January 31, 2021

California is Cleansing Jews From History

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 11:07 pm

California Is Cleansing Jews From History

Jan 31, 2021 | by Emily Benedek

California Is Cleansing Jews From History

The state’s proposed new ethnic studies curriculum is even worse than you imagined.

In the fall of 2016, California’s then Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law a mandate to develop an ethnic studies program for high schools in California. California’s public schools have the most ethnically diverse student body in the nation, with three-quarters of students belonging to minorities and speaking over 90 languages. Luis Alejo, the Assembly member who shepherded the bill through the 15 years required for its adoption, hailed the law, the first in the nation, as an opportunity to “give all students the opportunity to prepare for a diverse global economy, diverse university campuses and diverse workplaces,” adding, “Ethnic studies are not just for students of color.”

Elina Kaplan, a former high-tech manager who had just stepped down as senior VP of one of California’s largest affordable housing nonprofits, remembers agreeing wholeheartedly with the idea at the time. “The objective was to build bridges of understanding between people,” said Kaplan, an immigrant herself, who moved to California from the former Soviet Union with her family when she was 11. “This was as welcome as mom and apple pie. It offered students the chance to learn about the accomplishments of ethnic minorities, as well as to address issues of inequality and bigotry.”

But three years later, when the first draft of the Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum (ESMC) was released, Kaplan couldn’t believe what she was reading. In one sample lesson, she saw that a list of historic U.S. social movements – ones like Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, Criminal Justice Reform – also included the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement for Palestine (BDS), described as a “global social movement that currently aims to establish freedom for Palestinians living under apartheid conditions.” Kaplan wondered why a foreign movement, whose target was another country, would be mischaracterized as a domestic social movement, and she was shocked that in a curriculum that would be taught to millions of students, BDS’s primary goal – the elimination of Israel – was not mentioned. Kaplan also saw that the 1948 Israel War of Independence was only referred to as the “Nakba” – “catastrophe” in Arabic – and Arabic verses included in the sample lessons were insulting and provocative to Jews.

Kaplan, 53, a Bay Area mother of two grown children who describes herself as a lifelong Democrat, was further surprised to discover that a list of 154 influential people of color did not include Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., John Lewis, or Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, though it included many violent revolutionaries. There was even a flattering description of Pol Pot, the communist leader of Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge, who was responsible for the murder of a quarter of the Cambodian population during the 1970s.

Kaplan began calling friends. “Have you read this?” she asked, urging them to plow through the 600-page document. The language was bewildering. “Ethnic Studies is about people whose cultures, hxrstories, and social positionalities are forever changing and evolving. Thus, Ethnic Studies also examines borders, borderlands, mixtures, hybridities, nepantlas, double consciousness, and reconfigured articulations. …” This was the telltale jargon of critical race theory, a radical doctrine that has swept through academic disciplines during the last few decades.https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/ads?guci=2.2.0.0.2.2.0.0&client=ca-pub-8573325940152694&output=html&h=90&slotname=9473233342%2F1978221825&adk=326744000&adf=772328274&pi=t.ma~as.9473233342%2F19782218_&w=728&lmt=1612133082&rafmt=12&psa=0&format=728×90&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aish.com%2Fci%2Fs%2FCalifornia-Is-Cleansing-Jews-From-History.html&flash=0&wgl=1&dt=1612134212306&bpp=9&bdt=697&idt=257&shv=r20210127&cbv=r20190131&ptt=9&saldr=aa&abxe=1&prev_fmts=350×303%2C0x0&nras=1&correlator=4556947888427&frm=20&pv=1&ga_vid=1366390411.1612134212&ga_sid=1612134213&ga_hid=1491479009&ga_fc=0&u_tz=-420&u_his=1&u_java=0&u_h=864&u_w=1536&u_ah=824&u_aw=1536&u_cd=24&u_nplug=3&u_nmime=4&adx=205&ady=1964&biw=1519&bih=722&scr_x=0&scr_y=0&eid=21068769%2C21068893%2C21068786&oid=3&pvsid=2225245894906221&pem=553&wsm=1&rx=0&eae=0&fc=896&brdim=0%2C0%2C0%2C0%2C1536%2C0%2C1536%2C824%2C1536%2C722&vis=1&rsz=%7C%7CpeEbr%7C&abl=CS&pfx=0&fu=8448&bc=31&ifi=1&uci=a!1&btvi=2&fsb=1&xpc=Jr1X2Ii8ZV&p=https%3A//www.aish.com&dtd=1352

The new curriculum, which will eventually be promulgated throughout the California school system of 6 million children, would “critique empire and its relationship to white supremacy, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism … and other forms of power and oppression,” according to the proposal. It would “build new possibilities for post-imperial life that promotes collective narratives of transformative resistance.”

Capitalism was classified as a form of “power and oppression,” and although “classism, homophobia, Islamophobia, and transphobia” were also listed as forms of oppression, anti-Semitism was not. Jewish Americans were not even mentioned as a minority group.

It didn’t take long for Kaplan to realize that the education offered up by the ESMC had little in common with the program described at the time of the law’s passage. Instead, it was a crude pastiche of idiosyncratic neo-Marxism that advocated the end of capitalism and divided the world into a simple polarity of victims and oppressors. The victims, according to this schema, included four groups: African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinx, and Native Americans.

Kaplan quickly marshaled her skills honed as a nonprofit leader and co-created, with two other women, the Alliance for Constructive Ethnic Studies (ACES), to fight the adoption of the ESMC. The effort was urgent, she knew, because since California has the largest school system in the country, any curriculum it adopts will be exported to the rest of the country.

It’s a view that actively invites anti-Zionism into the classroom. It requires it. This is the greatest threat facing American Jews today.

As a refugee from the Soviet Union, she understood the challenge intimately. “The reason I’m doing this – full time and not sleeping” she said, is that “this curriculum is pervasive and all-inclusive. It creates a means of understanding the world that does not allow questioning. And it’s a view that actively invites anti-Zionism into the classroom. It requires it. This is the greatest threat facing American Jews today.”

Kaplan wasn’t the only one upset about the Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. Clarence Jones, former legal counsel and speechwriter for Martin Luther King Jr., in a letter he wrote to Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state’s Instructional Quality Commission, called the ESMC a “perversion of history” for providing material that refers to non-violent Black leaders as “passive” and “docile.” Jones, who is co-founder of the University of San Francisco Institute for Nonviolence and Social Justice, decried the “glorification” of violence and Black nationalism as “role models for the students,” and rejected the curriculum as “morally indecent and deeply offensive.”

The unassailably liberal LA Times editorial board weighed in, criticizing the offering as “an impenetrable mélange of academic jargon and politically correct pronouncements” that served as an “exercise in groupthink, designed to proselytize and inculcate more than to inform and open minds.” It warned it was “in bad need of an overhaul.”

A group of Asian Americans urged the state to develop a program that would “inspire ethnic pride in all students and inspire them to work together, rather than against one another,” while Hindu, Korean, Armenian, and Sikh groups complained of being left out as did several Jewish groups. The California Legislative Jewish caucus published a letter saying the ESMC “effectively erases the American Jewish experience.”

Several émigrés from the former Soviet Union found the curriculum so traumatizing they couldn’t read it through. Three hundred signed a letter to Gov. Newsom and other state agencies saying: “We escaped a Marxist-socialist system and its associated tyranny and oppression. Never could we have imagined that, decades later, the same ideology and concepts that we escaped, would show up in, of all places … the California Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum.”

They wrote of their shock at seeing Marxist “code-words” in the text, such as urging students to fight for a “truer democracy,” which Marx used to refer to the abolition of private property. They also noted other terms that look innocuous or even enlightened to the uninitiated, such as “transformative resistance,” “radical healing,” “critical hope,” have specific meanings in critical race theory, which the ESMC explicitly directs teachers to use as the key theoretical framework for teaching ethnic studies.

Critical race theory in education, writes Daniel Solorzano, a scholar cited in the ESMC, “challenges the traditional claims of the educational system such as objectivity, meritocracy, color-blindness, race neutrality, and equal opportunity.” Critical race theorists argue that these traditional claims act as a camouflage for the self-interest, power, and privilege of dominant groups in U.S. society.

CRT is not just an educational pedagogy that seeks to overturn academics as we know it, but it is also a guide for activism “animated by the spirit of the decolonial, antiracist, and other global liberationist movements.”

Ethnic studies is a California native. It was born of a violent strike that erupted on the campus of San Francisco State College in 1968, triggered by the firing of a popular teacher named George Murray. The strike, led by the Black Student Union and the Third World Liberation Front, was marked by huge rallies, bloody clashes with police, and eventually, the shutdown of the campus. It was finally settled when the president of the college accepted the strikers’ principal demands and agreed to establish degree-granting departments of Black and ethnic studies, to be housed in a separate School of Ethnic Studies that would include Black, La Raza, Asian American, and Native American studies.

There is a straight line from the 1968 strike to today’s ESMC, whose text explicitly acknowledges its debt to the Third World Liberation Front. In a speech a week before his firing, George Murray, who also served as the minister of education for the Black Panther Party, declared the U.S. Constitution was a “lie” and the American flag was a “piece of toilet paper” deserving to be flushed. He also attacked Jewish people as “exploiters of the Negroes in America and South Africa” and called for “victory to the Arab people” over Israel.

Many of the 18 people chosen by the State Board of Education’s Instructional Quality Committee to create the ESMC hail from San Francisco State’s School of Ethnic Studies, and most are adherents of the radical critical ethnic studies movement who refer to themselves as scholar-activists.

Kaplan reports that State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond admitted in a 2020 meeting with Jewish groups that there were problems with the creation of this group that allowed it to be politicized, and we have put systems in place to make sure they do not recur.

