Wednesday, September 30, 2020

The Morning After

Based on what I am seeing on social media, my decision last night to skip the "debates", head to bed early and read for an hour paid off. Without watching any of it, what I gather is that the entire thing was a string of petty insults, name-calling, lying and focus on non-existent threats like "White supremacy". Mostly it sounds like a tie with neither candidate landing a knock-out blow and more importantly Joe Biden's meds worked and he didn't melt down on stage. Trump needs more than ties, Joe Biden holding his own and not pooping his pants on live TV is a win for Biden.

As I wrote yesterday, these men aren't going to have substantive debates not because they don't want to but because Trump and Biden are intellectually incapable of having substantive debates. Last night was another new low in end-stage America.

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Meanwhile In Motown

Detroit police search for individuals in connection with nightclub shooting on city’s west side

6 people were injured in shooting early Monday morning

Of note:

The shooting is Detroit’s eighth mass shooting of the year.

Where is the national media on the rash of shootings and especially mass shootings in the black community?


The Not-So-Great Debates

In 1858, two men held a series of debates across Illinois. Those two men were Abraham Lincoln, who would later become President, and Senator Stephen Douglas. The "Lincoln-Douglas Debates" are considered to be one the best examples of political debate in American political history. 


The main topic of the debates was the issue of slavery. With new states coming into the Union, the balance was always potentially shifting between slave and free states. When you read the rhetoric these men employed, it is a stark reminder of how coarse the English language has become today. For example, from the linked page, Douglas said:

Mr. Lincoln, following the example and lead of all the little Abolition orators, who go around and lecture in the basements of schools and churches, reads from the Declaration of Independence, that all men were created equal, and then asks, how can you deprive a negro of that equality which God and the Declaration of Independence awards to him? ... Now, I hold that Illinois had a right to abolish and prohibit slavery as she did, and I hold that Kentucky has the same right to continue and protect slavery that Illinois had to abolish it. I hold that New York had as much right to abolish slavery as Virginia has to continue it, and that each and every State of this Union is a sovereign power, with the right to do as it pleases upon this question of slavery, and upon all its domestic institutions. ... And why can we not adhere to the great principle of self-government, upon which our institutions were originally based. I believe that this new doctrine preached by Mr. Lincoln and his party will dissolve the Union if it succeeds. They are trying to array all the Northern States in one body against the South, to excite a sectional war between the free States and the slave States, in order that the one or the other may be driven to the wall.

Lincoln, regarding the equality of blacks with Whites said in response:

I agree with Judge Douglas he (the black man) is not my equal in many respects—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.

While the terminology used is jarring in our ears, these are men with powerful skills in rhetoric and reasoning. These are not lines written by professional speech writers and then regurgitated by empty suits from a telemprompter. These are their own words.This is a substantive debate over a substantive issue being carried out by men of substance. The issues they raised about the equality of all men under the law and the sovereignty of the individual states would carry forward to the Presidential election of 1860, won of course by Abraham Lincoln, which led to the declaration of secession by the states that would make up the Confederate States of America and the Civil War/War Between The States/War Of Northern Aggression, whatever you call it. The Civil War would claim the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans and the aftermath would change the course and the very fabric of America. 

Whatever you think of the two men involved in the debates, Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln were serious men.

Fast forward 162 years. America is once again on the verge of a major clash of ideologies. Once again there are the rumblings of secession and civil war and political violence. The issues we are fighting over get to the very root of the American experiment and who we will be as a people going forward. 

Is America still the land of opportunity, an imperfect union but superior to every other nation on earth, the shining city on a hill that people around the world long to come to? Is the history and heritage of America mostly praiseworthy and deserving of being remembered and memorialized? 

Or is America a nation built on "White supremacy" that has treated women, sexual degenerates, blacks, mestizos, Asians, Jews and every other subgroup you can think of poorly since the founding? Is this injustice something that can only be resolved by tearing the whole thing down, taking from heritage Americans to give to everyone else, and starting over with a new, more "progressive" vision?

These are not compatible visions and we need to have a serious, thoughtful and sober debate to decide which vision will win out and how we should approach the future to hopefully avoid massive bloodshed.

That is not what we are going to get.

Tonight, assuming Biden's team doesn't pull a fast one and find an excuse to keep him off stage, two men will square off in the first presidential debate of the 2020 election season and what will probably be the last time in American history that the two candidates for President are White heterosexual men.

The debates between President Donald Trump and former Vice-President Joe Biden promise to be many things. A dumpster fire, off the charts cringe, probably hilarious if you enjoy that sort of thing. Thoughtful? Serious? Sober? Addressing at all the actual issues of the day in any substantive manner?

Hell no.

Shouting at and speaking over one another, ad hominem personal attacks, outright lying and boasting will be the order of the evening. Best of luck to moderator Chris Wallace because this is going to be a circus. 

It is not simply a question whether Trump and Biden will have a civil, thoughtful debate. Rather it is an issue of Trump and Biden being incapable of having a civil, thoughtful debate. In his prime Joe Biden wasn't particularly intelligent but he was clever, in the way that Bill Clinton is clever without being especially intelligent. Today, Biden can barely string a few sentences together. On the other side, Trump is a blowhard, an up-jumped used car salesman, a carnival barker. Stirring up a crowd? Sure he can do that. Elucidating a point with any eloquence or evidence of having given it some thought? Not going to happen.

Will Trump blow an artery? Will Biden have an involuntary bowel movement or challenge the podium to a fistfight? If you play a drinking game and take a shot whenever Biden misstates the year or says "Come on man!", you will be black out drunk within 45 minutes. The same if you drink every time Trump pats himself on the back for being the bestest Prez evah!

I was for sure going to watch up until a a few days ago but I am not sure I can do it. If you choose to, John Wilder is going to have an open comment section for the debate at his blog: 


I might see you there but really the whole thing is just depressing so I might clean my guns and take an updated inventory of ammo and food stocks because it is about to go down.

