Law abiding political candidate Marie Newman returns illegal campaign contribution that criminal Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had illegally given to her

Marie Newman is a law abiding political candidate who is running for office in Illinois.

The largest campaign contribution that anyone is allowed to legally give to her campaign is $2,000.

However, this report from the Federal Election Commission shows that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez donated $5,000 to Newman’s campaign.

Here’s a screenshot which proves that Ocasio-Cortez broke federal campaign finance law. Source: https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00639591/1357189/sb/21

Fortunately, Newman is a law abiding citizen, and returned the excess $3,000.

On the other hand, Ocasio-Cortez is a criminal who violated federal campaign finance law.

Democrats are always going on and on and on about how much we need to reform the current campaign finance laws. Well, here’s a chance for those very same Democrats to publicly speak out in favor of prosecuting one of their own for breaking the campaign finance laws which are already on the books.

October 18, 2019. Tags: , , , . Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Leave a comment.

Video: Antifa mob chokes and beats pro-Trump man in Minneapolis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpfrGE_UIfs

October 18, 2019. Tags: , , , , . Antifa. Leave a comment.

Environmental hypocrite Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez flies to Denmark to tell everyone else to reduce their use of fossil fuels

https://nypost.com/2019/10/08/aoc-takes-first-international-trip-as-lawmaker/

AOC takes first international trip as lawmaker

October 8, 2019

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is taking the Green New Deal global.

The New York Democrat posted an Instagram story Tuesday afternoon showing herself walking through the airport as she headed for her first trip abroad as a freshman lawmaker.

She’s off to Copenhagen, Denmark, for the C40 World Mayors Summit.

“After a very busy week in district, I’m headed to Copenhagen for a global C40 conference where mayors and a lot of other public servants are going to be convening to discuss what we’ll be – what actions we need to take for the climate crisis,” she told her followers.

Mayors from Los Angeles, Boston and Philadelphia, among others, will all be in attendance. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio will not attend, The Post confirmed.

October 16, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , . Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Environmentalism. Leave a comment.

ABC News’ ‘slaughter in Syria’ footage is really from a Kentucky gun range

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuO6yJrRAYw

October 16, 2019. Tags: , , , . Media bias. Leave a comment.

Maria Ana Carrola Flores, the UC San Diego student who got hit by a car at 1:30 a.m. during an anti-Trump protest, actually sued her college because it “failed to warn students of the danger of walking onto the freeway”

You may remember this video, which I have posted before. It shows an anti-Trump protest near UC San Diego that took place at 1:30 a.m. a few days after Trump was elected President. One of the protestors, a UC San Diego student named Maria Ana Carrola Flores, gets hit by a car:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GtM-debHD8

Maria Ana Carrola Flores chose to stand in the middle of a busy highway at 1:30 a.m.

And after she got hit by a car, she actually sued the driver who hit her.

She also sued the city and county of San Diego, UC San Diego, and the UC Board of Regents.

The Washington Free Beacon explained the reason for her lawsuit with the following: (the bolding is mine)

Flores’s attorney, Jerold Sullivan, argued that while his client accepted her responsibility for the accident, others shared blame as well. Sullivan claimed that according to Flores, campus officials had encouraged the protest, did not control it, and failed to warn students of the danger of walking onto the freeway.

So she sued her college because it didn’t teach her that it was dangerous to stand in the middle of a busy highway at 1:30 a.m.

That’s insane.

Fortunately, a judge dismissed her lawsuit.

And besides, since she did insist on filing a lawsuit because someone didn’t teach her that standing in the middle of a busy highway at 1:30 a.m. was dangerous, then she should have filed the lawsuit against her parents, not her college.

October 11, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Dumb lawsuits, Idiots blocking traffic. 1 comment.

Greta Thunberg is an environmental hypocrite

Greta Thunberg wants the whole world to think that she cares about the environment because she traveled across the Atlantic ocean by boat instead of by airplane.

However, in the real world, multiple yacht crew members flew on an airplane from Europe to New York in order to bring the yacht back to Europe.

Furthermore, the yacht itself was made from propane and petroleum – the very same things that Thunberg was protesting against.

Of course, this whole environmental movement is far more about virtue signaling than it is about actually protecting the environment, which is why pretty much every single environmental celebrity and environmental politician is, in reality, an environmental hypocrite.

This video, which I wrote the dialogue for, is called “Hitler gets mad at Al Gore’s global warming hypocrisy.” The video’s description includes links to sources to verify each and every claim:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfr37Xn9IL8

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: I never trust anyone who doesn’t live by the rules that they expect everyone else to live by.

October 9, 2019. Tags: , , , , , . Environmentalism. Leave a comment.

The only way that rich people could pay Bernie Sanders’s proposed annual 8% wealth tax would be by selling enough stock to get the money to pay the tax. This would drive down stock prices, and would hurt every single middle class person who has a pension, a 401K, or an IRA.

Billionaires don’t just have billions of dollars in cash just sitting around, waiting to pay Bernie Sanders’s proposed annual 8% wealth tax.

For example, the richest person in the world is Jeff Bezos, the guy who created amazon. 99.9% of his wealth is in the form of stock in the company that he himself created. In the beginning, that company was worth zero. The only reason that it has value today is because he created that value. The stock in any company is worth only as much as what people are willing to pay for it.

If Sanders forced Bezos to pay an 8% annual wealth tax, Bezos would have to sell enough of his amazon stock to get the money to pay the tax.

That would drive the price of the stock down.

And that would hurt every single middle class person who has a pension, a 401K, or an IRA.

And it gets even worse than that.

Sanders tried to justify his annual 8% wealth tax by saying

“Billionaires should not exist.”

But if billionaires don’t exist, then the companies that those billionaires created would not exist either.

And the goods and services that are provided by those companies would not exist either.

Which is why Sanders also said that people in the U.S. have too many choices when it comes to deodorant and shoes, and that it’s a “good thing” when people have to wait in line to buy food.

Sanders said that Americans have too many choices when it comes to deodorant and shoes. These are his exact words:

“You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country.”

Well, as it turns out, the policies of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro have caused a shortage of both deodorant and shoes in Venezuela.

Sanders also said that it was a “good thing” when people have to wait in line for food.