Nevertheless, in 2020, Gov. Newsom signed into law AB 1460, which requires that every student in the Cal State system – the largest four-year public university system in the country, of which San Francisco State is a part – take a three-unit course in ethnic studies. The governor’s decision defied the recommendations of the university’s own chancellor, members of the university’s board of trustees, and the university’s academic senate, all of whom opposed the bill, objecting to the government’s unprecedented intrusion into the university’s curriculum. The board of trustees had offered a competing proposal to require a course on ethnic studies and social justice, which would have included Jewish, LGBTQ and disability studies. Propelled by the momentum of the BLM movement in the wake of George Floyd’s killing, the governor rejected the board’s suggestion.

Several districts in California have already implemented ethnic studies courses on their own, independent of the ESMC. Some are controversial and some are not. Although the ESMC was originally intended for high school students, an entire chapter deals with K-12 integration. Because of the public outcry following the unveiling of the proposal, Newsom vetoed a bill that would have required an ethnic studies class for graduation from high school. (The bill has been reintroduced.) Meanwhile, the city of Seattle has already created a proposed framework for implementing ethnic studies throughout its K-12 curriculum. Math teachers will ask the following questions: “identify how math has been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color,” “analyze the ways in which ancient mathematical knowledge has been appropriated by Western culture,” “how important is it to be right?” and “Who gets to say if an answer is right?” It appears educational leaders are all for this. The president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Robert Q. Berry III, told Education Week: “What they’re doing follows the line of work we hope we can move forward as we think about the history of math and who contributes to that, and also about deepening students’ connection with identity and agency.”

This, despite the fact that students in the United States already perform poorly in math. In the most recent survey conducted by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), which tests 15-year-olds in dozens of developed and developing countries, the U.S. placed an unimpressive 38th out of 71 countries in math and 24th in science. Among higher performing countries, the 35 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the U.S. ranked 30th in math and 19th in science.

One of the selling points for ethnic studies is that it would help California’s students do better in school overall. In 2019, only one-third of California’s fourth graders were reading-proficient. Only 25% of California’s total student population had basic reading skills. A suit brought against the state in 2017 by a group of parents, teachers, students, and advocacy groups claimed that “When it comes to literacy and basic education, California is bringing down the nation.” Among the 200 largest school districts in the country, California “had 11 of the lowest performing 26 districts, including three among the lowest performing 10 districts.” In February 2020, a state judge approved a settlement that requires the state to pay $53 million to improve basic literacy statewide.

Almost every article touting the ESMC makes reference to a single paper that showed some improvement in at-risk students who took an ethnic studies class. Thomas Dee, professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Education, compared a group of ninth grade students in San Francisco high schools at risk of dropping out with a similar group who took a class offering “culturally relevant pedagogy.” He described the results as “highly encouraging” – the latter showing improved attendance, completing more courses, and earning improved grades. Basically, students earning Ds became C+ students after taking the classes. This improvement, he said, is significant, as it means the difference between dropping out and being able to apply to college. Dee calls ninth grade a make-or-break year.

Dee described the classes less as instruction about other ethnicities and how they have succeeded in the U.S., and more as a social-psychological intervention that helps to “buffer students’ social identities in the classroom setting,” which might otherwise “affect their sense of belonging.” In other words, the teachers try to keep the kids from tuning out because of cultural influences that may make them feel they don’t belong and can’t succeed. He explained the classes as aiming to reduce “stereotype threat,” by identifying external forces that contribute to academic challenges and preparing for “how you may be misjudged.” He said the teaching has three defining traits: “an emphasis on student success, maintaining students’ cultural integrity, and promoting students’ capacity to think critically.”

But Dee cautioned that his study was small and its results not easily scalable. He explained that the teachers who offered the classes had spent “years developing them and getting them right” with the help of outside experts. “This kind of pedagogy requires teacher skills of a high order,” he said. He is not sure the ESMC, a huge statewide top-down project, is focused on providing the kind of sensitive, close teaching that produced the positive results.

He is critical of the ESMC’s chaotic rollout, which he characterized as a “hot mess.” “The motivation for ethnic studies is grounded in the idea that historically underserved communities don’t see themselves represented in the curriculum,” he said, a project he supports. However, referring to the team of CRT proponents that prepared the first draft, “The people who have been nurturing this flame for a half century are reluctant to give up control. I’m worried that the way it’s being rolled out might snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. By having such a high profile effort, it has become a flashpoint of the larger culture wars.”

“If done carefully, he emphasized, “this kind of teaching can improve student interest in learning. In the wrong hands, it can be feckless and counterproductive. We have evidence of real measurable innovation, but by pushing it the wrong way, California runs the risk of discouraging its adoption throughout the country.”

As a result of the outpouring of criticism of the first ESMC draft, in August 2019, Superintendent Thurmond ordered a revision. A second draft was completed in August 2020 and was immediately criticized for simply moving objectionable material to the appendices and footnotes. In the current, third draft, released in December, some of the most offensive material was actually moved back in. For example, an historical resource was added with the following description of prewar Zionism: “the Jews have filled the air with their cries and lamentations in an effort to raise funds and American Jews, as is well known, are the richest in the world.”

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, director of AMCHA Initiative, which fights campus anti-Semitism, points out that all 13 founding members of the Critical Ethnic Studies Association (CESA) are BDS activists. CESA, the national home base for critical studies, passed a resolution to boycott all Israeli academic institutions in 2014, and the group’s past four biennial meetings included multiple sessions demonizing Israel. “There are a couple thousand academic boycotters of Israel in the country,” she said, “and the largest percentage of them come from ethnic studies. Anti-Zionism is built into the theory and the discipline of ethnic studies, which demonizes Israel as an apartheid settler-colonialist Nazi state.”

But of even greater concern to Jews, she believes, is the singling out of Jewish students as enjoying racial privilege. “I don’t see any way that Jewish students can sit in an ethnic studies class and not feel they have a double target on their backs,” she said, fearing hatred and violence will ensue. First, because they’re Jewish, and considered white and part of the 1%, the purported villains of the teaching, and then through an assumed association with Israel. “There’s a state requirement that you have to sit through a class that says to Jewish students they have extraordinary racial privilege and yet forbids them from speaking because ‘this course is not about you?’ If you don’t accept it, you’re publicly shamed and ostracized – you can’t even speak up and say, ‘I’m not sure if I think that all white people are racists.’”

Jews are the only group in the curriculum for whom the term “privilege” is used. And this privilege is not earned by way of talent, or educational and professional attainment, but rather trickery.

To placate critics, the third version has added lessons about Korean Americans, Armenian Americans, and Sikhs. Two lessons have been offered about Jews. One, following crude CRT dogma, teaches that Mizrahi Jews coming to the United States from Arab lands were mistreated by “white” Ashkenazim. The other suggests that Jews of European descent have white privilege.

The Jewish Journal points out that Jews are the only group in the curriculum for whom the term “privilege” is used. And this privilege is not earned by way of talent, or educational and professional attainment, but rather trickery. The ESMC, echoing Nazi propaganda about Jews as impostors and appropriators hiding in plain sight, points out that American Jews often change their names (“this practice of name-changing continues to the present day”) to change their rank in the social hierarchy.

The historical reality of repeated genocidal attacks on Jews because of their perceived or imagined privilege is not offered as counterpoint, because ethnic studies teachers assume the Holocaust is taught in world history class. But next year in San Mateo County, world history will be replaced by ethnic studies. Lia Rensin, who has two children in public schools in the Bay Area, said the students already have no time. “I think I probably feel the way most parents feel – there are already a gazillion requirements. My daughter took two semesters this summer of online Spanish, so she could take art next fall in school. Now you’re thinking of adding yet another requirement?”

Meantime, Rossman-Benjamin said the ESMC creators are trying to reestablish their influence: “The people who wrote the first curriculum who are still very well connected are going school board by school board and getting them to agree to implement the discredited first draft.” In fact, school districts are free to follow any curriculum they want. There is no requirement to use the model curriculum.

Moreover, she said, “while everyone was going through the third field review, they are holding webinars and training sessions, they are recruiting faculty, and training the teachers who will need to be hired to teach ethnic studies.”

These teachers are warning that additional counselors will be required to help students deal with the trauma of the new content, she reports. In fact, the ESMC itself makes this suggestion.

Brandy Shufutinsky is an African American Jewish woman who is pursuing an Ed.D. in international multicultural education at the University of San Francisco. She opposes the ESMC. “It needs to be scrapped. Its foundations are faulty,” she told Tablet, having more of a “political agenda than an educational one.” Her interest is personal. The mother of four, she is concerned that “other states will follow the lead of California, and may have an impact on my own children in the future.”

She doesn’t approve of critical race theory, and she said the LA Unified Teaching District has already adopted a fine ethnic studies program that does not rely on it.

“I’m a progressive Democrat and have been for my entire life, and I come from a family of Democrats,” she said. “I don’t understand how someone who claims to be progressive can say they are against Israel. Israel is one of the most successful countries in terms of the indigenous rights movement. They have reclaimed a culture that was decimated and denied, reclaimed their religion, their peoplehood, and language in their traditional indigenous land. This is something that progressive people all around the world should hold up as an example, not demonize.”

And she has no patience for young people calling Israel an apartheid state. “They don’t know the history of apartheid – they’re too young to have experienced it themselves, and they seem not to have read too deeply about it either. It’s easy for people to imagine that Arabs are all Black and brown and the Israelis are all white. But it’s not true. Israelis are not white, but that’s a lie that the ethnic studies curriculum is built on.”

The State Board of Education will vote on the curriculum on March 17. Comments can be sent to the SBE and Gov. Newsom.

This article originally appeared in Tabletmag.com

Leave a Comment

October 4, 2008

The Polar Ice-Cap is having its most volatile year on record.

Filed under: Climatology, Energy Talk, Media Check — Tags: Add new tag — justplainbill @ 7:14 pm

The Polar Ice-Cap is having its most volatile year on record.

