws the pooch…

Judge Juan Merchan’s sentencing of Trump for his felony convictions happens later this month. And who’s to say that another Trump assassination attempt won’t happen between now and January?

Harris and Biden mouth the words required of them. Now they can have plausible deniability if the left’s shock troops act to stop Big Orange Hitler from taking office. We’ll see if Trump actually gets to January 20, 2025.

(Meta: why is it that Trump is rarely referred to by first name?)

I’ve thought about that too. Referring to people by their first names invites a sense of closeness and familiarity, maybe makes them appear more approachable or likable even. So it could be strategic on the part of ‘Kamala’ supporters. Alternatively, the name ‘Kamala’ is more unique and memorable for most people than ‘Harris’ as a way to identify her—many Harrises but only one Kamala. A few politicians also are commonly referred to by their first names: Lula (da Silva) by is an example. I don’t think gender has much to do with it.

Why should Americans care about what Chinese do to Uhygurs, or what Turks do to Kurds, or what Israelis do to Palestinians? (I noticed you left out the current administration’s tacit approval of that genocide. What a bunch of Nazis!!!)

America has a proud history of making trade and diplomacy with authoritarian dictators. The problem is with the arrogant internationalists who want to impose their neoliberal capitalist pride-flag agenda on the rest of the world against their will. It’s cultural imperialism… and yet Trump is the Nazi for opposing this. Because 2024 became the year that up is down and 2 + 2 = 5.

The GOP’s 2028 nominee won’t be any Republican that people are talking about today. It won’t be a white man. Given the inexorable demographic trends, it will be an Hispanic populist outsider. Think Nick Fuentes but with greater respectability, and who has ties to the military. America will want a military leader to deal with challenges posed by China or Iran. Someone Trumpian and with a bio that could fill out a webpage like this.

America has remained low trust? There are a multitude of economic counter arguments one can make. The simplest is that few people would invest in a low-trust society, and yet the American economy remains the envy of the world. The US dollar is the world’s reserve currency. The US routinely runs current account deficits, as foreigners just seem to love holding US-denominated assets. The legal system has its foundations in common law, which requires a great deal more trust than civil law. American industries operate quite profitably based on trust such as banking, and anything that relies on brands.

What I think you’ve identified, quite appropriately, is the mistrust that reasonable Americans now have toward the people and institutions who have betrayed them. Technology has made it harder for politicians and journalists to lie. Television showed Americans what was going on during e.g. the Vietnam War. The Internet gave Americans more perspectives that were censored or ignored by the mainstream press. Social media allowed Americans to communicate with each other without needing a propagandist to soft chew their ideas for them. And it turns out that many conspiracy theories turned out to be conspiracy facts, and Americans realized that the faceless bureaucracy supposed to represent the better angels of our nature actually had its own self-serving motives. So maybe the ‘conspiracy nuts’ were previously the ‘compliant citizens’ who woke up to a nation that—somewhere along the line—stopped being theirs. Is it any wonder, then, why some of those people might resort to taking their nation back by force?

Yes, Trump is the man who flouts traditional norms night, noon, and day. Like that time his administration pressured Twitter and Facebook to censor truthful news stories like the Hunter Biden laptop. Or when he used the FBI to spy on an incoming President’s campaign. Then used his media connections to concoct an elaborate hoax about Russian influence by his opponent. Or those times his cronies indicted his opponent for process crimes on totally novel and unprecedented legal theories. Or how his inflammatory rhetoric caused his opponent to almost be assassinated twice in two months.

But hey, Trump said mean words about people so…

I expect to see counters about how the entire government is corrupt, and I don't even disagree with all of it. But he is so incredibly blatant about it that he doesn't even try to create plausible deniability.

Is this a criticism of Trump? Because I see this as a great positive. Would you rather have a public servant who is good at hiding corruption from the people?

I suppose that sounds right. Maybe they always wanted to produce a sequel sooner but were delayed due to COVID/production hell, etc.

Also, maybe they legitimately wanted to make a good sequel? Just one that fundamentally alters the Joker’s character, and it took time to arrive at something satisfactory to all parties concerned. (Except, of course, to the audience.)

It’s possible that the director/screenwriters/producers believed that the 2019 film produced a moral panic and they didn’t want blood on their hands. Perhaps they believed that they might be perceived as responsible for some incel-inspired shooting or violence against the state? So, they had to make a sequel to defang Phoenix’s Joker and make his character weak and pathetic. “Look at your ‘hero’ now, you filthy incels!”