These are Sanders’s exact words:

“It’s funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, cause people are lining up for food. That’s a good thing! In other countries people don’t line up for food: the rich get the food and the poor starve to death.”

You can see and hear Sanders saying those words in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc

Well, as it turns out, the policies of Chavez and Maduro have caused shortages of food in Venezuela.

For example, in May 2017, the Washington Post reported:

In a recent survey of 6,500 Venezuelan families by the country’s leading universities, three-quarters of adults said they lost weight in 2016 — an average of 19 pounds… a level of hunger almost unheard-of outside war zones or areas ravaged by hurricane, drought or plague.

Then in February 2018, Reuters reported:

Venezuelans reported losing on average 11 kilograms (24 lbs) in body weight last year… according to a new university study…

That’s 43 pounds in two years.

Here’s a photograph from 2014 of people in Venezuela waiting in line for food: (posted here under fair use from http://www.businessinsider.com/long-food-lines-are-in-venezuela-2014-2 )

You can read all about how Venezuela ended up like this at this link.

All of this happened in Venezuela because Chavez and Maduro decided to wage war against the rich.

What is exactly what Sanders is trying to do.

In fact, I have never, ever heard Sanders criticize any of the specific economic policies of Chavez or Maduro.

Sanders hasn’t criticized Chavez or Maduro for setting price controls on food.

Sanders hasn’t criticized Chavez or Maduro for nationalizing farmland.

Sanders hasn’t criticized Chavez or Maduro for nationalizing the electric, steel, cement, and construction industries.

On the contrary, every single economic policy that Sanders has ever expressed support for adopting in the U.S. is completely in line with the economic policies that were enacted by Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela.

You cannot help the poor and the middle class by hurting the rich people who provide the goods and services, as well as the jobs, that the poor and the middle class need.

Bernie Sanders’s hatred for the rich exceeds any concern for the poor and the middle class that he claims to have.

Sanders would rather hurt the middle class and the poor, as long as it also meant that he got to hurt the rich.

A falling tide lowers all ships.

Sanders has repeatedly criticized the existence of “millionaires and billionaires.” (Although he stopped doing so after the New York Times reported that he was one of them.)

Sanders defended his own millionaire status by saying the following:

“I wrote a best-selling book. If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.”

I agree with Sanders.

But here’s the difference between what I believe and what Sanders believes: I believe that it’s a good thing when any person becomes a millionaire or billionaire by providing their customers with the goods and services that their customers choose to buy. By comparison, the only person whose millionaire or billionaire status Sanders has ever defended is his own.

And I never trust anyone who doesn’t hold themselves to the same standards that they expect everyone else to follow.

October 9, 2019. Tags: , , , . Bernie Sanders, Economics. 1 comment.

Rebecca Watson: Facebook Deletes Science Fact Check at Ted Cruz’s Request

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gwinZO8J0I

October 7, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , . Abortion, Health care, Media bias, Science. Leave a comment.

Candace Owens gives speech at White House, explaining how Democrats hurt black people

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LObY49p3MDQ

October 6, 2019. Tags: , , . Donald Trump. Leave a comment.

Antifa Harass Elderly Couple Crossing The Street

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mtIwff6E_U

October 6, 2019. Tags: , . Antifa. Leave a comment.

Why a “Billionaire” Wealth Tax Would Hurt the Working Poor and the Middle Class

https://fee.org/articles/why-a-billionaire-wealth-tax-would-hurt-the-working-poor-and-the-middle-class/

Why a “Billionaire” Wealth Tax Would Hurt the Working Poor and the Middle Class

Although the wealth tax was drafted with the poor in mind, its passing could cause them more harm than benefit.

By Mark Hornshaw

October 4, 2019

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders wants to tax billionaires out of existence, or at least make them an endangered species. His proposed wealth tax of up to 8 percent per year would mean “the wealth of billionaires would be cut in half over 15 years,” he says.

The progressive tax would start at 1 percent on retained wealth over $32 million, rising to 2 percent over $50 million, and so on, reaching to the top rate of 8 percent on wealth over $10 billion. Whatever is left would be taxed again the following year, and every year until it was gone.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that you don’t have an ethical problem with taxing people a second time on wealth that has already been taxed. And let’s set aside the issue of whether billionaires would simply leave their wealth on the table for Sanders to take, rather than fleeing to places with less ambitious governments. Let’s posit for the sake of argument that the tax achieves its aims.

The question then becomes, would it be beneficial for the working poor who Sanders is appealing to? Would it leave them better off or worse?

Net Worth Isn’t What You Think It Is

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has a net worth of $109 billion, according to Bloomberg. If you think you can get a decent abode for $1 million, then it seems like he could buy 109,000 plush houses. Does anybody need that much wealth? Wouldn’t it be better off going to people who need it more? How does leaving that corporate wealth in private hands help the average person? This is the simplistic way that Sanders wants you to think about the situation. But this is not a true reflection of the situation at all.

In pre-capitalist feudal times, wealth was acquired by conquest and subjugation. The Duke in the castle was there because his group was militarily the strongest, having defeated the previous band of marauders, who defeated everybody else in the area. A Duke’s castle might be sacked by the army of another Duke, but the common person’s lot in life would be the same, albeit with a new master.

In this system, nearly all production was for the benefit of the wealthy “strongman.” The tailor-made fine clothes for the Duke. The blacksmith shod the Duke’s horses, the woodworker made the Duke’s furniture, and so on. For everybody else, virtually nothing was produced at all apart from meager subsistence. It was not possible to “become” wealthy in such a society—there was no peaceful process by which it could occur.

Sanders and many others would like you to view the world in that paradigm. But that is not how a market economy works.

Sure, the rich still appreciate their custom furniture and fine clothes—and you can make a modest living as a craftsman or tailor. But you don’t become a billionaire yourself from those activities. You become a billionaire in a market economy by producing products for millions, or even billions of people.

The people who started Amazon, Google, Walmart, Apple, Microsoft, and Disney got rich through their unparalleled level of service to the masses. They were “voted rich” through the voluntary choices of millions of people.

Amazon is one of the most amazing engines of poverty reduction and enhancement of living standards the world has ever seen. They literally make the working poor less poor, by offering them goods and services they like at prices they can afford. (Not to mention the opportunities Amazon creates by empowering and encouraging entrepreneurs to start new side businesses at very low start-up cost.)