In 1992 as a young college student majoring in Political Science and about to vote in my first Presidential election, I watched the Vice Presidential debates between Dan Quayle, Al Gore and James Stockdale. Never have three dumber people been on one stage together. The whole thing was awful, devoid of a single serious moment. The debate tonight might match that one for stupidity. 

The "winner" tonight will not be determined based on who gets the best zingers and certainly not who makes the most persuasive argument. Nope, the winner and loser tonight will come down to this: can Biden's team pump him with enough medication to keep him sounding coherent for a couple of hours or not? If Biden doesn't come across like someone who should be in a nursing home, he wins. If Trump can get him to go off script enough that everyone sees that Biden is mentally incompetent, then Trump wins. That is the whole debate, does Biden hide his dementia well enough or not?

Said it before and I'll say it again. We are living in Clown World and the clowns running President are not the men we need but they are the men we deserve.



Movie Review: Greyhound


A movie I had been hoping to watch finally made it on the docket for my wife and I over the weekend, the new Tom Hanks film: Greyhound. Hanks plays Captain Krause, the captain of a destroyer escorting a convoy of supply vessels in the North Atlantic as they leave the protection of U.S. air cover until they reach the relative safety of British air cover. At only about an hour and a half, it is a welcome respite from the interminable movies we normally get with an extra hour of mindless action sequences to drag the film out.


Tom Hanks is very good as usual, playing a captain on his first ocean crossing protecting a convoy. The action is great, not overwhelming and reasonably realistic. From what I know of the Battle of The Atlantic, the film does a great job of faithfully capturing the reality of trying to sail across the Atlantic while being pursued by an enemy you can't see until a lookout spots the torpedo in the water. The limitations of technology in WW II are handled very well, this isn't a high tech battle but one where quick thinking and gut instinct born of experience meant the difference between life and death. Hanks is especially good when he refuses to celebrate the death of the German sailors, as befits a devout Christian. How often do we see Christians portrayed in anything but a terrible light in mainstream films?

I recall the man I am named after telling me about the trip over the Atlantic to England and him saying that throwing a cigarette butt over the side would get your ass kicked because the glow could alert a U-Boat of your presence. I can't imagine being a solder packed in like sardines in a slow moving, huge target day after day, helpless and hoping that your ship didn't catch the eye of a U-Boat.

The one real downside of the movie is that Greyhound falls into the predictable pattern we see in contemporary movies about World War II: turning the Germans into cartoonish villains. In Greyhound, the German U-boat captain breaks radio silence repeatedly to taunt Hanks and revel in the screams of men dying. Film makers feel it is necessary to add this sort of thing into films so no one is confused that the Germans were the bad guys. In older World War II films it was clear that the Germans were the bad guys but they weren't cackling and rubbing their hands together in glee to show how awful they were. Now we get the wanton cruelty and over the top villainy.


The "Battle Of The Atlantic" lasted around six years, from 1939 to 1945, and pitted the German Kriegsmarine against the British Royal Navy and the U.S. Navy primarily. The Germans were never the sort of dominant sea power that the British were and America was becoming in WW II, so rather than try to build a navy to slug it out with the Royal Navy, they instead invested in U-Boats. It was a very clever and fairly effective tactic.

The number of Allied ships sunk by German U-Boats was over 3,000. That is hard to even fathom. Losing 3000 ships over 6 years works out to 500 ships per year lost to U-Boats or an average of around 1.3 ships sunk every single day for six straight years. Even with that level of carnage, the U.S. industrial output buried the Germans on the Western front.

This much is certain. Americans were a very different breed back in the 1940s and we aren't better off for having more information and a longer life expectancy. 

Greyhound is a fun flick if you can overlook one serious flaw. 

Monday, September 28, 2020

Panderer-In-Chief

 More 4-D chess!



As someone else pointed out, there are just under 40 million blacks in America. Doing some basic math, that works out to about $12,500 for every black man, woman and child in America. But it isn't reparations because we don't call it reparations. Initially I said this was a backdoor reparation scheme but someone pointed out there is nothing backdoor about this, rather this is the equivalent of black America kicking in the front door of White America and screaming "Pay up honky" holding a Glock sideways while Trump claps in  the background.

According to Fox News:

The president’s plan, according to the campaign, will increase access to capital in Black communities by almost $500 billion, help to create 500,000 new Black-owned businesses, and help to create 3 million new jobs for the Black community.

It makes it sound like the government can create a black owned business and that blacks don't already have access to capital. As a former banker I can tell you unequivocally that they have the same access as Whites, Asians and mestizos provided they are credit worthy. 

As usual, the deeper you dig in and get past the rhetoric, the worse it is.

From the press release:

"Alternative ways to build credit"? Generally speaking paying your non-credit related bills like rent and utilities is not something that impacts your credit, because you are not getting credit. You are paying by the month for a place to live and to keep your phone working. It isn't credit and no one else gets credit score improvement for it but Trump is going to give blacks basically an easier to achieve credit system to sidestep the generally poor creditworthiness of blacks. 

Getting a loan is not hard: have the income to support the additional debt and a reasonable history of repaying your existing debt. I often told customers this when I was a banker: the bank doesn't want your house or car. They want their money back with the interest you agreed to. That is how they make money, not by foreclosing on houses or repossessing cars. For some reason, encouraging blacks to follow the very basic guideline of not borrowing more than you can afford and paying back the debt you agreed to is entirely unreasonable. 

Trump is also promising 3 million new black jobs. How is he going to do that when 3 million jobs would be jobs for  almost 10% of the black community?


This is a giant handout to blacks with tax cuts that are apparently targeted only at black owned businesses and infrastructure money that likewise will be directed to black owned contractors. It won't matter who can do the best job for the best price, now White owned businesses will be pushed aside so black businesses can get contracts but you can be sure those White business owners will still be expected to pay their "fair share" in taxes. 