The production studio, believing this same ridiculous notion, merely did a cost-benefit analysis. “Which will lose us less money: a box office bomb or a lawsuit and reputational damage of aggrieved families of the Great Incel Shooting of 2024?”

Jesus healed sinners and the demon-possessed with the instruction to sin no more. His miracles weren’t meant to be a blank check to go out to continue to sin. (“A wicked generation looks for a sign”, says Jesus from Matthew 16.) That’s a big difference. Today’s social justice calls on people to tolerate and not change their ways, but Jesus calls on people to be loving. And sometimes being loving means calling on people to repent of evil and change from their sinful behaviors. God does not tolerate evil. He patiently waits, but there will come a day of the Lord where He will no longer wait.

As for Matthew the tax collector, he was by no means an elite. He may have gotten rich but only by cooperating with the Romans against his own people, much like the Jewish Councils in the Warsaw Ghetto and elsewhere occupied by the Nazis. There was no mistaking who the ruling class was at those times; the film The Pianist also depicts them a little bit.

If you want to compare historical wars with the present situation in Ukraine, I would suggest the Mexican-American war as a better template. Mapped over to historical events…

The United States —> Russia Mexico —> Ukraine Texas —> Crimea/DPR/LPR

I’m a bit short on time, but try to read the Wikipedia page and draw the comparisons. To me at least there are many similarities.

You’re acting like individual income tax avoidance is a bad thing? Just like Trump’s proposed tax incentive on tips, this too would benefit blue-collar and service sector workers. Maybe we should be advocating policies that place a greater proportional tax burden on those who society caters to already: corporations and white-collar PMCs?

This isn’t the first time that politics has created tax incentives for employers based on hours worked, either. Remember that the Affordable Care Act’s large employer mandate kicks in for “full-time” employees who work 30 or more hours per week? Take this with a huge grain of bias, but the Cato Institute in 2023 found that there was a minor effect in reducing FTEs due to the employer mandate.:

[w]e estimated that the ACA increased low-hours, involuntary parttime employment by 2–3 percentage points, or 500,000 to 1 million workers, in retail, accommodations, and food services—the sectors where employers are most likely to reduce hours if they choose to circumvent the mandate.

I was wrong about God. Grew up atheist, now I am a firm believer in the trinity as well as the power of prayer. That changed my view on other political/cultural topics too, like abortion (formerly was for it in certain circumstances, now against it), race (formerly pretty racist, now I see that all people have inherent moral value), gay marriage (formerly for it, now against it), taxation (formerly against it, now for it especially on the rich—render to Caesar and all). The best policy for society is twofold: love God and love your neighbor.

The winner and the show stealer will be the fly, dispatched to vanquish Trump this time…

Kennedy was polling historically well for a third-party candidate, and he will remain on the ballot in most non-swing states. The nationwide realclearpolitics polling average had him at about five percent, which means 5-7 million votes.

Your vote absolutely does matter! You might not live in a swing state, but your vote can and does affect the ideological disposition of local elected candidates for office.

For example, if you are a Democrat in a red state, you might not succeed in electing a Democrat to your local congressional seat. But, on the margins, your vote can influence how radical the elected Republican might feel they are allowed to be once they get into office. I don’t have data to back this up, but I have two hypotheses which some political scientist might study someday. Elected officials with a low Cook Partisan Index score (closest to zero) are more moderate politically, and candidates elected to office with the thinnest margins display more moderate behavior in office than in blowout elections.

Starmer previously served as leader of the opposition party. He was not the incumbent. Are American voters really willing to give current Vice President Harris the benefit of the doubt?

When Al Gore ran for President in 2000, he had served as then-President Bill Clinton’s VP. Gore didn’t run away from their record, he embraced it and made it a key aspect of his policy!

(Now that I think about it, there are so many similarities with the 2000 election as with the current one. A formidable third party that could act as a Democrat spoiler. A scandal that makes the incumbent Democrat President a liability to campaign with. Concerns about election integrity. The Republican nominee criticized for lack of ‘presidential’ qualifications. A tech bubble which was at its peak value. Criticism of the Democrat President involving the country in a war in Eastern Europe. Criticism of the President’s handling of evacuating soldiers from a collapsing Muslim country where servicemen ended up dying.)