The Problem with a Wealth Tax

I’m sure Bezos has some nice houses (as does Sanders) and other luxury items that would make our minds boggle. But not $109 billion worth. Most of the wealth of people like Bezos consists of shares in the companies they started, which were initially worth zero. It is other people’s recent valuations of those shares on the stock exchange that we are quoting. The figures come from multiplying the last traded parcel of shares by the total number of shares owned – not from any realistic offer to purchase the whole company.

Somebody like Bezos does not normally keep a spare $8 billion under the mattress, just in case Uncle Sam asks for it. In order to raise that money, he would have to sell down some of the stock of his company, and probably much more than $8 billion worth at the current valuation. But who would buy them?

When you credibly threaten to confiscate wealth, valuations can plummet. Not to mention the fact that all other billionaires (at least American ones) would be in the same predicament, being forced sellers of large portions of their own stocks.

Perhaps during the initial rounds of the tax, there may be some small investors, small enough to be flying below Sanders’s radar for the time being. But if these shareholders thought they could do a better job running those companies, they could just buy those shares on the open market right now. By not doing so in an un-coerced market, they are indicating that they feel less competent than the current owners.

So over time, it would be unlikely that any new Amazons or Apples would be started, and existing firms would be placed in ever less capable hands, with ever lower valuations as the wealth tax works its way down the line from billionaires to millionaires.

Sanders would either have to tax a vastly diminished pie or ask foreign investors to buy up US firms or, more likely, just confiscate shares directly and nationalize the companies. After a very short time, these companies would end up being majority-owned by the state – a veritable “trillionaire.”

Who’s Best Suited to Run a Business?

But perhaps you agree with Sanders that billionaires should not even exist, so it is still worth it anyway, regardless of how much tax is raised. The key question is, would the state do a better job running those companies than the entrepreneurs who started them or the investors who may have voluntarily bought them?

This is an important question, since these companies were started to provide goods and services to the masses, so it is the poor and middle class who will suffer if they do not operate efficiently. But now, instead of being run by competent, productive, future-oriented billionaires, these companies would be managed by an incompetent, non-productive, ultra-short-term-oriented trillionaire institution.

A billionaire businessperson could, if they wanted to, spend their fortune building statues of themselves. But that would only be a drain on the wealth they had acquired through previous rounds of serving customers. They would quickly find that it does not generate new income, and would promptly stop, choosing instead to invest in ways that expand the business by serving even more people. There is an effective feedback loop to weed out unproductive choices and reward productive ones.

But the state, for its entire existence, has had the privilege of being able to just confiscate any resources it wants and order them to be used in any way its rulers direct. It can choose to build statues, pyramids, or whatever it wants, whether or not it serves real consumer needs. Neither does it have to worry about competition from new entrants doing a better job; it can just ban them. Since nobody gets to choose whether to commit the resources or buy the finished goods, there is no way of knowing whether those resources were spent wisely or poorly.

This does not mean people in government don’t make any good decisions. They will stumble upon some good ones over time. But the people involved do not bear any direct consequences for their bad decisions, and neither are they directly rewarded for their good decisions. They have less effective mechanisms for weeding out the bad decisions and doubling down on the good ones. There is more incentive for managers and employees to make their own job more comfortable and less demanding, and there is less consequence for leaving customers twisting in the wind.

In short, a wealth tax means state-owned enterprises, and a state-owned enterprise can get away with being unresponsive, self-absorbed and lazy.

If you dislike productive billionaires, you ought to be 1,000 times more suspect of confiscatory trillionaires.

October 6, 2019. Tags: , , , , , . Bernie Sanders, Communism, Economics. Leave a comment.

R.I.P. Ginger Baker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Gze0PxDKgQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF-pMingp6A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUxYzfLZkpc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=794WnKLQ2Yc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DES2KOq5SoE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYYeM_t6b5c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCc00pX_pFA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbx2Os3wPTg

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/06/arts/music/ginger-baker-dead.html

Ginger Baker, Superstar Rock Drummer With Cream, Is Dead at 80

October 6, 2019

Ginger Baker, who helped redefine the role of the drums in rock and became a superstar in the process, died on Sunday in a hospital in southeastern England. He was 80.

His family confirmed his death in a post on his official Twitter account.

Mr. Baker drew worldwide attention for his approach to the drums, as sophisticated as it was forceful, when he teamed with the guitarist Eric Clapton and the bassist Jack Bruce in the hugely successful British band Cream in 1966.

Keith Moon of the Who was more uninhibited; John Bonham of Led Zeppelin — a band formed in 1968, the year Cream broke up — was slicker. But Mr. Baker brought a new level of artistry to his instrument, and he was the first rock drummer to be prominently featured as a soloist and to become a star in his own right. Mr. Clapton praised him as “a fully formed musician” whose “musical capabilities are the full spectrum.”

Both as a member of the ensemble and as a soloist, Mr. Baker captivated audiences and earned the respect of his fellow percussionists with playing that was, as Neil Peart, the drummer with the band Rush, once said, “extrovert, primal and inventive.” Mr. Baker, Mr. Peart added, “set the bar for what rock drumming could be.”

But Mr. Baker, who got his start in jazz combos and cited the likes of Max Roach and Elvin Jones as influences, bristled when the word “rock” was applied to his playing. “I’m a jazz drummer,” he told the British newspaper The Telegraph in 2013. “You have to swing. There are hardly any rock drummers I know who can do that.”

Mr. Baker’s appearance behind the drum kit — flaming red hair, flailing arms, eyes bulging with enthusiasm or shut tight in concentration — made an indelible impression. So, unfortunately, did his well-publicized drug problems and his volatile personality.

Mr. Baker, who by his own count quit heroin 29 times, was candid about his drug and alcohol abuse in his autobiography, “Hellraiser,” published in Britain in 2009.

He recalled driving from Los Angeles to San Francisco while on tour with the band Blind Faith in 1969 and being more amused than surprised when he heard a report on the radio that he had died from a heroin overdose.

Of a later tour, he wrote, “In 1983-84, I formed the Ginger Baker Trio with guitarist John Simms and bassist Ian Macdonald and we did a tour that included Malta, Spain and Germany; but I can’t remember anything about it due to the fact that I was drinking so heavily.”