So?

Yupper, a record that we’ve been keeping for almost one hundred and fifty years. Let’s see, now, the ice cap’s been around for a few million years, but the last 150 are the important ones.

Oddly enough, The New York Times and various environmentalists, most of whom live in high rise apartments far from either pole, have deemed this important enough to point to as further evidence of man’s malevolent impact upon the global habitat. Hmm, I do believe that, since 1900, The New York Times has cried Wolf more times that we’re headed for the next massive ice age than hot house, and that they’ve had more than one Jason Blair scandal, Blair being the “Time’s reporter” who with the approval of the Editor-in-Chief, for over two years filed fantasy as fact, The New York Times is no longer a credible source for print news. This leaves, for serious daily print news, only The Wall Street Journal and her sister, Barron’s, (and, sorry for my faulty memory, and thanks for reminding me, The Christian Science Monitor); and the web, thanks to Google and Ask.com, and some of the other, manageable search engines, for daily print news, but I digress.

There are numerous reasons why the measuring of snow and ice for climatological purposes isn’t done at the North Pole; it is done in Antarctica, near the South Pole.

One of the many interesting aspects of this rotating ball of molten iron upon which we so precariously abide, is that the land masses form plates, called tectons, which make up the crust of the planet. These tectonic plates float along and bounce off of each other. At the interstices they either subsume each other or separate allowing the molten core to surface to form new crust. One aspect of this is that sea level is not the same around the world when measured by atmospheric pressure. In fact, the Pacific Ocean is about six inches higher than the Atlantic Ocean. This is because the plates consisting of Asia-Minor and South America are moving towards each other, and Africa is both closing the Mediterranean and opening the South Atlantic. The violent turbulence in the Straits of Magellan and the flow of the warm ocean current, starting in the Indian Ocean that ends up in the North Atlantic melting the polar ice cap as it passes Iceland, are proofs of this. Anther attribute of this tectonic movement is that, the water is always moving!

Another proof is that the last ice age was, with other factors, caused by the closing of the gap between the North American Plate and the South American Plate at Panama, thereby allowing the polar cap to dramatically expand and upset the then current balance, because the warm current instead of being able to move through what is now the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico, had to take the much longer route around South America allowing for additional cooling as it flowed past Antarctica and up through the South Atlantic.

As the temperature of water varies, so does its ability to solute chemicals. As an example of this, as the temperature drops, it will retain more CO₂, as it rises, it will hold more salt and less Carbon Dioxide, your quick proofs are in the soda cans in your hands. Soda warm, when opened, fizzes as the CO₂, no longer in solution, escapes; when the soda is cold when opened, you barely hear a pop; notice how salty you can make your pasta water when boiling, as compared to when it’s cool and the salt crystals simply drop to the bottom to await the heating of the water so that they can then dissolve, and if you do your water in this fashion, please note how the corrosive properties of the salt pits and destroys your pot.

As any U.S. Navy Submariner will tell you, if you’re fortunate enough to have such a vet in your social circle, at about the depth of 1,000 feet in the open ocean, is a thermal layer, above which is comparatively warm water, and below which is actually very cold water. Part of the cause of this layer is the ability of the sun to heat water. This layer is about where the sun’s impact stops. The chemical solution content above and below this layer is significantly different, partially due to the temperature difference.

You may also wish to note that temperature change in water, whether higher or lower, always causes kinetic activity, meaning, that it moves. And, moving water is always abrasive.

Another problem with ice formation is kinetic energy. Ice forms readily at 32^o F in still water, but in moving water, the temperature must drop significantly below that, as determined by the velocity of the water and its mineral content. Pure water freezes at that 32^oF whereas soluted water requires lower temperatures to freeze. The quick proof is evident for anyone who lives near a river or creek in the higher latitudes. At the edge of the flow, where the water is immobile, ice forms, whereas in the center of the river, where the current is strongest, the ice does not form, yet the temperature of both the water and the ambient air is the same in both locations.

So, the polar ice cap, subject to all of the above variables, is not the place to measure snow and ice. In the alternative, the South Pole has none of these problems. Beneath the South Pole ice layer, lies frozen tundra, not subject to current flow, saline content, nor tectonic activity.

Dr. David Bromwich, head of the Polar Meteorology Group of the Byrd Polar Research Center and professor in the Atmospheric Sciences Program at the Department of Geography of Ohio State University, president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology, chair of the Polar DAAC Advisory Group, member of the Arctic Climate System Study Working Group on Reanalysis and past member of the National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Geophysical and Environmental Data, Ph.D., says, “The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from the continental Antarctic.” and, “it’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now.”

BTW, as of today, 16 October 2008, the reports from the Acrtic Circle show that the glacial masses are increasing. Increasing means that there’s more snow than melt on them. More snow than melt means that we are headed for a cooling period. Hmm, now does Gore’s $100,000,000 profit make sense to you?

The Polar Ice-Cap is having its most volatile year on record.

So what?

[OK, today is March 1, 2009 and there’s an important update to this post: it seems that the original report that the polar ice cap is having a volatile years was wildly, and purportedly innocently, innaccurate. It seems that the people who did the original reporting failed to report a significant number of sensors, thus, seriously understating the actual amount of ice in the cap. After some responsbile people went and rechecked, they found that, in fact, the Polar Ice Cap is EXPANDING. So much for global warming Your Thighness Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Ignorant State.]

Better yet, for those of you who want to know what’s happening first hand, Discovery Channel runs “The Deadliest Catch” which is about crab fishermen in the Bering Sea. Sig Hansen, Phil Harris, The Colburns & Hilstrands, have all said during this last season that the Ice is coming farther and farther south and they have the radar & sounding records to prove it. So, who’ya gonna listen to? Al “never been there” Gore, or the crab fishermen who’re in it months at a time every year?

Well, someone must be doing some research. Today, 12 Dec 13, the lowest temperature ever recorded, was recorded! Guess where. That’s right, in Antarctica, where all legitimate climate study is being done. Sigh, where’s the IPCC now?

And, now, January 2014, a group of Russian climatologists has been frozen in the Antarctic Ice. They were going to Antarctica to prove “Global Warming”. Ok, so I guess that I was correct with all of that stuff about the Polar Ice Cap not being the place to go for scientific data, eh? Do I really need to say more? BTW, today, the high in Kansas City has been 3 degrees Fahrenheit. Hey, Al, send some of that global warming here to Kansas & Missouri so the winter wheat will grow and we won’t starve in 2014!!!

And, during a recent broadcast of the FOX NEWS Business Block, broadcast on Saturday mornings, Eric Bolling, host of Cashin’ In, posted two NASA photos of the polar ice cap. The first from 2013, the second from exactly one year later, ie 2014. Contrast of the two NASA photos show that the polar ice cap is in fact, EXPANDING, by hundreds of thousands of acres. So much for the idiots pushing climate change. BTW, considering that, in addition to the above essay, the continents are on floating plates that move around, in a jerky style of movement as denoted by earth quakes, no matter what man does, as the continents move, weather will change!!!

Update 31 May 2014
The Weekend edition of The Wall Street Journal has an article “Climate Clues”, p C-3, which explains a lot. It seems that this German climatologist actually goes to places and looks for facts to explain things. ‘Tipping’, according to his facts, takes place over millions of years. The IPCC (Dear Prez Obama, the IPCC is the Inter-GOVERNMENTAL Panel, not International, and the ‘p’ IS pronounced here), and those others who use computer models (gosh, doesn’t anyone understand GIGO? Garbage In = Garbage Out???), might want to get out of their air conditioned academic sanctuaries, and search for actual FACTS upon which to base their theories!

Update 3 July 2014

1. For the 2nd time in the last 2 weeks, scientists have measured and recorded the largest amount of Antarctic ice in history. And “yes”, you read correctly, the record has been achieved/broken 2 times in the last 2 weeks!

2. Last year NOAA, one of the “scientific” groups that expounds the “man made climate change” and “CO2” myths, went on record as saying July 2012 was the hottest July on record (if you recall MO was in a drought). This replaced July 1936 as the hottest July on record (July 1936 being smack dab in the middle if the dust bowl). Well over the last 2 weeks NOAA has very “quietly adjusted” the findings and surprise, July 1936 is once again the hottest July on record. Apparently NOAA’s pronouncement in 2013 that July 2012 was the hottest July was based completely on computer modeling and not real data. I gathered from the story that I heard that really the only reason they went back and “re-modeled” the data and “adjusted” the findings is due to a couple of very serious and vigilant watch dog groups. These groups are dedicated to ensuring there is accuracy and transparency w/ respect to the data, findings and stated causation impacts when it comes to the “man made climate change” debate. So they called NOAA out in several articles w/ respect to how they reached their conclusion and NOAA “quietly” “adjusted” the findings.

Update 29 July 14, Famous Meteorologist on Climate Change:

Weather Channel Founder Debunks Global Warming Hoax

157 Comments

An award-winning meteorologist with 60 years of experience and founder of the Weather Channel has produced a video explaining the history of the man-made global warming hoax.

John Coleman was also a former broadcast meteorologist of the year of the American Meteorological Society (AMS). However, after being a member for several years, he quit the AMS after it became very clear to him that “the politics had gotten in the way of the science.” Coleman explains in the video that there is no man-made global warming, and why he’s sure about this.

The well-respected weatherman says that if there were evidence of man-made global warming, he would have dedicated his life to stopping it. “I love our wonderful planet Earth. If I thought it was threatened by global warming, I would devote my life to stopping the warming!”

Environmental activists now call it “climate change” instead of global warming because the warming has stopped, Coleman added, and $4.7 billion in taxpayer money is funding “bogus reports” and “bogus research.”

Coleman explains that any so-called “climate change” is extremely negligible from a long-term perspective and nothing unusual or alarming. He points out that Antarctic sea ice is close to an all-time high, and the polar bear population is as high as it’s been in recorded history.