Hitler’s cavalier takeover of numerous small neutral countries (Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands)

Were these any more objectionable than the Allies’ invasion and occupation of the small neutral countries of Iceland, Iraq, and Iran?

  1. Disable every ISP in the country. Eliminate Internet service everywhere. Overcome obstacles like VPNs and Starlink by imprisoning employees of companies that offer these services.

  2. Nationwide prohibition on abortion, contraceptives, and pornography.

  3. Institute a new government works administration, like something akin to the WPA or the Civilian Conservation Corps. Hire only young male citizens. Pay them at least the median nationwide individual income.

  4. Finance (3) by raising taxes on all businesses that employ more than 100 individuals. The marginal tax rate should be raised from 21 percent currently to 55 percent.

  5. Nationalize every large media corporation and film production studio. Replace the executives and the creatives with government employees. Task them with producing art in a Soviet realism chic. A cross between Fox News and the Hallmark channel should serve as a good template for how entertainment should be manufactured.

  6. Confiscate all foreign-owned financial and capital assets. Give them to domestic companies and individuals, or simply let the government manage them or liquidate them to reduce the national debt.

I predict that this would ruin the economy and the currency. It would transform the source of wealth from financialization back to manufacturing, and turn the country into a net producer and exporter. By necessity, more domestic manufacturing and government works jobs would raise the status of men and make them more appealing to women. The government’s authoritarian control over technology, entertainment, and family planning would also foment greater appeal for families and natalism. Poor people have more children, so the goal should be to impoverish the people while making the state strong and in control.

“If you wanna speak then actually say something, Kamala”

Or perhaps a bit longer form:

“Kamala wants to speak? After refusing to give interviews alone? Well she’s been talking a lot tonight but she’s not saying anything in terms of policies. Not a thing. Very sad, you know, the American people want to know what your policies are, Kamala. They wanna know and you’re not telling them a thing. You can’t though because you do have a record. The Biden-Harris record, and it’s been a total disaster. You wanna run for President but you’re running away from your record. Which has been a complete horror show, so if you wanna speak then talk about the Afghanistan withdrawal or inflation or immigration. All disasters.”

Giffords’ shooting was a huge deal. I don’t think it can be understated how pivotal that event changed American politics. In my opinion, Giffords was being prepared for a long career in the U.S. Senate, perhaps even to become President someday. The shooting changed the trajectory of the U.S. forever. The media was right to cover it so much, because the shooting effectively robbed the U.S. of a future President. In another timeline we might be debating a Trump vs. Giffords election right now.

I say this as someone who lived somewhat close by to the ‘Congress on Your Corner’ event where the shooting happened. It was 2011. Giffords had served in the House of Representatives for the prior four years, and in Arizona state politics for the prior decade. She started in politics at the age of 30, and was 40 years old at the time of the shooting. A Jew, she is related to celebrity stardom (Gwyneth Paltrow) and married a corn-fed, non-Jew military guy, the current junior Senator, Mark Kelly, a man with no political aspirations himself before the shooting happened in 2011. Giffords went to the correct private liberal arts colleges, was a Fulbright Scholar, ran her family’s business, and spearheaded economic development initiatives in Hispanic, rural Arizona. Check, check, check. This was a woman with ambition for higher office. She had never spoken at the DNC but she was young. She, too, could have her 2004 Obama moment. Until a schizophrenic loser tragically came out of the woodwork.

How many ‘Congress on Your Corner’ mass public campaign events do politicians hold nowadays? Basically none, I think. If you’re not an incumbent you still have to hold outreach events, but they happen in private establishments, often with guest lists and operational security to control access. Or you just cut the populist facade and hold dinners that charge $50,000 per plate to attend. The Giffords shooting also sparked the resurgence of the gun control movement. The shooting was the beginning move toward a greater political polarization, since the media blamed Sarah Palin and her ham-fisted Internet ad about putting elected Democrats ‘in the crosshairs’ for unseating them at re-election.

Were the shooting not to happen in 2011, or if Giffords’ career hadn’t effectively ended that day, I have no doubt that she would have been Senator instead of Mark Kelly. They wanted her, not her husband. But she’s part of the same Orwellian Inner Party apparatus, that’s why she got a Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2022 as well as a speaking slot at the DNC this year in 2024, long after she’s become irrelevant. The DNC apparatus wanted her to become Senator, maybe even President. But it wasn’t meant to be.