Here is a baffling one:


In what way is this not already the case for "black churches"? I guess "White churches" don't have poor people they minister to, even though every food pantry I know of is at a predominantly White church. Do we really want churches being treated disparately based on whether they are considered "black churches" versus "White churches"? What about predominantly mestizo churches or Asian churches? Not to mention that once again, White evangelicals are Trump's most loyal supporters and black churches are typically hotbeds of leftist ideology who criticize Trump and Republicans in general incessantly (although no one threatens their tax exempt status like White churches). Of course there is also a First Amendment issue if the government gives tax dollars to black churches based on the racial make-up of their congregation.

More:


Oh. How are we going to do that, except by making preferential purchasing decisions for Federal contracts, something specifically mentioned, and by changing the playing field to give black businsses an advantage. The critical thing to remember here is that when the Federal government gives black businesses an advantage it must do so by making it more difficult for White, Asian, Jewish, mestizo, whatever businesses. 

In the mythical "free market", if a black guy opens a business making widgets and a White guy also opens a business making widgets, all else being equal, the one who is better at making and selling widgets will succeed and the other will fail. Assuming a limited demand for widgets means that not everyone creating a business to make them will succeed. America is littered with failed businesses. Sometimes people are crappy at running a business, or the market changes or the economy gets torpedoed by a "pandemic". 

Again, in the mythical free market business is not a zero sum game but in reality it often is. If the government wants a new bridge built to replace an old one, they only need one bridge so only one contractor (or more likely a group of contractors working together) is going to get the job. If a black contractor gets the job because he is black, that means that it is likely that a White contractor won't get the job because he is White. 

A real life example. My wife's family is friends with a guy who has a construction business. They used to do a lot of government work for lucrative projects. The crew running it was all men and the guy who actually ran the company was a dude but the company was technically owned by his wife even though to my knowledge she had nothing to do with the company. Why was she the "owner"? Because being owned by a woman makes it easier to get government contracts. There are programs for minority and female small business owners, programs for minority and female farmers, on and on. The only people who don't get any special programs and who therefore have to be not just good at what they do on their own merit but have to be significantly better to make up for everyone but them getting preferential treatment? 

White men.

Yes, yes, there are the endless canards and slogans about White men having all the institutional advantages and maybe 50 years ago that was true but however true it once was, it isn't anymore. Today the full weight of the government, corporate America, organized religion, the entertainment and sports world and academia is firmly against White men, the very people who created all of those institutions in the first place. If that isn't bad enough, now the guy who is endlessly accused of being a "White supremacist" is promising to give away $500 billion dollars to the black community. Worst. Fascist. Ever.

Oh yeah, and to add insult to injury:

The president’s plan also vows to make Juneteenth a national holiday.

A couple of years ago no one had heard of Juneteenth, not even most black people. Now there is talk of making it a freaking national holiday? Are we going to just add a Federal holiday to the calendar or will an old Federal holiday have to go to make room? The level of pandering is off the charts.

In summary, Trump is promising half a trillion dollars aimed specifically at around 13% of the population. Where would this magical pot of totally not reparations come from? 

Why, the money will come from tax revenue generated by Trump's supporters to bribe people who won't vote for Trump anyway!

Dude, that is more like 16-D Chess. Trump is a master political strategist!

This won't move the needle for Trump on black voters, and certainly not enough to offset pissing off more of his voters. Blacks have been hearing empty promises of more and more money from the Democrats for decades and they know it is all bullshit. 

That doesn't mean it won't have an impact because it certainly will. Here we have the "fascist White supremacist" President of the United States openly embracing race-based payouts benefiting blacks at the expense of Whites. I doubt he understands what he has done here because honestly Trump isn't all that clever and is still, four years into his presidency, woefully naive about how politics works but this is a massive gift for the race hustling Left. If Trump of all people approves of the philosophy of "justice" meaning taking from Whites to give to blacks, then all that remains is negotiating over just how much can be looted from White America. 

Trump has unilaterally surrendered this point on behalf of all of us. 

Now the left gets to negotiate with itself on dividing up the fruits of White labor. Thanks Trump! What is worse is the number of "conservatives" who applaud this in the desperate hope that a handful of blacks will agree to vote for Trump to soothe the collective conscience of White conservatives that are terrified of being called racist. How much money will it cost middle and working class Whites to bribe a few black voters?

He couldn't even just name antifa a terror organization in a year when antifa is rampaging through our cities committing widespread acts of violence and billions in property damage. He doesn't even mention the domestic terrorists in black Lives Matter who are indistinguishable from the Marxist agitators in antifa. Instead he brings up the KKK and promises to make lynching a national hate crime. Lynching someone is murder which is already illegal in every state and no one has been actually lynched for decades, Jussie Smollett's near miss not withstanding. The Klan is a shadow of what it was 75 years ago, comprising a handful of people who can't even hold a tiny rally and most of the people in the Klan are Feds anyway. When was the last time someone who was legitimately associated with the KKK actually harmed in real life a real black person? Meanwhile antifa operates with impunity across the country and with the open support of many local governments. Conflating an actual Marxist terror group with a boogeyman from the middle of the last century is the sort of idiocy that has marked the Trump administration from day one.

I have tried to give Trump the benefit of the doubt but with this latest fiasco I can only conclude Trump is mostly a dolt. He has been played for a chump by Schumer and Pelosi for his entire administration. He constantly hires terrible people to work in his administration, they back-stab him and then he fires them and calls them incompetent, never seeming to realize that he is the one who keeps hiring all of these incompetent people in the first place. As a hiring manager, if I hired someone who was late for the interview and seemed disinterested while we spoke, it is my fault when the employee is constantly late and lackadaisical at their job.

Trump is giving away the store here and getting absolutely nothing in return. He won't get more black votes, he won't get praised by black clergy and "community activists". He won't be in a stronger position to negotiate something for his voter base. Nope, he just cedes the moral objection to a race based hierarchy of preferences from the Federal government, cramming yet another indignity down the throats of his supporters and getting bupkis in return.

He has gone past being simply useless for anything other than amusement and trolling and is now causing more harm than good. I don't think it is malicious, I just think he is incompetent, over his head and too vain to recognize it.

In spite of all of that, I still am going to vote for Trump. My reasons in an upcoming post.