He was also, by all accounts, not a very likable man. Journalists who interviewed him tended to find him uncooperative at best, confrontational at worst. The hostility between Mr. Baker and Mr. Bruce, which sometimes led to onstage altercations, was the stuff of rock legend. The 2012 documentary “Beware of Mr. Baker” — the title is taken from a sign outside the house in South Africa where he was living at the time — begins with footage of Mr. Baker physically attacking the film’s director, Jay Bulger.

“If they’ve got a problem with me, come and see me and punch me on the nose,”Mr. Baker says in that film. “I ain’t going to sue you; I’m going to hit you back.”

But if he was difficult to deal with, his talent was impossible to ignore. As A. O. Scott of The New York Times noted in his review of “Beware of Mr. Baker,” Mr. Baker’s music was ultimately “the only reason anyone should take an interest in him.”

Peter Edward Baker — he became known as Ginger during childhood because of his red hair — was born on Aug. 19, 1939, in the Lewisham area of southeast London, to Frederick and Ruby (Bayldon) Baker. His father, a bricklayer, was killed in action during World War II.

Drawn to the drums at an early age, Mr. Baker talked his way into a job with a traditional-jazz combo when he was 16 despite his lack of professional experience. Before long, he was well established on the London jazz scene. He also had a heroin habit that would dog him for decades.

In 1962 Mr. Baker joined Blues Incorporated, one of the earliest British rhythm-and-blues bands, beginning his contentious but musically rewarding association with Mr. Bruce. When the organist and saxophonist Graham Bond left that band in 1964 to form his own group, the Graham Bond Organisation, Mr. Baker and Mr. Bruce went with him.

Two years later they teamed with Mr. Clapton, whose work with the Yardbirds and John Mayall’s Bluesbreakers had made him one of Britain’s most celebrated guitarists, to form Cream.

Performing a repertoire that mixed original compositions with radical reinterpretations of old blues songs, Cream was an instant sensation. Within two years, the band went from nightclubs to stadiums and released four albums, whose total sales were estimated at 35 million. But in 1968, at the height of its success, Cream disbanded.

One reason for the breakup was the continuing animosity between Mr. Baker and Mr. Bruce. Another, Mr. Baker later said, was the extreme volume at which Mr. Clapton and Mr. Bruce played.

“For the first 18 months it was great,” he said in 2013. “But things got too bloody big and too bloody loud. They kept piling these huge Marshall speakers one on top of another. That’s why my hearing’s wrecked.”

Mr. Baker’s next band was, on paper, even bigger than Cream: Blind Faith, in which he and Mr. Clapton joined forces with the singer, keyboardist and guitarist Steve Winwood, known for his work with the Spencer Davis Group and Traffic. (The less famous Ric Grech was the bassist.) Hopes were high, but Blind Faith imploded after one album and one tour, the victim of excessive hype and conflicting egos.

Following the similarly brief life of his next band, Ginger Baker’s Air Force, a jazz-rock outfit with a saxophone section, Mr. Baker led a peripatetic life and stayed largely out of the spotlight.

He spent much of the 1970s in Lagos, Nigeria, where he built a recording studio and became immersed in African music, performing and recording with the singer, songwriter and political activist Fela Kuti. He also developed a love for polo that over the years would prove almost as costly as his drug habit: He drove himself into debt more than once buying and importing polo ponies.

In the ensuing decades he was in and out of various bands, ranging from the hard-rock group Masters of Reality to a jazz trio in which his high-profile sidemen were the guitarist Bill Frisell and the bassist Charlie Haden. He was also in and out of financial trouble and moved frequently, living in England, Italy, Los Angeles and South Africa, where he settled in 1999 and stayed until returning to England in 2012.

Mr. Baker and the other members of Cream were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 1993. The band reunited for concerts in London and New York in 2005 and received a Grammy Award for lifetime achievement in 2006.

Whatever hope there might have been for another reunion ended when Jack Bruce died in 2014.

Mr. Baker was married four times. He is survived by his wife, Kudzai Baker, a nurse from Zimbabwe with whom he lived in Kent, England, and three children: Nettie Baker, who has written several books about her relationship with him; Leda Baker, a business analyst; and Kofi Baker, a drummer. All were born in the 1960s during Mr. Baker’s first marriage, to the artist Liz Finch.

In 2013, although he had serious health problems, Mr. Baker toured and recorded with a quartet whimsically named the Ginger Baker Jazz Confusion. Interviewed that year on the BBC television program “Newsnight,” he claimed to have “lost everything six or seven times in my life” and suggested that the motivation for his return to music was more financial than artistic.

“I thought I’d retired,” he said. “Managed to sort of outlive my pension, as it were, so I had to go back to work.”

Asked in that same interview how he would like to be remembered, he paused for a moment and then gave a one-word answer:

“Drummer.”

October 6, 2019. Tags: , , . Music. Leave a comment.

Netherlands Liberal MP Tjeerd de Groot calls for livestock production to be reduced by half

Last year, I published this blog post, which is called, “Here’s how most Venezuelans lost an average of 43 pounds in two years.”

Here’s a photograph from 2014 of people in Venezuela waiting in line for food: (posted here under fair use from http://www.businessinsider.com/long-food-lines-are-in-venezuela-2014-2 )

It looks like the Netherlands might be trying to achieve a similar effect.

The BBC just reported:

Liberal MP Tjeerd de Groot called for livestock production to be halved, meaning six million fewer pigs and 50 million fewer chickens

Meanwhile, I’d like to once again remind everyone that Bernie Sanders actually said that it was a “good thing” when people have to wait in line for food.

These are Sanders’s exact words:

“It’s funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, cause people are lining up for food. That’s a good thing! In other countries people don’t line up for food: the rich get the food and the poor starve to death.”

You can see and hear Sanders saying those words in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc

Depending on how things go next year, Bernie Sanders may be the next U.S. President.

October 2, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Bernie Sanders, Environmentalism. Leave a comment.

Greta Thunberg without a script to read from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g

September 27, 2019. Tags: , , , . Environmentalism. Leave a comment.