In regard to rising sea levels, Coleman says:

“It’s rising at about the rate of about six inches per hundred years, as part of this inter-glacial period. When North America was covered in a 400 foot thick ice core at the end of the last ice age, the oceans were low, and then as that ice melted, of course the oceans have risen. That rise has been gentle and is not important.”

Coleman says in the video there are 9,000 PhDs and 31,000 scientists who have signed a petition saying that the CO2 global warming theory is a hoax. These climate change “non-believers” aren’t heard by most Americans because they don’t receive government funding. And they aren’t covered by the mainstream media because it almost always promotes the climate change theory.

This damning indictment by an experienced and well-respected meteorologist proves that the “climate change” movement is primarily (if not all) politically based. Its ultimate goal is to make Americans the enemy of the planet (so they’ll agree to greater government control over their behavior) — and to reduce America’s use of oil, gas and coal-based energy sources.

If you hear someone talk about “climate change” and that America should do something, show them this video as proof that it’s nothing more than left-wing, “Chicken Little” politics.

7 October 14

Article below, with references, shows global cooling even though many are still talking “climate change is caused by man”, well, hell, OF COURSE THERE’S CLIMATE CHANGE, JUST LOOK AT THE SEASONS AND CONSIDER THAT DURING ROMAN TIMES THE MEDIAN TEMPERATURE IS ESTIMATED TO HAVE BEEN 82 F !!! 30 years of cooling means at least 10 years of potential crop failures in the middle, and famine and disease, so, let’s REALLY keep those borders open and let all of those “dreamers” in without medical checks and quarantines.
BTW, how can they be wondering why the ocean levels are rising? Don’t these people even know basic chemistry? As pointed out above, the polar ice cap is expanding/growing, meaning the sea water is being displaced, just like when water is being frozen, the ice rises up and displaces the water below? Let’s get out of the U.N. and stop financing stupidity like the IPCC.

NASA Scientists Puzzled by Global Cooling on Land and Sea
Image: NASA Scientists Puzzled by Global Cooling on Land and Sea (iStock)

Monday, 06 Oct 2014 12:36 PM

46
inShare

The deep ocean may not be hiding heat after all, raising new questions about why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years, said the US space agency Monday.

Scientists have noticed that while greenhouse gases have continued to mount in the first part of the 21st century, global average surface air temperatures have stopped rising along with them, said NASA.

Some studies have suggested that heat is being absorbed temporarily by the deep seas, and that this so-called global warming hiatus is a temporary trend.
Editor’s Note: Dark Winter: Book Exposes Fraud of Man Made Global Warming

But latest data from satellite and direct ocean temperature measurements from 2005 to 2013 “found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably,” NASA said in a statement.

The findings present a new puzzle to scientists, but co-author Josh Willis of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) said the reality of climate change is not being thrown into doubt.

“The sea level is still rising,” said Willis.

“We’re just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details.”

A separate study in August in the journal Science said the apparent slowdown in the Earth’s surface warming in the last 15 years could be due to that heat being trapped in the deep Atlantic and Southern Ocean.

But the NASA researchers said their approach, described in the journal Nature Climate Change, is the first to test the idea using satellite observations, as well as direct temperature measurements of the upper ocean.
Editor’s Note: NASA Expert: Sun Cycles To Cause 30 Year Cold Spell

“The deep parts of the ocean are harder to measure,” said researcher William Llovel of NASA JPL.

“The combination of satellite and direct temperature data gives us a glimpse of how much sea level rise is due to deep warming. The answer is — not much.”

12 Dec 2014, another update, completely ripping Al ‘jabba the hut’ Gore’s hoax of a movie, http://nws.mx/1IGXEwd .

29 Dec 2014, another update:
Capital Hill

Political & Economic Analysis

Polar Ice Not Melting, But Global Warming Story Is
32 Comments

By KERRY JACKSON

Posted 11:41 AM ET

Print
Comment
inShare

Feeling low about the incessant screeching that the ice is catastrophically melting at the poles? A lot of us are, so it’s good to see a researcher buck the narrative.

Ted Maksym, an oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, has drawn a conclusion that will surely bring him grief from the global-warming believers and cold shoulder from most of the mainstream media, which is heavily invested in the idea that man is heating his planet by burning fossil fuels.

“The North and South Poles are ‘not melting,'” the British Express reported on Christmas.

“In fact,” the Express said in its coverage of Maksym’s finding, “the poles are ‘much more stable’ than climate scientists once predicted and could even be much thicker than previously thought.”

Remember those words “previously thought.” In the future we will be seeing them a lot more in reference to the continued unraveling of the global warming fable. In the meantime, kudos to the Express for publishing what the mainstream American media refuse to report.

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/122914-732367-polar-ice-not-melting-oceanographer-says.htm#ixzz3NKQChTdo
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

15 Jan 15 See Chris Horner’s book, “Red Hot Lies”.

12 February 2015, Interesting update: Yesterday, in Oslo Norway, the Norwegian Central Bank and a group of Norwegian scientists, announced that the climate change hoax had nearly destroyed the Norwegian Economy.
It seems that over the last 5 years, IPCC, U.N., NOAO, and the “global climate science community”, have been fiddling with the numbers to get their computer models to agree with their predictions. However, Norway, a Socialist Country, has been planning its economy for the last five years on the climate change assumptions. This means that they have been spending their entire national economic resources on the false assumptions that the Polar Ice Cap is melting, that their shorelines will shrink, that they will have tons more fresh water, acres and acres of more farm and pastureland, milder winters, and longer summers.
Only, since the global scientific community has been fiddling with the figures, the reverse has happened, thus bringing the Norwegian National Economy to the brink of collapse.
So, it seems that the fishermen of “The Deadliest Catch”, NASA satellite photography, scientists like Lawrence Solomon, and simple pundits such as Eric Bolling, have been proven correct, once again.

25 Feb 15, ;TWSJ and The Economist 4th quarter reports on Real Estate were recently released. I decided to look at a couple of other RE stats, simply because HGTV has posted its 2015 Showplace House/ Giveaway. The 3+MILLION $$$ house is located on Cape Cod, MA. Hmmmmm. So I looked a little farther into this.

RE prices are up in Big Sur CA, Cape Cod MA, Miami FL, throughout the Caribbean, all along both coasts of North AND South America, HI, and along the Indian Ocean. Hmmm.

Don’t get it yet??? It means that all of the greenies screaming about climate change, have NOT sold any of their big estates along the coasts! It means that the people who sell mortgages, do NOT believe in Climate Change! It means that the Kennedys, who have estates in MA and FL as well as CA and NY, do NOT believe in Climate Change! None of the limousine liberals have sold any of their coastal properties!!!

Gee, how much more needs to be said about this fraud????

Update 7 Dec 15 (Pearl Harbor Remembrance, BTW) TWSJ p A 14, letter to the editor by Terry W. Donze, Geophysicist, ‘Warming’ Science Is Anything but Settled’. A must read for anyone interested in the climate change controversy. Mr. Donze cites several real scientists who refute every aspect of climate change catastrophe from sea levels rising, false according to sea level expert, Nils-Axel Moerner “the greatest lie ever told”, through Arctic ice is melting despite it 5% increase. Every aspect of the climate change claim is refuted by actual climatologists, and not politicians like Al Gore.

Update 8 Sep 16 Was looking at the newest Voyager photos and slipped over to the Polar Ice cap current photos. Al Gore stated categorically that the Polar Ice cap would be gone by 2014. According to today’s satellite passing shots, it is bigger than ever since we started taking photos, and this for the end of summer condition.

Update 3 Oct 19 Been awhile, but several comments on this particular post in recent months have suggested to me to make an update. Bjorn Lomberg of the Stockholm Consensus, an environmental group in Sweden, no longer believes in Man-Made Climate Change. Other sources than Lawrence Solomon include anything by Joe Basterdi and the Galileo Movement. GM has several videos that are worth the time to view. Some have been pulled from youtube but if you search for them, you can get them all. Christopher Horner has two books and if you like dry humor on some of these subjects, almost anything by Mark Steyn.

Also, Varney & Co today reported that Americans paid more in taxes in 2018 than they spent on food, clothing, services, and healthcare; $18,000 vs $14,000. So, now what Ocrazy-O-Cortez, Warren, Sanders, Biden & Co? You want even more for WHAT???

7 July 2020

Michael Shellenberger is no slouch when it comes to environmental issues.Ditch the fake news ==> Click here to get news you can trust sent right to your inbox. It’s free!

Besides his TED talks garnering more than 5 million views, he’s a Green Book Award Winner, a frequent contributor to publications such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Scientific American — and he also authored “Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All,” which was released Tuesday by HarperCollins.

But Shellenberger said a Forbes article — “On Behalf of Environmentalists, I Apologize for the Climate Scare” — based on his new book was soon “censored” soon after it went up Sunday. The Daily Wire reported that his piece was taken down from the Forbes website “a few hours” after it was published. The Forbes site on Tuesday showed where Shellenberger’s article should be — but only says it’s “no longer active.”

Image source: Forbes website

TheBlaze on Tuesday didn’t immediately hear back from Forbes in regard to the reasons Shellenberger’s article was removed or the reported time frame in which it was shuttered.

But Shellenberger has a few ideas on why his article is no longer there: “No book on the environment has ever been praised by a more prestigious group of scientists & scholars than ‘Apocalypse Never,'” he wrote on Twitter. “And no book has ever been more devastating to green alarmism. No wonder they’re so terrified you’ll read it.”

In a statement to the Daily Wire — which published his piece in its entirety — Shellenberger said, “I am grateful that Forbes has been so committed to publishing a range of viewpoints, including ones that challenge the conventional wisdom, and was thus disappointed my editors removed my piece from the web site. I believe Forbes is an important outlet for broadening environmental journalism beyond the overwhelmingly alarmist approach taken by most reporters, and look forward to contributing heterodoxical pieces on energy and the environment in the future.”