Thursday, September 24, 2020

Breonna Taylor And black Lies Matter

Two news items occurred yesterday in Louisville, Kentucky that warranted notice. One made national headlines and led to riots across the country, one was completely ignored. One was based in the usual lies and misleading rhetoric, one was based in inconvenient facts.

The first one you have certainly heard of because every politician, athlete and entertainment figure in America weighed in on the topic. That was the decision by a grand jury in Kentucky to not indict any of the three officers involved in the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor for her death, although one was charged for reckless endangerment for shooting into a neighboring apartment.

As is typical in these sort of media and internet driven frenzies, the true story is drastically different from the narrative being pushed. At a minimum Breonna Taylor was shacked up with a loser, a drug dealer with a long criminal career, and more likely she was aiding and abetting him by handling his finances. The police didn't just kick down the door, they knocked and announced their presence. Her boyfriend starting shooting first, through the door at the officers, one of whom was wounded. Naturally they returned fire and this resulted in her death.

Her killing was unfortunate but as I constantly reiterate, almost all of the shootings of blacks by cops could be easily avoided by staying out of trouble and away from people who cause trouble, in this case Taylor's drug dealer boyfriend. I assume she knew he was a drug dealer, most girlfriends know what their boyfriend does for a living and he is on record saying she helped him with his "finances" and it also sounds like her involvement was far deeper than depositing money at the bank. That doesn't mean she deserved to be killed but it did mean she was putting herself in a position to run afoul of the law. The police were executing a legal and valid search warrant when they were fired upon. While I would defend my family if someone was entering my house, I don't think I would shoot through the door at them.

None of that matters to bLM and their White communist supporters. The narrative is another "black body" been shot by the "racist" police so the obvious proper response is rioting and looting. They were primed and prepared to riot no matter what happened, short of the cops being dragged into the street and summarily executed. It went about as you would expect, rioting and looting, over 100 people arrested and two cops shot by this guy, Larynzo Johnson, who is 26 and now gets to spend a couple of decades in prison.


Another solid example of impulse control and thinking more than 5 seconds into the future before acting.

Odds are very good that the rioting will continue and intensify into the weekend. How many people will be shot and killed "protesting" a black woman being shot and killed because her idiot drug dealer boyfriend decided to shoot at cops?

Meanwhile, completely lost in the news cycle was this from the Louisville Courier-Journal:


Louisville hit a sobering milestone Saturday night as the city plowed past its 117th homicide of 2020, making it the deadliest year in the city's history....

....Louisville’s Black residents have been hit hardest in 2020, according to LMPD data, accounting for 71% of identified victims.

White people have accounted for 26% of deaths, according to coroner's office records of identified victims from over the course of the year, while three Hispanic people and two people of unknown race have been killed.

Louisville is about 22% black as of 2007, no idea if that has changed significantly, but anyway that means that blacks in the city are 2-3x disproportionately the victims of murder compared to their percentage of the population. Since most murder is intraracial and blacks are generally overrepresented as murderers, it is safe to assume that of the 71% of murders that had black victims, all of them were killed by other blacks.

Like most cities in America, the murder rate in Louisville is skyrocketing and blacks are bearing the brunt of the violence but black Lives Matter and their financial sponsors don't care. The media pushes and spins every black death at the hands of cops to make it seem common but barely can be bothered to cover a story when it is black on black, and even less so when it is black on White. Sport figures don't care when blacks kill blacks, nor do musicians or actors. 

The very name of black Lives Matter is a lie. Everyone knows it but the media and politicians and celebrities still pretend like it is a serious movement concerned with black lives when in fact it is just a cover for Marxism. 

If Breonna Taylor had been shot by a black man, perhaps a rival of her drug dealer boyfriend, no one would know her name. That is all you need to know about the lies of black Lives Matter.

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

The Next Stage Of Weimarization Of America: Inflation Nation

 Two similar stories last week and one this week caught my eye:


Hobby Lobby's wage increase comes just three months after a similar move from Target, which increased its minimum wage to $15 per hour earlier than planned because of the pandemic.

...and...


The new wage ranges for hourly team lead roles start between $18 and $21 per hour and can go up to $30 per hour in Supercenters.

For the math challenged among us, including me, paying $30/hour for a full-time worker is $62,400 per year. Notice these are not store manager positions, these are hourly team leaders who I assume are responsible for just one segment of the store, clothing or grocery or the front end (cashiers). For comparison purposes, that is also about what my base pay was to be a bank manager running a branch with 15 years of experience in financial services. Sure being a bank manager means M-F 9-5 with a ton of paid time off and great benefits plus bonuses, and that was more than a dozen years ago but still.


Available positions include sales, customer service, merchandising inventory and car install technicians. Pay rates begin at $15 per hour.

That is a pretty drastic jump in pay. Just a few years ago, as recently as 2015, starting wages for hourly retail workers were under $9/hour. Even going to just $15/hour is a 50% increase in five years.

Some background. My first jobs were in retail, in high school and college, and then I spent a few years once I graduated from college working in retail management (boy that degree in PoliSci sure paid dividends!) plus a short stint in retail management in 2015. Retail can be a tough job because you deal with the public, you work all of the days everyone wants to have off and the pay was historically poor. It was a step above fast food but required very little in terms of tangible skills besides pretending to be polite. It was a great job for kids, you learn to be responsible and to deal with any loon that walked in off the street, discovering how stupid and unreasonable most people are. Just being an hourly worker wasn't great for adults because it just didn't pay very well and it wasn't really intended to be a career job. The ambitious people went the management track and the rest found other employment. We need jobs like this for younger people and people with limited professional experience to get that professional experience they needed later on.

Again, it bears repeating that generally speaking retail work is an entry level job that requires no real skills to be hired other than being able to be friendly, or these days to not be actively unpleasant.

While it won't break the bank for Wal-Mart or Hobby Lobby to arbitrarily raise the wages of retail workers, it will have two significant impacts for the rest of us:

1) Smaller retailers for whom employee wages are a significant cost will be pressured to raise wages or if they cannot they will be at yet another major disadvantage when it comes to hiring workers. If you own a small store and haven't been crushed by Amazon and Wal-Mart yet, having to drastically increase wages is going to make it just that much harder to compete.