CNN removed 540 words from the transcript of Trump’s phone call to frame him for something that he didn’t do

You can read about it at this link:

https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/25/cnn-just-yadda-yadda-yaddad-540-words-to-frame-trump-for-favor-he-never-requested/#.XYvr6bd00yo.twitter

 

September 26, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Media bias. Leave a comment.

Scott Adams: A Message for Children About Climate Change

https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/09/23/a-message-for-children-about-climate-change/

A Message for Children About Climate Change

By Scott Adams

September 23, 2019

Dear Children,

I’m sorry adults have frightened you about climate change and how it might affect your future. You might be less afraid if you knew some facts that adults intentionally do not explain to you. I’ll tell you here.

The news was once a source of real information, or so we thought. But in the modern world, the news people discovered they can make more money by presenting scary news regardless of whether it is true or not. Today, much of the news on the right and the left is opinion that is meant to scare you, not inform you, because scary things get more attention, and that makes the news business more profitable. The same is true for people who write books; authors often make books scary so you will buy them. Most adults know all the scariness is not real. Most kids do not. You just learned it.

Nuclear energy used to be dangerous, back in the olden days. Today’s nuclear power plants (the ones built in the past 20 years all over the world) have killed zero people, and are considered the safest form of energy in the world. More people have died installing solar panels and falling off roofs than have died from nuclear power problems anywhere in the world for the past few decades. And nuclear energy is the obvious way to address climate change, say most of the smartest adults in the world, because it can provide abundant, cheap, clean energy with zero carbon emissions.

Nuclear energy as a solution to climate change is one of the rare solutions backed by several Democrats running for president and nearly all Republicans. Please note that two Democrats in favor of nuclear energy (Corey Booker and Andrew Yang) are among the youngest and smartest in the game. To be fair, the oldest Democrat running for president, Joe Biden, also supports nuclear energy because he is well-informed.

If you are worried about nuclear waste, you probably should not be. Every country with nuclear energy (and there are lots of them) successfully stores their nuclear waste. If you put all the nuclear waste in the world in one place, it would fit on one football field. It isn’t a big problem. And new nuclear power designs will actually eat that nuclear waste and turn it into electricity, so the total amount of waste could come way down.

The United Nations estimates that the economic impact of climate change will reduce the economy by 10% in eighty years. What they don’t tell you is that the economy will be about five times bigger and better by then, so you won’t even notice the 10% that didn’t happen. And that worst case is only if we do nothing to address climate change, which is not the case.

A number of companies have recently built machines that can suck CO2 right out of the air. At the moment, using those machines would be too expensive. But as they come down in cost and improve in efficiency, we have a solution already in hand should it ever be needed. It would be expensive, but there is no real risk of CO2 ruining the world now that we know how to remove any excess from the atmosphere. (Plants need CO2 to thrive, so we don’t want to remove too much. Greenhouses actually pump in CO2 to make plants grow better.)

Scientists tell us that we could reduce climate risks by planting more trees. (A lot more.) That’s all doable, should the world decide it is necessary. There are a number of other companies and technologies that also address climate change in a variety of ways. Any one of the approaches I mentioned (nuclear energy, CO2 scrubbers, planting trees) could be enough to address any climate risks, but there are dozens of ways of dealing with climate change, and more coming every day.

Throughout all modern history, when we humans see a problem coming from far away, we have a 100% success rate in solving it. Climate change is no different. All the right people are working hard at a wide variety of solutions and already know how to get there, meaning more nuclear power plus CO2 scrubbers, plus lots of green power from solar, wind, and more.

If you are worried about rising sea levels, don’t be. The smartest and richest people in the world are still buying property on the beach. They don’t see the problem. And if sea levels do rise, it will happen slowly enough for people to adjust.

Adults sometimes like to use children to carry their messages because it makes it hard for the other side to criticize them without seeming like monsters. If adults have encouraged you to panic about climate change without telling you what I am telling you here, they do not have your best interests at heart. They are using you.

When you ask adults about nuclear energy, expect them to have old understanding about it, meaning they don’t know the newer nuclear energy technologies are the safest energy on the planet.

What I told you today is not always understood even by adults. You are now smarter than most adults on the topic of climate.

My generation has a lot of faith in your generation. You will be the most educated and effective humans of all time. My generation (and a few generations younger than me) already has the fixes to address climate risks coming online. Your generation will finish the job.

We adults respect your passion and your energy on the topic of climate. But it isn’t fair for us to deny you the basic facts while at the same time scaring you into action. I hope this letter helps you sleep better. We adults have this problem under control, or will soon, and you’ll help us finish the job. So get some good sleep tonight. Together, we got this.

Scott Adams

September 26, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , . Environmentalism, Science, Technology. Leave a comment.

The father of a 15-year-old who assaulted and killed an innocent person at the Great Frederick Fair defends his son

At the Great Frederick Fair in Frederick, Maryland, a 15-year-old assaulted and killed an innocent man.

The father of the killer said:

“My son is not an animal. He’s never been in trouble. He made a mistake. He’s only 15. I feel for the other family. They lost a loved one. My son doesn’t deserve to spend the rest of his life in prison.”

Here’s a video of a news report on this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpd1mTHtZLM

September 24, 2019. Tags: , , , , . Violent crime. 6 comments.

An American woman named Bethany Vierra got a masters degree in Middle Eastern studies and a PhD in human rights, moved to Saudi Arabia, was shocked to discover that women didn’t have the same rights as men, and falsely claimed, “The problem here is not Islamic law”

Bethany Vierra was born in Washington state.

She got a master’s degree in Middle Eastern studies from the American University in Paris.

Then she got a PhD in human rights at the National University of Ireland.

With such an education, I would think that Vierra would be aware that women in Saudi Arabia didn’t have the same rights as men, and that this lack of equal rights was due to the country following Islamic law.

But I would be wrong.

Vierra moved to Saudi Arabia, married a Saudi Arabian man, and later gave birth – while in Saudi Arabia – to their daughter.

Since doing those things, Vierra and her husband have gotten a divorce, and are now involved in a custody dispute over their daughter.

During this custody dispute, Vierra was genuinely shocked to find out that under Islamic law (also known as Sharia law) in Saudi Arabia, women do not have the same rights as men. Here’s the obligatory “shocked” scene from the movie Casablanca:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME

Vierra was also surprised to find out that she was not allowed to leave Saudi Arabia or to access her own bank account, without her ex-husband’s permission.