What does his article say?

Here’s how Shellenberger opens his article: “On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.”

He also says he feels “an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.”

Shellenberger then details a list of “facts few people know”:

Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
Carbon emissions have been declining in rich nations including Britain, Germany and France since the mid-seventies
Adapting to life below sea level made the Netherlands rich not poor
We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

“I know that the above facts will sound like ‘climate denialism’ to many people,” he adds. “But that just shows the power of climate alarmism.”

How the Climate Elite Spread Misery

Most people are more worried about high gas and food prices, which green policies make worse.

Bjorn Lomborg

July 21, 2022 6:36 pm ET

SAVE

TEXT

541

A sidewalk in London, July 20.PHOTO: ANDY RAIN/SHUTTERSTOCK

Listen to article

Length(7 minutes)Queue

The chattering classes who jet to conferences at Davos or Aspen have for years been telling the rest of us that our biggest immediate threats are climate change, environmental disasters and biodiversity loss. They point to the current heat waves killing thousands across Europe as the latest reason to change our societies and economies radically by switching to renewables.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH

Biden Considers Declaring a Climate Emergency

00:001xSUBSCRIBE

Such arguments are misleading. It’s true that as temperatures rise the world will experience more heat waves, but humans also adapt to such things. In Spain, for example, rising temperatures have actually led to fewer heat deaths, because people have adapted faster than temperatures have gone up. It simply took air conditioning, public cooling centers and better treatment of maladies that are caused or aggravated by heat, such as heatstroke and heart disease.

The exclusive focus on heat deaths is also misleading. Across the world, low temperatures are much more dangerous than high ones: Half a million people die each year from heat, but more than 4.5 million die from cold. While rising temperatures will increase heat deaths, they will also decrease cold deaths. A recent Lancet study found that rising temperatures since 2000 have on net reduced the number of temperature-related deaths. Researchers concluded that by the end of the 2010s, rising temperatures globally were causing 116,000 more heat deaths annually, but also leading to 283,000 fewer cold deaths a year.

Moreover, politicians’ singular focus on climate change ignores that people are much more worried about rampant inflation, especially rising food and energy prices. And climate policies are making those problems worse.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Opinion

Morning Editorial Report

All the day’s Opinion headlines.PREVIEW

Much of the extreme energy-price increase that normal people are dealing with is caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine. But things wouldn’t be nearly as bad if the West hadn’t thrown up green roadblocks to its own energy security, such as President Biden’s moratorium on gas leases or Europe’s refusal to dig into its substantial shale gas reserves. Climate policies also increase energy prices by subsidizing renewables like solar and wind. That makes it even harder to adapt to the extreme temperatures climate activists bemoan. You need cheap and reliable energy to afford air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter.

Rising fuel prices are also making food more expensive. Low-cost synthetic fertilizer is one of the greatest technologies humanity has invented for feeding the world, but it’s mostly made with natural gas. Even with almost a billion people at risk of starvation, climate-obsessed bureaucrats still object to producing more fertilizer because of the fossil fuels required.

The cost of green policies will become even harder to bear if politicians make good on their promises to hit net-zero emissions. Achieving this globally by 2050 would cost more than $5 trillion a year for the next three decades, according to McKinsey. That would be one-third of total global tax revenue. If every American were to shell out more than $5,000 a year, it would only get the U.S. 80% of the way there by midcentury. Hitting 100% would likely cost more than twice that. The European Union already pays €69 billion a year in subsidies to support its renewables. But if the EU persists with its even stauncher promises of net-zero, that annual climate policy cost is likely to exceed $1 trillion.

No wonder there’s political pushback to environmental grandstanding. The Netherlands has been roiled by protests since the government mandated in June that nitrogen-oxide and ammonia emissions, which are produced by livestock, must be slashed by 70% to 80% in some parts of the country. As many as 40,000 farmers demonstrated against the measure last month. Holland is among the world’s 10 largest food exporters, and these policies would decimate the country’s agriculture industry while global hunger is rising.

Sri Lanka is the epitome of elite environmentalism gone wrong. Pushed to go organic by activists and the World Economic Forum, the government banned synthetic fertilizers in April 2021. Food production collapsed and the currency defaulted. Hungry and outraged citizens launched protests, overran the presidential palace, and forced the government to resign en masse and the president to flee the country.

It’s entirely possible to help the climate and working families at the same time. The policies to do so are innovation-focused. Policy makers need to recognize that they simply can’t eliminate fossil fuels with current technologies. The world gets almost 80% of its energy from fossil fuels, and even if all current climate policies were fully implemented, by midcentury fossil fuels would still provide more than half of all energy used world-wide, according to the International Energy Agency. Instead of sending energy prices sky-high by trying to force a transition to renewables prematurely, policy makers should focus on funding research to develop clean energy sources that are actually affordable and reliable. And instead of badgering farmers to go organic, governments should invest in research to develop varieties of crops and agricultural practices that deliver higher yields with a smaller environmental footprint.

Some of these technologies are already in development. Greater funding could bring them to fruition more quickly and do a lot more to help limit emissions than the policies activists now hawk. These sorts of sensible measures would cost much less than policies like net-zero, leaving more money to meet the world’s many other challenges.

https://fea5e1911a48a7fb3c06fe1799f470b7.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

It’s starting to dawn on some elites that their policies are creating political dangers. Frans Timmermans, the European Commission’s vice president, has said that many millions of Europeans may not be able to heat their homes this winter. This, he concludes, could lead to “very, very strong conflict and strife.”

He’s right. When people are cold, hungry and broke, they rebel. If the elites continue pushing incredibly expensive policies that are disconnected from the urgent challenges facing most people, we need to brace for chaos.

Mr. Lomborg is president of the Copenhagen Consensus and visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. His latest book is “False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet.”

Update, August 31, 2022:

Translate toSpanishArabicDutchFrenchGermanGreekItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussian

SCIENCE

1,100 Scientists and Professionals Declare: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’

‘Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,’ scientists say

By ALLAN STEIN

More than 1,100 scientists and professionals worldwide have signed a World Climate Declaration (WCD) stating that there’s no climate emergency.

The independent foundation Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL) issued the one-page summary on June 27, garnering 1,152 total signatures in 15 countries as of Aug. 23.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the summary reads. “Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming.”

At the same time, “politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined

CLIMATE

1,100 Scientists and Professionals Declare: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’

‘Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,’ scientists say

CONTINUED FROM A1

benefits of their policy measures,” the declaration states.

CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok to promote knowledge and understanding of climate change in forming climate policy.

Crok said the WCD project began in 2019 and that the power is in its message, brevity, and accessibility.

“The message is plain and clear: There is no climate emergency. Very important: This is true, even if you accept that CO2 is the main driver of the current climate change,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

“We simply state that all evidence so far indicates that the increase in CO2 and the increase in temperature [are] not harmful for us or for nature and therefore the climate hysteria surrounding the topic is totally unjustified [and] that the ‘cure’— getting rid of fossil fuels asap and replacing them with renewables— probably will be worse than the ‘disease’ [climate change].”

Crok said the CLINTEL document has produced significant pushback from climate activists.

He said the organization sent many open letters to organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N., and the World Economic Forum asking for a high-level meeting with CLINTEL scientists.

“ We normally don’t even get a polite reply,” Crok said. “Activists don’t like our WCD for the simple reason that they always claim there is a 97 percent or 99 percent or 99.9 percent consensus.

“So, they have two general ways to attack the WCD. They say that only a few [signatories] are active climate scientists and many are retired. Both are true and very understandable.”

The WCD states that the science of climate change is far from settled and that the geological archive shows Earth’s climate has been in flux for as long as the planet has existed.

We simply state that all evidence so far indicates that the increase in CO2 and the increase in temperature [are] not harmful for us or for nature.

Marcel Crok, science journalist

He said if a working climate scientist dependent on government money signs the WCD, they face the risk of getting fired.

“We have some brave enough to speak out nevertheless, but that means you will have to face a lot of criticism and attempts to discredit you,” Crok said.

Direct engagements with the activists are rare, he said.

“They simply dominate the media, and if they feel our WCD has some impact, they will arrange that it gets discredited in the media and the social media.”

In recent weeks, CLINTEL has received increased attention and new signatories, many of whom have worked in academia.

The WCD states that the science of climate change is far from settled and that the geological archive shows Earth’s climate has been in flux for as long as the planet has existed.

“Therefore, it is no surprise that we are now experiencing a period of warming. Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming. The world has warmed significantly less than predicted [based on] modeled anthropogenic forcing,” it reads. “The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.”

The WCD also states that climate models have “many shortcomings” and are unsatisfactory policy tools.

“They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, [but] they also ignore that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial,” it reads. “CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet.

“Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.”

The Texas-based company Navigator Heartland Greenway recently announced plans to build a carbon capture network across five states in the U.S. Midwest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The company held public meetings on potential land takings to make way for the project earlier this year.

The proposed Heartland Greenway pipeline would span 1,300 miles across South Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois to nearly 20 recipient points. CO2 would be converted into liquid form and buried underground.

“CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth,” the declaration reads. “There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts, and suchlike natural disasters or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2 mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.

“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”

The declaration states that European leaders that climate policy should “respect scientific and economic realities.” “To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in,” the WCD reads. “This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central.

“Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”

Crok said the document’s main goal is to make clear that even if you accept most of the claims of the IPCC, you can still conclude there’s no climate emergency.

“In this respect, our WCD should be uncontroversial,” he said.

CHRISTOPHER FURLONG/GETTY IMAGES

A giant sand artwork on New Brighton Beach in Wirral, England, on May 31, 2021.