2) Non-retail workers will have to be paid more to reflect their more valuable skill set. As an example, a newly trained welder with a certificate in welding that took a year or more of study to obtain can get a starting job as a welder around here for $16-18/hour. Welding requires a great deal of training and skill to do properly and the job is hot, dirty and physically demanding (that's what she said). Why would you go through the trouble of learning to weld when you can make just as much stocking scented candles and yarn at Hobby Lobby? 

I have no objection to people making as much as they can for doing their job. If the owners of the Lakers want to pay LeBron James tens of millions of dollars to be an ignoramus political activist who occasionally dribbles a ball, that is their business and bully for him.

However, when one segment of the labor force suddenly leapfrogs other, more skilled segments, it shakes up the whole thing. We won't see an immediate impact but by next year it will be harder for jobs in basic manufacturing to attract workers when they are paying the same wages as Target. That isn't good. We need more people making stuff in America, we don't need more people working retail. If businesses can't hire the workers they need for manufacturing, they will be even more tempted to move production overseas where you can pay middle school kids in Thailand 5% of what you pay an American worker. Libertarians think that is great because it improves the profit for corporations, but it is devastating to our society. In the short term it might seem great for retail workers but in the longer term, plans are already being made to eliminate those workers entirely through self-checkout lanes and robots that replenish shelves, just as fast food workers are being eliminated with self-service kiosks and apps to order your food.

There is a direct relationship between wages and prices. When they move in tandem, it evens out more or less. When one or the other increases or deceases dramatically? Then things go a little haywire. There is already a lot of inflationary pressure in the U.S. thanks to the creation of "money" out of thin air (see: Mo' Magic Money from me and Deflation, Inflation, Collapse – Now With Muppet Jokes from John Wilder). If already struggling businesses get into a wage war to attract workers on top of everything else happening, it is going to increase prices and drive more companies out of business. Our libertarian friends would again applaud this, bad companies should go out of business, but a lot of these are not "bad companies", they are being crushed by government intervention outside of their control.

If manufacturing jobs and skilled trade jobs increase wages by a similar percentage to keep them ahead of retail workers, that is going to make everything more expensive. Durable goods, houses. Everything. If you are in a bunch of debt, this can help. It is easier to pay off $20,000 in credit card debt or a $250,000 mortgage when your wages inflate rapidly. However if you are a saver, it can hurt because inflation will eat up all of your earnings and rapidly diminish your buying power. That is the big reason why you are supposed to invest in the stock market for retirement, to theoretically keep ahead of inflation. Putting $10,000 in a CD or under your mattress when you are 30 means that money is only worth a fraction of what it was worth when you are retired while money in the stock market increasing at historic values* will outpace inflation. In theory and in the past. In 2020 and the near term? I will stick with The Four Gs Of Investing In 2020: Guns, Grub, Gold and Ground*..

Rapid inflation can lead to economic chaos. The government prints money to keep the people happy, prices inflate in response, the government prints more money, and pretty soon you get the infamous trillion dollar bills in Zimbabwe. 


Or the people with wheelbarrows of marks in the Weimar Republic to buy a loaf of bread or using the worthless currency as a cheaper alternative to wallpaper.


These sudden wage increases for retail workers concern me, mostly because they are not based in any real reasoning. Retail workers are not more skilled and with a lot of retailers shut down or limited in hours/capacity, it seems like there shouldn't be a huge demand for them. 

Inflation is a quiet killer until it isn't and we show a lot of signs that we are headed to a dramatic inflationary period. You should consider the evidence before deciding to hold a significant amount of assets in cash or cash equivalents*.

Inflation could be managed on it's own but 2020 and beyond shows all the signs of a series of compounding problems all coming to a head at once. If the money in your pocket this morning has half the buying power in the afternoon, that is going to cause massive instability and the Republic doesn't have much tolerance for more instability.

*I am not an investment advisor, this is not investment advice, past performance is no guarantee of future results, etc

Tuesday, September 22, 2020

Advice And Consent

In what has become a daily, sometimes hourly occurrence, the Left is losing their collective shit again because Trump is poised to name a successor to Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Also as is inevitable, there is a new faith affirming story to go along with this that has been added to the mythology of RBG, specifically that her dying wish was to not be replaced until a new President was installed. Riiiggghhhttt...


I don't know, maybe those were her final words. If that is the case, what a tragic testament to her life that on her death bed she was concerned about politics and preserving the "right" to an abortion. Regardless of whether or not it was true, the Left desperately wants it to be true and so therefore it is and in the same way that a poem on a statue in New York supersedes all immigration laws, so too must RBGs dying wish trump the Constitution. I missed the "fervent dying wish" clause in the Constitution....

It wasn't always this way. Supreme Court justices were replaced on a regular basis like clockwork but then as is almost always the case the Left decides to ratchet up the politicization of the appointment process while accusing conservatives of being the guilty party. In 1987, one of the great legal minds in American history, Judge Robert Bork, was nominated by Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court and was promptly smeared and slandered by Ted Kennedy publicly without a peep from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. That Chairman? Senator Joe Biden. History has a funny way of coming full circle. Bork was not confirmed by the Senate and Reagan, in one of his greatest blunders, nominated Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court. Kennedy was confirmed by a 97-0 vote and went on to be the usually liberal "swing vote" on the Supreme Court. Kennedy was the deciding vote on Obergefell v. Hodges which created a nationwide "right" for homosexuals to "marry" and he also wrote the majority decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey which reaffirmed the "right" to abortion. Even Ted Kennedy probably had no idea how influential their shameful treatment of Judge Bork would be on the course of this nation. 

With the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a woman who managed to rule incorrectly on nearly every case that came before the court, there is a chance, however temporary, perhaps not to reverse much of the damage already done but at the least stem the inevitable tide. 