During the custody dispute, some of the evidence that was used against Vierra were photographs which showed that she had worn a bikini in public, had worn yoga pants in public, and had had her hair uncovered in public.

And Vierra said of this:

“The problem here is not Islamic law.”

Relative to their level of education, I don’t think I’ve ever heard of anyone as dumb as Bethany Vierra.

Instead of getting all of those useless college degrees, she should have watched the movie Not Without My Daughter. The movie is based on a true story. Here’s the trailer for it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TSmbayUJCo

And here’s a scene from it about how the country enforces its dress code:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm3xv5sosng

 

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., a woman named Linda Sarsour, who was born in Brooklyn, New York, made four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law.

Sarsour made this tweet, which says the following:

“10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”

She also made this tweet, which says:

“shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics”

and this tweet, which says:

“You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”

and this tweet, which says:

“If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America.”

These statements prove that Sarsour wants the U.S. to adopt Sharia law.

Sharia law bans women from driving cars, prohibits women from appearing alone in public, calls for girls to have their genitals mutilated, and gives a woman’s testimony in court only half the value of a man’s.

After Sarsour made those four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law, left wing American feminists chose her to be one of the organizers of the 2017 Women’s March.

But any movement which truly cared about women’s rights would not support someone who wants the U.S. to treat women in such a horrible and repulsive manner.

I will say one positive thing about Sarsour: even though Sarsour claims to believe in Sharia law, and says that women in Saudi Arabia are better off than women in the U.S., at least she is not dumb enough to actually move to Saudi Arabia.

September 21, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Islamization, Religion, Sexism. Leave a comment.

This is why you should always have lots of vegetables on your burgers, pizzas, and hoagies

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/03/health/poor-diet-blindness-scli-intl/index.html

Teenage boy goes blind after existing on Pringles, white bread and french fries

September 3, 2019

Eating a diet of french fries, Pringles and white bread was enough to make one teenage boy lose his sight, according to a case study published in a medical journal.

Scientists from the University of Bristol examined the case of a young patient whose extremely picky eating led to blindness, and have warned of the dangers of a poor diet.

The unidentified patient told doctors he had only eaten fries from the fish and chip shop, Pringles potato chips, white bread, slices of processed ham and sausage since elementary school, and he avoided foods with certain textures. He first visited a doctor at age 14, complaining of tiredness, according to a case report published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on Monday.

He wasn’t taking any medication, had a normal BMI and height, and showed no visible signs of malnutrition.

Doctors discovered low vitamin B12 levels and anemia, treating the patient with vitamin B12 injections and offering dietary advice.

One year later there were signs of hearing loss and vision symptoms, but doctors did not find the cause.

His vision had worsened to the point of blindness by 17 years of age, and doctors identified vitamin B12 deficiency, low copper and selenium levels, a high zinc level, reduced vitamin D level and bone level density, according to a statement from the University of Bristol.

By this stage, vision damage was permanent.

Researchers from Bristol Medical School and the Bristol Eye Hospital examined the case and concluded that the patient suffered nutritional optic neuropathy, a dysfunction of the optic nerve.

In developed countries it is mostly caused by bowel problems or medication that interferes with the absorption of nutrients, and it is rarely caused entirely by poor diet because food is readily available.

In some places, malnutrition caused by poverty, war and drought is linked to higher rates of nutritional optic neuropathy, according to a statement.

The condition is reversible if treated early but can lead to blindness if no action is taken.

“Our vision has such an impact on quality of life, education, employment, social interactions, and mental health,” said study lead author Denize Atan, an ophthalmologist at Bristol Medical School and Bristol Eye Hospital.

“This case highlights the impact of diet on visual and physical health, and the fact that calorie intake and BMI are not reliable indicators of nutritional status.”

The researchers say that poor diet and reduced intake of minerals caused vision loss in this case, and warn that nutritional optic neuropathy could become more common due to the consumption of junk food.

They also warned vegans to make sure to supplement for vitamin B12 to avoid deficiency.

To prevent similar cases, doctors should ask patients about their dietary history as part of routine clinical examinations, the researchers urged.

Extreme example

Tom Sanders, a professor of nutrition and dietetics at King’s College London, was critical of the case report, saying it relied on the patient’s own recall of his eating habits and did not take into account other possible explanations for the condition, including genetic defects or environmental exposures.

“Vitamin B12 deficiency can cause optic neuropathy but it is very unusual to find dietary deficiency when animal products are consumed e.g. ham and sausages which are significant sources of the vitamin B12,” he told the Science Media Centre in London.

Gary Frost, a professor of nutrition and dietetics at Imperial College London, who was not involved in the research, told CNN it is incredibly rare for someone in the UK to have a diet so limited it results in micronutrient deficiencies.

“Although it is an extreme example, it highlights the importance of having a wide and varied diet to ensure that you get the profile of nutrients and micronutrients that are needed for healthy development,” said Frost.

These deficiencies become more likely the more limited the choice of food, he added.

“Fussy eating is very common in young children and in extreme cases can lead to very limited choice of food,” said Frost.

“There is a need to pick up on eating problems such as these as early as possible so the issue around limited textures and tastes can be addressed.”

September 18, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Food. Leave a comment.

A California bank robber could get extra time in prison because social justice warriors said his mask was offensive

In Santa Monica, California, a bank robber could get extra time in prison because social justice warriors said his mask was offensive.

Here’s a still from the security footage which shows the mask in question: (Source)

I support the maximum prison time for anyone who robs a bank.

But I don’t think anyone should ever go to prison for doing something that some people consider to be offensive.

In this case, the proposed extra time for the robber is because the mask that he wore was a form of “cultural appropriation” which “violated the rights of indigenous peoples.”

The voters and politicians of California are insane.

September 17, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Political correctness, Racism, Social justice warriors. 2 comments.

Candace Owens criticizes Democrats for the high rates of violent crime and poverty in the inner cities that they control, as well as their policies that encourage women to have babies out of wedlock

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOT7MbDQc00

September 16, 2019. Tags: , , , , , . Politics. 1 comment.