IDA GULDBAEK ARENTSEN/ RITZAU SCANPIX/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

A detail of the pilot CO2 capture plant at Amager Bakke waste incinerator in Copenhagen, Denmark, on Ju

update from The Wall Street Journal, 9/20/2022

Don’t Believe the Hype About Antarctica’s Melting Glaciers

Two studies carefully explore the factors at play, but the headlines are only meant to raise alarm.

By Steven Koonin

Sept. 19, 2022 6:27 pm ETSAVEPRINTTEXT

785

The Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica, Sept. 5.PHOTO: COVER IMAGES/ZUMA PRESS

Listen to article

Length(5 minutes)Queue

Alarming reports that the Antarctic ice sheet is shrinking misrepresent the science under way to understand a very complex situation. Antarctica has been ice-covered for at least 30 million years. The ice sheet holds about 26.5 million gigatons of water (a gigaton is a billion metric tons, or about 2.2 trillion pounds). If it were to melt completely, sea levels would rise 190 feet. Such a change is many millennia in the future, if it comes at all.

Much more modest ice loss is normal in Antarctica. Each year, some 2,200 gigatons (or 0.01%) of the ice is discharged in the form of melt and icebergs, while snowfall adds almost the same amount. The difference between the discharge and addition each year is the ice sheet’s annual loss. That figure has been increasing in recent decades, from 40 gigatons a year in the 1980s to 250 gigatons a year in the 2010s.

But the increase is a small change in a complex and highly variable process. For example, Greenland’s annual loss has fluctuated significantly over the past century. And while the Antarctic losses seem stupendously large, the recent annual losses amount to 0.001% of the total ice and, if they continued at that rate, would raise sea level by only 3 inches over 100 years.

Many fear that a warming globe could cause glaciers to retreat rapidly, increasing discharge and causing more rapid sea-level rise. To get beyond that simplistic picture, it is important to understand how glaciers have flowed in the past to predict better whether they might flow faster in the future.

Two recent studies reported in the media focus on the terminus of glaciers—i.e., where the ice, the ocean and the ground come together. One study used an underwater drone to map the seabed at a depth of 2,000 feet, about 35 miles from the terminus of the Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica. Detailed sonar scans showed a washboard pattern of ridges, most less than 8 inches high. The ridges are caused by daily tides and serve as a record of where ice touched the seabed in the past. Researchers could read that record to infer that at some time in the past the glacier retreated for half a year at more than twice the fastest rate observed between 2011 and 2019.

The cause of the specific event at the Thwaites Glacier remains unknown, in part because the time of the rapid retreat hasn’t yet been determined. It likely happened more than 70 years ago, if not several centuries ago. But the media goes with this angle: “A ‘doomsday glacier’ the size of Florida is disintegrating faster than thought.” A correct headline would read: “Thwaites Glacier retreating less than half as rapidly today as it did in the past.”

A second study tested the idea that freshwater from the melting of one glacier could be carried by currents along the shore to accelerate the discharge of nearby glaciers. Because global climate models are insufficiently detailed to describe the ocean near the coast, researchers constructed a special model to prove out their idea. If ocean currents can connect the discharges of distant glaciers, that would add to the complexity and variability of changes in the Antarctic ice sheet.

Under scenarios deemed likely by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a connection between ocean currents and discharge would increase the overall discharge rate in one region of the continent by some 10% by the end of the century. But to emphasize the idea being tested, the modelers used human influences almost three times larger. Even though that fact is stated in the paper, reporters rarely catch such nuance, and the media goes with headlines such as “Antarctic Ice Melting Could Be 40 Percent Faster Than Thought” with the absurd statement that “a massive tsunami would swamp New York City and beyond, killing millions. London, Venice and Mumbai would also become aquariums.” A more accurate headline would read: “Ocean currents connecting antarctic glaciers might accelerate their melting.”

These two studies illustrate the progress being made in understanding a dauntingly complex mix of ice, ocean, land and weather, with clever methods to infer past conditions and sophisticated computer modeling to show potential future scenarios. These papers describe the science with appropriate precision and caveats, but it is a shame that the media misrepresents the research to raise alarm. That denies the public the right to make informed decisions about “climate action,” as well as the opportunity to marvel at the science itself.

Mr. Koonin is a professor at New York University, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters.”

Comments (26)

July 10, 2024

A Starter’s Reading List (for Belinda 7/10/24)

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 8:31 pm

For Belinda: a Starter’s Reading List

Early histories of Western Civilization:

Most people, generally, ignore these earlier peoples and their histories. Both Commentaries and Thucydides are filled with policies, histories, and biographies that are still relevant, and have been since before they were written. Thucydides in particular is a blueprint of how to both succeed and fail in government & war. The fact that it starts with an explanation of how these wars started, a how to and how not to execute diplomacy, and ends with the destruction of Athens, and why they lost, is more instructive than Sun Tzu’s Art of War will ever be. Commentaries is a further exploration on how to win and lose, and both are extraordinarily relevant in our nuclear age.[1]

Cæsar, Julius: The Landmark Julius Cæsar: The Complete Works ISBN 978-0-307-45544-4

Referred to by some as ‘Cæsar’s Commentaries,’ includes Gallic War[2] and Civil War. I prefer the Landmark series for all sorts of reasons, primarily that they are annotated and have maps placing all of the locations in place for easy reference. So much explanation by the editors in the margins that other source materials are unnecessary, not even a dictionary or glossary.

Thucydides: The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to The Peloponnesian War ISBN 978-1-4165-9087-3

Like Commentaries, the Landmark people have made this an easily readable and understandable piece of work. Even better, they got Dr. Victor Davis Hanson to do the introduction.

Tacitus: The Annals of Imperial Rome ISBN 0-14-044060-7

Tacitus’ last work covers Rome from ~55 AD to ~117 AD, this is the period leading up to the fall. It ends with Nero’s death.

Herodotus: The Histories ISBN 1-59308-102-2

Describes the rise of Greece and the creation of the city-states from an agricultural & subsistence society into the civilization foundations for contract law and banking systems and to the fount of Western philosophy, including the concepts of democracy, free trade, and social equality. May be the first surviving Western history book. Some think that the pieces he wrote about Egypt were foisted on him by guides as the Egyptian locals may have thought of him as a simplistic tourist rather than a serious historian.

Everitt, Anthony: Cicero; the life and times of Rome’s greatest politician ISBN 978-0-375-75895-9

Exactly what it says: a well-researched biography of Cicero, one of the greatest orators, politicians, and jurists of Western Civilization.

Early colonies & the War of 1776, “The Revolutionary War”

Rothbard, Murray N.: Conceived in Liberty ISBN 978-1-933550-98-5

Five volumes in two books, tenth grade level reading skills, available in hardback and paperback at www.mises.org/store . The Mises Institute is the premiere Austrian School of Economics proponent in the U.S. It is located at the University of Alabama, Auburn. Conceived in Liberty covers from the first settlements, the 17^th Century, through the new republic, 1791.

M^cCullough, David: 1776 ISBN 0-7432-2671-2

One volume, tenth grade read.

Middlekauff, Robert: The Glorious Cause ISBN 0-19-503575-5

One volume, another tenth grade read. About the revolution.

Several good intermediate level, 12^th grade reads:

DiLorenzo, Thomas J.: Hamilton’s Curse ISBN 978-0-307-38285-6

“How Jefferson’s Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution – and What It Means for Americans Today,” quote from the dust cover.

Maier, Pauline: Ratification; The People Debate the Constitution, 1787 – 1788 ISBN 978-0-684-86854-7

Prof. Maier went to the original source documents of all of the ratification conventions and states legislatures to figure out what happened. Of particular interest to me, Mark Levin & Pete Hegseth notwithstanding, is the number of states that insisted that the right to secede, as evidenced by the secession conventions of 1776, 1814, 1826, and 1860 be acknowledged by all member states.

Tuchman, Barbara W.: The Shot Heard Around the World (can’t find my copy)

Mason, Matthew: Slavery & Politics in the Early American Republic ISBN 978-0-8078-3049-9

Discusses how slavery impacted early American politics. Definitely not read by the 1619 Project proponents, nor anyone in the NAACP or the Democratic Party.

Lefkowitz, Mary: Not Out of Africa ISBN 0-465-09838-X

Noted Egyptologist refutes all of the nonsense about African-American oral histories and their attachment to Egyptian Civilization

The War of 1861, “The Civil War” or “The American Civil War” to differentiate it from the other civil wars, such as the English “War of the Roses” and the “Spanish Civil War” which usually only refers to the one in the 1930’s.

Foote, Shelby: The Civil War: a narrative ISBN 0-394-74623-6

Three volumes in paperback, about 1,000 pp each, tenth grade level reading skills, available on Amazon.

Hillsdale college, www.hillsdale.edu has numerous DVDs on both subjects as well as some biblical studies. They are on-line for study at your own pace. They are free upon request, and you may be interested in their speaker series letter Imprimus, also no charge although they would like donations.

Another DVD source, not as a good in my opinion but still having good source material is the Smithsonian Institution’s The Great Courses DVD series which are on just about everything including how to play the guitar, yoga, &c. TGC DVD’s generally run from $29.99 to $499.99 depending upon the material. I’ve found their ‘books of distinction’ series to have good reviews and analyses of these works, for the purpose of this introductory reading list, they have an understandable set on The Federalist Papers.

For a better understanding of the constitution and what originalism is all about, you must read both The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. Keeping in mind that ratification and the Bill of Rights would not exist without both of these sets of pamphlets.

In the Hillsdale series is one of particular note: The Skeptic’s Guide to American History. The Hillsdale people also have hard copy workbooks & guides to go with their DVDs, but you have to pay for them. If you are serious, getting the guides and workbooks is worth the small price requested. Otherwise, just hearing the non-woke histories is worth the time spent in watching them.