If our country functioned as intended, this wouldn't be that big of a deal but of course our nation hasn't functioned as it should for the better part of 150 years. So instead of having a calm, rational replacement we are getting the latest existential crisis. It must be exhausting for the Left to endlessly charge from one Most Important Event In Our Lifetime to the next, always at a fever pitch. Little wonder these people are insane. Tucker had a good take on the latest over-the-top response, inflamed by the combination of the thought of losing access to their unholy sacrament of abortion and the idea of Orange Mad Bad getting a third Supreme Court pick.


Just imagine if Trump somehow is re-elected and the GOP holds the Senate. He could replace Clarence Thomas who is getting very old as well as Stephen Breyer who is 82. Trump getting five of the nine justices? The tears would flood the earth.

At this point it looks very much like Amy Coney Barrett will be the nominee. She is a good choice, an attractive woman with mostly solid social conservative credentials. She seems mostly reliable on the issue of immigration according to VDare which raised a cautious flag about her Catholic faith and whether she would listen to the church rather than the Constitution. I am not that concerned about that, most serious Catholic I know consider the bishops and current pope to be buffoons, at least on matters of politics. Trump has stated he will announce his nominee on Saturday and unreliable Mitt Romney has indicated he will support that nominee so that might be the ballgame.

That very well could mean outright physical violence to try to stop the Senate from holding hearings or voting on confirmation, something as Tucker mentioned in the video above has never happened in America. Will we see Senators hurt or killed by the Left in an attempt to prevent Trump's nominee from being confirmed? That is a very real possibility.

While the Left was going to go insane if Trump got the chance to replace RBG, having it occur in an election year and so close to the election is really getting them fired up because of the Merrick Garland thing. Garland was appointed by President Obama in March of 2016 to replace conservative legal giant Antonin Scalia. It would have been a huge win for the Left to replace Scalia with Garland but the Republican controlled Senate refused to hold hearings, much less a vote, ostensibly because it was an election year and Obama was a lame duck. Adults know that McConnell didn't hold hearings or a vote because Garland might have been confirmed. It was pure political maneuvering. Gorsuch was appointed by Trump and confirmed, and while he is no Scalia he is a huge improvement over Garland.

To liberals this means that Trump must not be allowed to replace RBG in an election year. I understand why they think that, most of them are dumb as a bag of hammers and think politics is a religion. The big difference is that Obama was facing a Republican Senate. Trump also has a Republican Senate and apparently has the votes. 

The Constitution has very little to say about the appointment of judges. Article II, Section II has this to say (emphasis in red mine)

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

That is it. The "judges" of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate". That's it. A magnificent use of Federalism here: the justices of the Supreme Court rule on issues as the court of last resort and serve for life but they are appointed by the President who then must get the consent of the Senate. The President gets to appoint the justices but the Senate must approve.

In 2016 Obama got to nominate a replacement, Merrick Garland, as the Constitution provides but he did not get the consent of the Senate, also as provided by the Constitution. The Senate is not required to give consent. The Senate is not required to hold a vote. The Senate is not required to hold hearings. In 2016 they simply indicated their lack of consent by refusing to hold a vote, which is basically the same thing. 

Too bad, so sad.

Was it politics? Sure it was. Duh. It was politics when Nancy Pelosi knelt for violent criminal George Floyd. She didn't give a shit about him and would have called the cops if he was in her driveway but it was political theater. 

Was it legal? 

Abso-freaking-lutely. 

It was legal in 2016. It was legal in 1987. It will be legal if the Senate confirms Trump's pick to replace RBG. 

But shouldn't the American people have a say in the next Supreme Court Justice?

Yes and no.

No, because we are in a republic and don't choose SCOTUS members by vote which is also supposed to help eliminate the political pressures on them and prevent Kim Kardashian from being on the SCOTUS.

But also yes. 

In 2016 the President was elected by the people who had their say in who should nominate a Supreme Court justice, even though I doubt many people voting for Obama thought about that. Obama was elected and he made his choice.

Also in 2016, the Senate had a majority of Republicans who were elected over the prior three election cycles by the people. They had a choice and they chose to not give consent to Obama's selection.

In 2020, we have a President who was elected by the people in 2016 and the Senate is still majority Republican by the will of the people. The President can once again nominate a Justice and the Senate can once again choose to give consent or not.

Take away the hysteria and wailing and gnashing of teeth, and that is what you get. The people spoke by electing Trump and electing a majority of Republicans to the Senate.

BUT MUH POPULAR VOTE!


This kerfuffle is demonstrating once again that most Americas are as ignorant as an iguana about basic civics. Maybe they don't take civics in high school anymore? It doesn't matter how many "popular votes" Hillary got, what matters is that Trump received a majority in electoral college. HIllary's husband Bill only got 43% of the "popular vote" in 1992, 3% less than Trump in 2016, and less than 50% in 1996 but liberals don't think he shouldn't have been President.

The President has the right, obligation and duty to appoint Supreme Court justices when a vacancy occurs. The Senate has the right, obligation and duty to give or withhold consent. 

All the rest of the static is just that, noise meant to obfuscate and try to whip up the liberal base.

Monday, September 21, 2020

Impulse Control

 This seems like a perfectly rational act:


Backstory.

A woman in Lansing, Michigan named Abbieana Williams suspected her boyfriend was cheating on her so obviously the proper response was not to confront him or just break up with him and move on. No, the only sensible response was to....set fire to his mother's house where she was sleeping along with two boys, ages 8 and 4. Melissa Westen and her two grandchildren, 8-year-old Aston Griffin and 4-year-old Jesse Kline IV burned to death.

Burned to death.

Because she thought her boyfriend was cheating on her.

Oh, here she is:

Abbieana Williams 


Then this criminal mastermind decided to throw the police off her trail by texting her boyfriend:

"I'm outside your mom's house...I hope your mom likes being burned alive"

Shrewd. 

Have a friend drive you to your boyfriend's mother's house so there is a witness. Be seen on camera walking around outside of the house. Text your boyfriend that you are going to burn his mother to death because phone companies absolutely can't track where you were when you sent the text or keep a copy of the contents of your text.