TED Talk: Michael Shellenberger explains why he switched from being anti-nuclear power to pro-nuclear power

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciStnd9Y2ak

September 14, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , . Environmentalism, Science, Technology. Leave a comment.

Did the Obama administration commit ‘the biggest accounting fraud in history’ with student loans? Experts weigh in

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-administration-student-loans-experts-113140861.html

Did the Obama administration commit ‘the biggest accounting fraud in history’ with student loans? Experts weigh in

September 5, 2019

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board (WSJ) recently accused the Obama administration of pulling off “the biggest accounting fraud in history” with student loans when eliminating the role of private lenders in the federal student lending market.

Experts who spoke with Yahoo Finance acknowledged the issue with the general policy in hindsight, though they disagreed on who exactly is to blame.

In 2010, Democrats “nationalized the market to help pay for Obama Care,” WSJ asserted. “The Congressional Budget Office at the time forecast that eliminating private lenders would save taxpayers $58 billion over 10 years. This estimate was pure fantasy, and now we’re seeing how much.”

The WSJ op-ed also highlighted the rising number of severely delinquent student loans since then and blamed the Obama administration for expanding plans in 2012 for new borrowers “to reduce defaults, buy off millennial voters and disguise the cost of its student-loan takeover.”

The editorial board then added: “This may be the biggest accounting fraud in history.”

‘There’s no way around that’

WSJ argued that eliminating private lenders from the student loan market severely hurt Americans and that by using fair-market accounting, it becomes clear that student loans will actually cost taxpayers nearly $307 billion over the next 10 years.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) during the George W. Bush administration and currently president of the center-right American Action Forum, agreed that the accounting discrepancy manifested because of the “technique” used by the CBO to evaluate the cost of these loan programs.

“A widely known deficiency of the Federal Credit and Reform Act is that it does not allow the CBO to incorporate [market risk] into assessments,” Holtz-Eakin told Yahoo Finance. “So the loans, when they’re evaluated are evaluated as safer than they truly are, and thus, the losses are smaller than they may truly be. And there’s no way around that — the techniques force you to do that.”

He added that “that’s why when you when they switched from the private loans to the government loans, it appeared to save money… that is misleading. I don’t disagree, but it’s not the CBO’s fault — those are the rules.”

Sheila Bair, the chair of the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) from 2006 to 2011, agreed that the WSJ was “right to call out the government” on the accounting issue and stressed that it is “a huge problem with federal budgeting and transparency generally.”

Income-based repayment plans were ‘poorly designed’

The WSJ argued that the key catalyst for the student debt crisis today — $1.48 trillion student loans outstanding, with 35% of the consumer loans in the “severely derogatory” category — was a result of the Obama administration’s policies regarding income-driven repayment (IDR) plans.

IDR plans allow borrowers to cap monthly student loan payments based on how much money they are making at a given time. As of September 2018, “almost half of the $898 billion in outstanding federal Direct Loans [were] being repaid by borrowers using IDR plans,” according to the Government Accountability Office.

Holtz-Eakin agreed with WSJ, arguing that the CBO “cannot anticipate a future action of either the Congress or the administration.”

If the government chooses “to move to a whole bunch of loan forgiveness and income-based repayment models, they can’t anticipate that and both of those things bring in less money,” he explained. “The money goes out and it doesn’t come back and they’re bigger losses.”

Holtz-Eakin added that the Obama administration “did that on a regular basis — there was nothing CBO could have done about it.”

Former FDIC Chair Bair, who headed the agency during part of both the Bush and Obama administrations, argued that the issue arose from the poor design of the repayment plan system.

“This has been a couple decades in the making, frankly,” said Bair. “I think that the concept of a payment based on income is a good one — it’s not a bad one. But the way these things have been designed, it’s like the worst of all possible worlds.”

With borrowers often in thousands of dollars in student debt, IDR plans are seen as an alternative for borrowers with high debt and low income. But the current income-based repayment plans is “very poorly designed… [and] confusing,” Bair said.

The WSJ pointed out that borrowers end up owing more than they borrowed even though they’re repaying their loans — called negative amortization — which Bair acknowledged.

“With a true income share, you have higher earners paying more and lower earners paying less, but you let the higher earners pay more to help with the cross-subsidization of the lower earners, and also just to mitigate the budget impact,” said Bair. “But what the government does do now is they cap you out.”

In other words, if a borrower decides that they want to increase their monthly repayment amounts, instead of being able to pay back loans quickly, they’re capped out because the repayment structure is based on their income. Hence, the borrower — despite being able to increase payments — is stuck with a loan that’s accruing interest for possibly 20 or 25 years.

‘Recreated the worst aspects of the subprime… crisis’

The other issue was underwriting.

Previously, the government guaranteed student loans that borrowers took out from private lenders. Today, it controls more than 90% directly.

When the Obama administration “got rid of the guarantee program with the private sector out of the process and made it a direct federal loan, they got rid of all underwriting,” Holtz-Eakin noted.

“And so they recreated the worst aspects of the subprime mortgage lending crisis,” he stated. “They gave anyone who walked up a loan, without any notion of their capacity to repay.”

September 5, 2019. Tags: , , , , , . Barack Obama. Leave a comment.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is raising money to support Antifa members who threw urine at police officers. DNC Chairman Tom Perez said she “represents the future of our party.”

In July 2018, DNC Chairman Tom Perez said that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

“represents the future of our party”

You can see him saying those words in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIriGu5dtHM

Given Perez’s statement, I think that it’s important that we pay attention to the many ridiculous and absurd things that Ocasio-Cortez says and does.

You can read about many of them here and here.

And now on to the newest example.

Ocasio-Cortez is raising money to support Antifa members who threw urine at police officers.

I’d be curious to hear what each of the current Democratic presidential candidates thinks of this.

September 5, 2019. Tags: , , , , , , , . Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Leave a comment.

Bernie Sanders wants to do the same things to the U.S. that Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro did to Venezuela

Bernie Sanders has described his proposals for the Green New Deal on his website. (Original, archive.)

And here is a link to a blog post that I wrote about the things that Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro did in Venezuela. It includes links to verify each and every one of my claims.

The two things are very similar in many ways.

Both Chavez’s and Sander’s plans call for massive government control of the agricultural, energy, transportation, manufacturing, construction, and steel industries.

Both plans call for replacing the free market with government decision making.