Intermediate level works are too numerous to list, but include any of the works of William Freehling, Thomas DiLorenzo, Mark E. Neely, Jr., Forrest M^cDonald, Eric Foner, and of special note is:

Kennedy, James R., Kennedy, Walter D.: The South Was Right ISBN 1-56554-024-7

Reviled and repudiated by The Left, especially the rabid racists, includes a summation of the 1860 U.S. census showing the actual ethnic breakdown of slaves in the country; the number of Native-Americans in slavery (~40%), Chinese (~3%), and Whites (~1%, mostly of Irish descent in the Union slave states of MD, DE, and MO).

Both of these time periods have many good works where the author went to the original source materials. Look especially for an historian from Southern universities as they are more interested in truth than fostering the Northern perspective. A recent work on the duplicity of the Northern aggression is:

Addicott, Jeffrey F. (Lt. Col. U.S. Army; BA, JD, LLM [2], SJD): Union Terror 978-1-94766-0-823

Pretty much details how the Union Army raped, pillaged, and burnt its way through the South for the sole purpose of looting the country-side. Sherman bragged at a post war re-union of his army how they took North over $100,000,000.00 in loot and how they destroyed even more of The South. Keep in mind that the Federal budget of the early 19^th Century shows that The South contributed over 75% of Federal revenue while The North received over 75% of it in the form of economic development, mostly of railroads and canals.

Economics

I know of no basic/simple economics books, but readable starters are more about history than PPM (purchasing power of money) or MMT (Modern Monetary Theory – which by-the-by is simply a repackaging of 19^th century Marxist Chartelism theory, so loved by AOC & Bernie), so,

Mises, Ludwig von: Omnipotent Government; The Anti-Capitalist Mentality; Theory and History; Liberalism, the classic tradition, his magnum opus is Human Action, but don’t go there before reading the shorter works.

The Mises Institute has all sorts of pamphlets that they’ll send for no or little charge. They include works on money (Rothbard: What Has Government Done to Our Money; Hulsmann: How Inflation Destroys Civilization; Salerno: The Progressive Road to Socialism), government, and moral philosophy (Hoppe: Social Democracy).

Boettke, Peter J., Coyne, Christopher J.: The Oxford Handbook of Austrian Economics ISBN 978-0-19-981176-2

Essays and articles on the school of Austrian Economics. Not for beginners, but an essential read for those interested in economics beyond the supply/demand curve and simple banking. Especially good for those who want to learn more about marginal utility and human action.

For the issue of slavery, first read Foote, then go to:

Thomas, Hugh: The Slave Trade

Adams, Charles: Slavery, Secession, & Civil War

Loads more when you’re ready, especially works by The Founding Fathers. Things like how they were so opposed to troops being quartered in the homes of private citizens, a common practice from before the Roman Republic, how during The Ratification conventions, three states refused in conclave to ratify the 1787 Constitution (the one that we still have) unless everyone understood that they could leave the union at any time that they wanted to leave, (Mark Levin & Pete Hegseth notwithstanding), and how there was a secession movement by the New England states in 1814, and by South Carolina in 1826, and the Deep South in the 1850’s.

Of further interest on the causes of the American Civil War, is the 1850’s Supreme Court decision Scott vs Davis a.k.a. The Dred Scott Decision. SCOTUS declared that slaves were property, and as such, fell under the private property restrictions of the constitution and as such, slaves were not protected by the constitution. Considering that at the time, ~58% of slaves were of African descent, importation of slaves forbidden around or before 1800, 38% Indians (“Native Americans”), 3% Chinese (working on the Pacific sections of the railroad) CA being a ‘free’ state the Chinese overseers/owners not bothering to tell their slaves that they were free, and 1% White (Irish mostly, “up North”), slavery wasn’t really about Race, but the economic stealing of the productivity of the individual, which still goes on today everywhere, including the stolen labor of the women and children, illegals, being trafficked here in the U.S.A.

When you look at events, trends, and movements in the historical context, it is my opinion that it is all based on wealth. Consider how from the economics viewpoint, the American Civil War was so unnecessary, wasteful, and destructive. With Robert Fulton’s steam engine doing so much work for so much less effort and cost, slavery as an economically feasible use of resources was rapidly dying. There were steam threshers, steam tractors, steam locomotives, and even steam carriages by 1860. Slavery in the border states was limited to personal/household slaves. Only in the Deep South were slaves still used, mostly for agriculture, which, if you look around today, picking crops is still mostly a human endeavor. Look at Hugo Chavez’ work in unionizing farm workers and what happened to him.

On the blog, www.justplainbill.wordpress.com there is a ten year old bibliography for further reading, if you’re interested. That list has hasn’t been updated to include some of the works listed above. Neither list has much of what I’d recommend as I simply haven’t gotten around to it, and I’m still woefully behind on my own reading and writing.

Anyhow, I’m dropping this off for you and will see you for trimming in August,

Yours,

Bill

©justplainbill 2024

[1] It’s interesting to note that prior to the 1946 G.I. Bill, and still in the U.K., a ‘liberal education’ meant that you learned Greek and Latin. In order to properly learn these ancient languages, students had to read all of these, and other works, in the original tongue, so, prior to the Korean War, a liberal education meant that you actually got an excellent education in business, government, and philosophy. Something no longer available in our CRT – DEI world.

[2] You’ve heard the opening: Gaul is divided into four parts.

Leave a Comment

June 13, 2024

The Lesson of the Trump Conviction, from Mises Wire

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 2:43 pm

Mises Wire

The Lesson of the Trump Conviction

Tags:Law,Media and Culture,Politics,Progressivism

06/05/2024•Mises Wire•Connor O’Keeffe

Print this page

Last week, Donald Trump was convicted of falsifying business records with the intent to commit, aid, or conceal another crime. The Manhattan jury found him guilty on all thirty-four counts.

This entire case was always ridiculous. Trump was charged for labeling reimbursement checks to his lawyer as “legal expenses” after the lawyer made a (completely legal) payment to an adult film actress to get her to sign a nondisclosure agreement. Prosecutors argued that the reimbursement payments—which were paid in 2017, after Trump had won the election—were actually campaign expenditures because keeping the alleged affair quiet may have helped the Trump campaign.

The idea that hush-money payments made by political candidates are only legitimate if they use campaign funds and publicly report the payments is absurd. And it’s unprecedented too. In fact, federal campaign law is rather strict in the other direction—limiting candidates from spending campaign funds on everything but the most clear-cut campaign expenses like rent for a campaign office or TV commercials.

But still, to turn charges of falsifying business records from misdemeanors into felonies, the New York State prosecutors had to show that Trump mislabeled the records in order to commit, aid, or conceal another crime. Alvin Bragg, the New York County district attorney, argued that this other crime was a violation of federal election law. But, as William Anderson explained last week, Trump has never been charged for this alleged violation of federal law. And even if Bragg thinks he should be, that determination cannot be made in a state court.

Bragg later changed the secondary election violation to claim Trump broke an obscure New York election law that made it a misdemeanor to engage in an election conspiracy, defined as, “Conspiracy to promote or prevent election: Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means . . . shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” Again, the jury decided that alleged misdemeanors that Trump committed in 2017 were done to unlawfully promote an election he had already won the year before.

Adding to the absurdity, just before deliberations began, the trial judge told the jury that they did not need to agree that Trump had violated that specific election law. He listed an additional violation of tax laws and further falsifying business records that could have resulted from the initial mislabeled payments as possible other crimes. According to the judge, the jury did not have to agree on what Trump specifically did. As long as everyone on the jury believed that he had committed any of these three crimes—none of which he has or is being charged with—they should find him guilty. And they did. So much for the presumption of innocence.

So, to review, Trump was convicted for mislabeling reimbursement checks to his lawyer as legal expenses when prosecutors say they should have been tagged as campaign expenditures. To turn the charges into felonies, prosecutors further asserted that by mislabeling these checks, Trump had violated federal election law because the payments may have impacted the 2016 election—even though the payments in question were made after the election was over. And finally, the judge instructed the jury that they did not even need to agree that Trump had violated federal election law but could each pick and choose from a number of possible crimes that Trump has never been charged with, and still reach a unanimous guilty verdict.

It’s important to understand how convoluted and ridiculous this case against Trump was because it reveals what’s really going on here. It’s not as if the almost 230-year norm of not bringing criminal charges against former presidents was shattered because Trump did something so egregious that prosecutors had no choice but to charge him.

Instead, Trump’s opponents spent years searching for anything they could charge Trump with in an effort to drive him out of political life. This case was just enough that, when cobbled together and presented to a jury in one of the most anti-Trump areas in the country, it got the political class the conviction they’ve wanted ever since Trump won the presidency.

Those of us who understand the serious political and economic changes required to address our country’s many problems need to learn the lesson of the Trump conviction. The political class will not roll over and let its power slip away just because we elect a few antiestablishment politicians.

As Murray Rothbard laid out in detail toward the end of his life, a widespread, enthusiastic, bottom-up movement is a necessary precondition if we’re ever going to see federal power rolled back. The political class is set on destroying Trump, not because of the policies he enacted while in office but because of the antiestablishment ideas he has helped stoke on the American right. The intensity of their reaction reveals how vulnerable they feel to such ideas. But the conviction of Donald Trump on such trivial and absurd charges also makes it clear that those in power will use whatever they can to stay there.

[fyi review the VI th Amendment for the abused constitutional rights. If you do not have a pocket edition of the constitution, check out cato.org for reasonably priced copies. Also, you may decide to get the 10 pack, which makes the individual copies significantly less expensive, and give some of the extras to friends &c.]

Leave a Comment

May 18, 2024

The New MAGA Manifesto, by Sebastian Gorka

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 3:05 pm

[not that I necessarily agree with Doc Gorka anymore than I completely agreed with Bolton, but his position should definitely be put out there.]