Based on the photo and her actions, we are looking at a budding physicist or perhaps a future Nobel Prize winning chemist,

It is hard to function as an individual in a normal society when you lack even the basics of impulse control. When an entire demographic group lacks impulse control?

You get Detroit.

Sunday, September 20, 2020

Wilma Hochstetler: Say Her Name

The story is all too familiar despite the media attempts to hide these stories from view.

Johnathan and Wilma Hochstetler, a Mennonite couple from Indiana, were in Indianapolis late at night changing a tire and fixing the wiring on a trailer. The couple has four children and their youngest, a six year old boy, was with them. He witnessed what happened next.

They were approached by two men who rather than offering to assist this couple like any decent human beings would do, instead robbed the couple at gunpoint. They took their wallets and her cellphone, which I assume they gave up without a struggle. The two thugs walked away, robbery complete. The couple was frightened of course but at least it was over.

It wasn't.

Despite having what they wanted, wallets and a phone, the men apparently stopped and turned around, and shot Wilma, killing her instantly, and also Jonathan who suffered severe injuries. This family of decent people are now shattered.


Four children will grow up without their mother. A six year old boy will have to deal with being there as his mom was murdered and his father shot, and he apparently helped his dad call 911.

The father of her husband, Sam Hochstetler, read a message of forgiveness that let slip the detail we all already assumed:

"I feel no hatred, bitterness, anger, nor revenge towards the two black men that murdered my daughter-in-law,” Sam said. “I extend forgiveness for the two murderers. Revenge only begets more violence. My heart's desire for them is that they would repent, to fall on their faces before the Lord Jesus, and cry out for mercy for their own souls’ sake." 

That is what one would expect from an Anabaptist. As for me? I don't agree with the sentiment, not any more. These men who shot her in the face are not contrite and searching for forgiveness. They most likely don't think they did anything wrong. 

Forgiveness is all fine and dandy but these two men need to be found and either locked up forever or shot dead. Left on the street, it is only a matter of time before they murder someone else, either in anger or in this case just for sport. In a just nation, these men would be swiftly identified and after a trial be strung up to swing in the public square as a warning to others to maybe think before impulsively robbing and murdering decent people.

Wilma will be quickly memory-holed by the media. As of tonight, a White woman murdered in front of her husband and her six year old child in Indianapolis warrants exactly one mention from the hometown Indianapolis Star:


One whole story from the 17th.

Meanwhile, Kenosha rapist Jacob Blake?



Five pages of mentions for a rapist in Wisconsin.

George Floyd?


He gets five pages of mentions, at least, for a violent career criminal who died of a drug overdose while fighting with cops after committing yet another crime. 

Then hometown "hero" Dreasjon Reed, a black man killed while shooting at cops who has nevertheless become a martyr to the local black community and liberal White media alike.


He gets five pages as well and I assume in all three cases that five pages is the most results their search engine will return.

Wilma Hochstetler, a White Mennonite woman, who has never done anything but be kind of people her whole life, murdered by a pair of black men?

One story, soon to be forgotten, swept under the rug like the rest of the hundreds of thousands of Whites who are victims of black-on-White interracial violence every sixty seconds in America.

Her husband Johnathan , a father and business owner who employs other people and works hard for his family? Shot in the face by black thugs who probably have never worked an honest day in their lives and facing a life of devastation from the loss of his wife and trying to raise their four children on his own.

Her little six year old boy who watched his mother gunned down by animals and helped his father call 911? That poor boy is going to have nightmares for a lifetime. I guess we should look on the bright side, I doubt the two blacks who shot his parents knew he was there or they likely would have shot the little boy as well.

Her three other children, daughters who need their mother and were learning how to be mothers and wives from her example? They get to step into the void and try to keep things together while their father recovers and they bury their mother.

I don't know the Hochstetler family but I know lots of families like them. They probably would never want to say the things I am saying, their faith and tradition forbids it. Johnathan's father can talk about forgiveness and I respect that but right now I am incensed that once again we see the same pattern repeated over and over of black violence taking the life of a White person and the media not only ignoring it, not only pretending the opposite is true but also lionizing as heroes people like Dreasjon Reed, Jacob Blake and George Floyd. The media doesn't care about Wilma dying because she is White and a decent person but they will go out of their way to fan the false flames of racial resentment among blacks and unjustified racial guilt among Whites because their agenda is and has always been undermining the American people.

Remember your ABCs:

Always Be Carrying

Be on alert, all the time and especially in "diverse" neighborhoods. Never turn your back, never let down your guard. Best of all, stay away from those neighborhoods.

It is open season on decent Americans. Don't be a victim.

It is hard to not write the words I really want to write, to say the things I really want to say.

Wilma Hochstetler was a good person. She deserved better. Her family deserved better. Her killers deserve justice, swift and severe. 

America deserves better than seeing people like the Hochstetler's devastated while pieces of garbage get streets named after them.

Say Her Name


Saturday, September 19, 2020

We Are Now At DefCon Spicy

A little over 11 years ago, Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts died of cancer. Even though Ted Kennedy was a garbage human who murdered at least one woman, was a drunk and a womanizer and helped smooth the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 by lying to the American people and claiming it would not lead to millions of immigrants and the changing of the demographics of America (it did and was always intended to do so), I still wrote what I think was a very gracious post on my old blog: On the passing of Ted Kennedy.

Times have changed.

A year ago I was openly hoping for the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Why Is It Wrong To Hope Someone Dies?. Why wouldn't I? She was awful for this country, pushed through positions that are antithetical to everything I believe in and her death paves the way to potentially overturning Roe v Wade and saving millions of babies and also reinforcing the 2nd Amendment. She has been clinging to that seat for far longer than she should have but nature and/or divine justice finally caught up to her. I don't know what sort of dark deity she sold her soul to in order to prolong her life or maybe it really was drinking the blood of virgins as I have speculated but her string has run out.