In the U.S., lots of people on the political left praised Hugo Chavez’s actions in Venezuela. In addition to the many college professors and social justice warriors who praised Chavez, Chavez also received praise from Sean Penn, Oliver Stone, Naomi Campbell, Michael Moore, Don King, Noam Chomsky, and Danny Glover.

The things detailed in Sanders’s plan sound a lot like the things that Chavez was talking about when he started implementing his policies. Before Chavez died, he personally chose Nicolas Maduro to be his successor. Since Chavez died in 2013, Maduro has been continuing Chavez’s policies.

The results of these policies in Venezuela have been horribly disastrous.

For example, in May 2017, the Washington Post reported:

In a recent survey of 6,500 Venezuelan families by the country’s leading universities, three-quarters of adults said they lost weight in 2016 — an average of 19 pounds… a level of hunger almost unheard-of outside war zones or areas ravaged by hurricane, drought or plague.

Then in February 2018, Reuters reported:

Venezuelans reported losing on average 11 kilograms (24 lbs) in body weight last year… according to a new university study…

That’s 43 pounds in two years.

You can read all about how this came to be in my blog post.

And then you can read about Sander’s proposals in his very long and detailed article on his website. (Original, archive.)

Just as huge numbers of progressives and other left wingers in the U.S. had praised Chavez’s policies, a lot of these same people are now praising Sanders’s proposals.

Both Chavez’s and Sander’s policies have massive government takeovers of the agricultural, energy, transportation, manufacturing, construction, and steel industries. Both plans involve replacing the free market with government control.

What makes Sanders think that the results of his policies would be any different than the results of the policies of Chavez and Maduro?

In fact, Sanders actually said that it was a “good thing” when people have to wait in line for food.

These are Sanders’s exact words:

“It’s funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, cause people are lining up for food. That’s a good thing! In other countries people don’t line up for food: the rich get the food and the poor starve to death.”

You can see and hear Sanders saying those words in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc

Here’s a photograph from 2014 of people in Venezuela waiting in line for food: (posted here under fair use from http://www.businessinsider.com/long-food-lines-are-in-venezuela-2014-2 )

Sanders also said the following:

“You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country.”

Well, as it turns out, the policies of Chavez and Maduro have caused a shortage of both deodorant and shoes in Venezuela.

Sanders has repeatedly criticized the existence of “millionaires and billionaires.” (Although he stopped doing so after the New York Times reported that he was one of them.)

Sanders defended his own millionaire status by saying the following:

“I wrote a best-selling book. If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.”

I agree with Sanders.

But here’s the difference between what I believe and what Sanders believes: I believe that it’s a good thing when any person becomes a millionaire or billionaire by providing their customers with the goods and services that their customers choose to buy. By comparison, the only person whose millionaire or billionaire status Sanders has ever defended is his own.

Chavez and Maduro managed to scare many of the millionaires and billionaires, as well as their capital, investment, skills, innovation, and jobs, out of Venezuela. And when Chavez and Maduro scared away those millionaires and billionaires, they also scared away the production of the goods and services that those millionaires and billionaires had been engaged in.

Sanders wants to “break up big agribusinesses” and encourage “urban, rural, and suburban Americans” to “transform their lawns into food-producing … spaces.”

Chavez seized more than 10 million acres of farmland from private owners, and now Maduro is encouraging everyone to grow their own food.

The industrial revolution was powered by fossil fuels. Before the industrial revolution, 90% of people in the U.S. were farmers. Today, with the use of fossil fuels as both fertilizer and fuel, it only takes 2% of the U.S. population to feed the entire country. Truck drivers whose trucks are powered by fossil fuels then transport that food to the other 98% of the population.

Chavez reversed that trend in Venezuela, and now Sanders wants to do the same thing in the U.S. Just as the Venezuelan government took over big agribusiness and is now encouraging everyone to grow their own food, Sanders wants to do the same thing in the U.S.

Sanders wants to replace private automobile ownership with mass transit, even in “rural communities.” While I myself think that mass transit in densely populated cities is a great thing, I also understand that it’s not practical in “rural communities” with much lower population densities.

Chavez and Maduro caused sales of new cars to fall by 99.4%.

Sanders said:

“I favor the public ownership of utilities, banks and major industries.”

CNN reported that Sanders was in favor of nationalizing

“the energy industry, public ownership of banks, telephone, electric, and drug companies and of the major means of production such as factories and capital”

Chavez nationalized all of those things, and it destroyed each and every one of them. Venezuela now has long term, chronic shortages of pretty much everything.

In 2011, Sanders published the following on his official U.S. Senate website: (Original, archive.)

“These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina”

Of course, Sanders didn’t explain why so many Venezuelans have fled the country and relocated in the U.S.

Sanders also didn’t explain why no one in the U.S. is moving to Venezuela for these so-called better opportunities.

Sanders wants to get rid of fossil fuels.

Chavez and Maduro waged war against the oil industry, and now Venezuela has frequent blackouts.

After Chavez took over the country’s oil industry, he did such a terrible job of running it that he actually managed to create a shortage of gasoline in a country that has some of the world’s biggest oil reserves.

And that reminds me of this quote from Milton Friedman:

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.”

So, to summarize:

1) Sanders said that it’s a “good thing” when people have to wait in line for food.

2) Sanders said that people have too many choices when it comes to deodorant and shoes.

3) Sanders hates millionaires and billionaires (not withstanding the singular exception of himself).

4) Sanders wants to replace the free market with government control of the agricultural, energy, transportation, manufacturing, construction, and steel industries.

5) Sanders wants to replace large scale, industrial farms with urban gardens where everyone grows their own food.

6) Sanders wants to reduce private ownership of automobiles, even in rural areas with low population densities, where mass transit is not practical.

7) Sanders wants to nationalize major industries.

8) After Chavez had already adopted many of his own destructive policies, Sanders specifically cited Venezuela as being better than the U.S.

The more and more that Sander’s proposals get examined, the more and more it becomes apparent that they resemble those of Chavez and Maduro.

Bernie Sanders wants to do the same things to the U.S. that Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro did to Venezuela.

September 3, 2019. Tags: , , , . Bernie Sanders, Economics, Venezuela. Leave a comment.

Next Page »