I really couldn't have drawn up something to throw the most contentious election in our history, one already pregnant with the looming threat of violence, into more turmoil and ratchet up the insane rhetoric from the Left quite like Ruth Bader Ginsburg dying in mid-September. Had she died in late October, it would have been too late to really get a nominee pushed through but now there is just enough time to get a nominee announced, hearings quickly held and a vote to confirm well before the election. For once I agree with circa 2016 Hillary Clinton: to not nominate and confirm Trump's nominee would be a dishonor to our Constitution:


The Left is taking it well. Here is a 67 year old woman who was a United States Senator remarking on the passing of RBG...


When Anotnin Scalia died, I was bummed because he was a towering intellect on the court but I wasn't "broken" nor was I "scared". How emotionally fragile can you be? This isn't really a ringing endorsement of having women holding public office.

It wasn't a long time at all for them to go from "Oh woe is us! She was a kween!" to "If Trump tries to nominate a replacement we are going to war". From brain eating Iranian cannibal Reza Aslan


Who is the "we" he is speaking of, because that sissy sure as hell isn't going to do anything but his rhetoric will inspire other loons like this guy...


Smart for this guy to threaten the life of the Senate Majority Leader. Goldman you say? He blocked me after posting this:


A handful of FBI informants carrying a sign that someone clumsily photoshopped. Compelling! 

Then there is 85 year old actor Russ Tamblyn who starred in West Side Story in 1961, talking about going to war.


What is he going to mount up on, his Rascal scooter?

Lots of other leftists were also promising violence if McConnell holds hearings for a replacement.

So what happens?

Most people are assuming Trump will nominate someone next week, most likely fellow Hoosier Amy Coney Barrett, a generally respected conservative jurist who is a devout Roman Catholic with seven children. She clerked for Antonin Scalia, something I didn't know until this morning. As you can already see, replacing a Jewish liberal woman with a conservative Roman Catholic woman is going to cause apoplexy from the usual suspects.


There will be hearings and I hope they are closed to the general public. The circus we saw during the Kavanaugh hearings will be a walk in the park compared to these hearings and actual violence is quite likely. No one wants to see a haggard Alyssa Milano with some open top blouse spilling her sloppy breasts glaring at Judge Barrett. 

Will Barrett be confirmed? 

That is by no means certain. There are several very squishy Republicans like Susan Collins and Mitt Romney who cannot be relied upon. Lisa Murkowski has apparently already signaled she won't vote to confirm until the next President is sworn in. In the case of a tie, Pence would cast the tie-breaker and boy would that make the Left really upset.

Some "conservatives" are arguing that Trump should wait because if he nominates and the Senate confirms a replacement, the Left will pack the court when they take power. That is just stupid because the Left is already planning on doing that (see: The Left Keeps Putting Their Cards On The Table).

The Left is going full scorched earth when they take power, whether in January or in four years. Nothing will be left to chance: "statehood" for Puerto Rico and D.C., packing all of the Federal courts to overwhelm conservative jurists, eliminating the electoral college, piling huge numbers of new non-White voters into red states (more on this in a future post). Once they get power, they will be lodged in like a tick and it a tick it will likely be bloody to dislodge them.

We still have a lot of time until the election. Lots can still happen and probably will to ratchet things up even more. I pondered this morning what could happen to make things even more crazed.


Biden is also very old and frail and not in good health. He is apparently going into hiding today, the day after Ginsburg died. What if he has a massive stroke or even dies before the election? Holy crap.

2020 is the year that just keeps on giving. Pop some Tums, the spicy times are just starting.

Friday, September 18, 2020

Happy 2020!

 After 8 1/2 months of making us eat shit by the shovel-load, Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies and I say to 2020:


Thank you 2020!

The Latest From The City Of Brotherly Love

Shall we check in on Philadelphia and see what is happening?


Well then. 

I think that works out to about one mass shooting every week and a half so I guess things are going swimmingly in Phillie. More good news from the article...

Wednesday night’s shooting also brings the total number of people shot so far this year in Philadelphia past 1,472 — the total reported during all of 2019.

To date, police have recorded 323 homicides — a 32% increase over the same time last year and the highest total at this point in the year in more than a decade.

Those kind of numbers are hard to imagine. More than a murder per day, around five people shot on average every single day. Worse, this is the general state of affairs in most every large city in America.

Tell me again how White supremacy is a major threat to the U.S.

Thursday, September 17, 2020

Defund The Police? How About Defund The University System.

In the latest example of the lunacy in the American "academic" world, the University of Chicago has declared that they will only admit graduate student into the English department if they are interested in "black Studies"...

For the 2020-2021 graduate admissions cycle, the University of Chicago English Department is accepting only applicants interested in working in and with Black Studies. We understand Black Studies to be a capacious intellectual project that spans a variety of methodological approaches, fields, geographical areas, languages, and time periods. For more information on faculty and current graduate students in this area, please visit our Black Studies page.   

What are "black Studies" and what does that field of study have to do with English?

Nothing.

In case you need a recap:

- English is the language of the people of England, generally understood throughout history to be White. Sure there were British subjects who were non-White but the British people are White.

- English is the primary language of the United States which was founded by and built from nothing by White people.

- Essentially all of the great literature and almost all of the decent literature ever produced in English was produced by White people.

- The University of Chicago was founded by White people, as was Chicago itself. 

- UoC has had 100 Nobel laureates and other than Barack Obama for his "peace" prize, I don't see many on the list who aren't White or Jewish. 

All that aside, if you want to be a graduate student in English, itself a mainly useless way to spend tens of thousands of dollars and several years of your life, at the University of Chicago, you must commit to "black Studies". 

I wonder, if blacks are producing English literature that is inherently worthwhile to study, why does UoC feel it necessary to blackmail students into studying their works?

Our university system, built by White people, was once the envy of the world but today the very worst thing you can do to expand your mind is to spend four years being force-fed this garbage.

The entire system of government grants and loans backed by the government should be dismantled. Unless you can demonstrate an ability to repay your college loans based on your field of study leading to gainful employment, you shouldn't be able to borrow money to pay for college. We need to reduce by about 75% the number of students in college and the number of colleges and universities in general.

It won't happen of course but maybe when we rebuild we can remember what happened when virtually every high school graduate ended up in college learning about English without studying the great writers who wrote in English.