The New MAGA Manifesto

Posted on Friday, May 17, 2024

by Dr. Sebastian Gorka

30 Comments

What is MAGA? What does Make America Great Again mean?

A strange question to ask, don’t you think? Given that the man who built his presidential campaign on the phrase, not only won the election in 2016, he is currently trouncing the current incumbent and is in a very strong position to become the Chief Executive once more.

But that’s the strange thing.

MAGA was always more of an attitude, a sentiment than an explicit ideology with a concrete explicit, and detailed manifesto.

What unites the members of the MAGA Movement, from the young black child in Harlem who recently led the chorus of “We Love you Trump!”, to the grizzled construction worker outside the Manhattan courthouse holding the Trump trial who told my Newsmax colleague “F**k Biden!”, or the record 100,000 Americans who attended the Wildwood rally in New Jersey last week?

The surface answer is “Love of country,” an uncomplicated patriotism that sees in President Trump a man who may be a billionaire but who also sees a broken nation, a bipartisan elite who has betrayed both the working class and middle class in favor of big business, foreign interests and a philosophy of America’s “managed decline.”

But we are less than 6 months away from an election that demands we step beyond feelings, emotions and instincts, and slogans. With rampant inflation, open borders, crime-ravaged Democrat-run cities, colleges indoctrinating our youth to hate America and our very civilization, women and children targeted and mutilated by the Church of Transgenderism, criminals rewarded based on skin color, war in Europe and war in the Middle East; we need to crystalize our beliefs into a manifesto so we can effectively turn 2020’s 74,223,975 MAGA voters into 90, or 100 million voters before it’s too late.

Here is a first cut of the new Make America Great Again Manifesto.

The Situation:

The USA is the greatest nation on Earth, the apex of the greatest civilization, Judeo-Christian civilization, founded as it is on Man’s liberty being God-given.

A world without strong American leadership is a world destabilized by regimes that feel free to threaten both America and her allies and friends.

For decades, the American people have been betrayed by a political and business elite that does not believe in the United States.

That elite is kept in power by a complicit media which acts as a willing propaganda arm and a permanent bureaucracy of unelected and unremovable officials who believe the will of the people and the people’s choice of President are irrelevant in comparison to their ideological goals.

We believe America’s original values must be reinstated for all Americans to live in freedom and for the World to be stable.

What MAGA Patriots need to do:

Secure fair and free elections. This is the responsibility of EVERY patriot.
Re-elect President Donald Trump, the man detested by both sides of the establishment elite because he is a threat to their entrenched way of business.
Restore the rule of law by impeaching any judge who favors criminals based on skin color
Protect American companies and American employees with tariffs that penalize foreign manufacturers (especially China) and US companies who outsource jobs to other countries.
Rebuild America’s military so that we can win any war with any Exercise all ideology from within the armed services, starting with DEI and CRT.
Reinstate aggressive tariffs against our greatest strategic foe, the Communist state of China.
Punish universities that discriminate based on race or ethnicity by denying them all federal funding and stripping them of their non-profit status.
Identify the worst criminals of the permanent bureaucracy who have used the FBI, DOJ, and the Intelligence Community to target Americans politically, denude them of their civil rights “under the color of law,” and prosecute them in a court of law outside of Washington DC.
Effect a Presidential pardon for all January 6th defendants who were maltreated by the DOJ, kept in pretrial custody for years, and given custodial sentences for merely walking peacefully inside Congress. Investigate and sanction all those responsible for those politically motivated prosecutions and provide financial compensation and support for the families of the 5 defendants, like Matt Perna, who have committed suicide as a result of the DOJ’s relentless targeting.
Establish a Presidential Committee to investigate the events of January 6th, starting with why the current Director of the FBI continues to refuse to answer under oath the simple question of how many undercover agents or assets were involved that day.
Establish a Presidential Committee to investigate the release of COVID-19 from China, and the culpability of US government employees in providing Gain of Function funding to the Chinese Army bio lab located in Wuhan, starting with Anthony Fauci.
Secure the border as we did during the Trump Administration. Effect the deportation of all those let illegally into America by Biden’s DHS, except for the fraction who can unequivocally demonstrate that they are asylum-seekers who would be killed if they returned home and are not in fact economic migrants.
Finish building the Wall.

If I have left out anything, I look forward to hearing from you here.

#MAGA

Sebastian Gorka Ph.D. is the host of SALEM Radio’s AMERICA First and The Gorka Reality Check on NEWSMAX TV. A former Strategist to President Donald Trump, he is a member of the National Security Education Board of the Pentagon. His latest book is The War for America’s Soul. Follow him on his SubStack page and website. He is a regular contributor for the Association for Mature American Citizens (AMAC).

Leave a Comment

May 15, 2024

Illegals voting in D.C., AMAC

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 7:31 pm

DC Holds Training Sessions For Noncitizens To Vote

Posted on Wednesday, May 15, 2024

by Outside Contributor

22 Comments

Vote Here, Vote NYC Sign In Multiple Languages, NYC, NY, USA. Sign from the Board of Elections in the City of New York advising the public of a voting location. This photo was taken in New York City, New York, on October 30th 2022; noncitizens voting sign

An agency of the District of Columbia held a training session last month to teach illegal immigrants and other noncitizens how to vote, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

News of the training session held by the local government in the nation’s capital comes as House Republicans push a bill—with the backing of Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.—to require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote

The D.C. Board of Elections conducted the April 10 event, called “Non-Citizen Voting Education Virtual Training.”

Judicial Watch obtained 13 pages of the training session’s PowerPoint presentation through a request under the Freedom of Information Act. On one slide, the presentation says:

Non-U.S. citizen residents can vote in District elections for the offices of Mayor, Attorney General, Chairman or member(s) of the D.C. Council, member(s) of the State Board of Education, or Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner(s) Non-U.S. citizen residents cannot vote for Federal Offices.

The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project previously raised concerns about noncitizen voting in the District of Columbia. (Heritage established The Daily Signal in 2014.)

The District of Columbia is joined by local governments in California, Maryland, and Vermont in allowing foreign citizens to vote in local elections. Federal law allows only U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections.

State courts blocked New York City from allowing noncitizen voting there.

“Illegal aliens and noncitizens should not vote in any elections,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “That Congress allows the votes of citizens to be legally stolen by illegal aliens in our nation’s capital is inexcusable.”

The District of Columbia amended its election code last year to allow noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, to vote for local D.C. offices.

As noted in my book “The Myth of Voter Suppression,” Democrats long have sought to change election laws to gain a political advantage. These noncitizen voting laws mimic a tactic used by New York City’s legendary Tammany Hall and other political machines that controlled big city politics.

The District’s presentation explains the qualifications for registering to vote when someone isn’t a U.S. citizen.

“To register to vote in the District of Columbia as a non-citizen, you must: Be at least 17 years old and 18 years old by the next General Election; Maintain residency in the District of Columbia for at least 30 days prior to the election in which you intend to vote; Not claim voting residence or the right to vote in any state, territory, or country; Not been found by a court to be legally incompetent to vote,” the presentation says.

Neither the D.C. Board of Elections nor the office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment on this report.

Fred Lucas is chief news correspondent and manager of the Investigative Reporting Project for The Daily Signal. He is the author of “The Myth of Voter Suppression: The Left’s Assault on Clean Elections.”

Reprinted with permission from The Daily Signal by Fred Lucas.

Leave a Comment

May 14, 2024

Stop Noncitizens From Voting, by Rebecca Weber

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 2:48 pm

ICYMI: REBECCA WEBER: Congress Must Act To Stop Noncitizens From Voting

Posted on Monday, May 13, 2024

by AMAC Action

3 Comments

Bohemia, NY – AMAC CEO Rebecca Weber published an op-ed in Townhall on the pressing threat of noncitizens illegally casting ballots in American elections. Amid the unprecedented surge of illegal aliens across the U.S.-Mexico border and lingering concerns about election integrity, Weber calls on Congress to take immediate action to secure the ballot box, including by passing the recently introduced Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.

As Weber says, “Many in the corporate media and the political establishment have assured Americans that they need not worry because non-citizens voting, or even registering to vote in federal elections is already illegal – and indeed, this is the case. But this prohibition has been effectively neutralized by caveats and special carve-outs in dozens of states’ laws which create ample opportunity to violate federal election law.”

You can read the op-ed in its entirety here. See excerpts below:

“With less than six months to go until Election Day, Americans have ample reason to be concerned that a wave of non-citizens casting ballots could undermine the integrity of our elections. Urgent federal action is needed to address this threat before it is too late.

Many in the corporate media and the political establishment have assured Americans that they need not worry because non-citizens voting, or even registering to vote in federal elections is already illegal – and indeed, this is the case. But this prohibition has been effectively neutralized by caveats and special carve-outs in dozens of states’ laws which create ample opportunity to violate federal election law.”

…

“To help guard against non-citizens voting, many states have wisely implemented Voter ID laws. But even these safeguards might not be enough.

For instance, in 28 states, including the swing states of Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina, a student ID counts as a valid form of identification for voting. But student IDs do not distinguish between citizens and noncitizens.”

…

“Instead of addressing this problem, the Biden administration has actively made it worse. Under the provisions of a 2021 Biden Executive Order, the U.S. Marshals Service is now required to provide everyone in its custody information on how to register to vote. This apparently includes illegal aliens who are ineligible to vote under federal law.”

…

“One simple step Congress could take right now is to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a common-sense bill introduced this month which gives state officials important new tools to crack down on non-citizens voting.

Specifically, this bill would fix the shortcomings of the 1993 Voter Registration Act by requiring voters to provide documentary evidence – in person – that they are a U.S. citizen and an eligible voter.”

…

“The American people deserve the confidence of knowing that their elections are secure. For too long, loopholes in state laws and unaccountability from elected officials have undermined the integrity of the American electoral system, and changes are overdue.

AMAC members and millions of other Americans have sent this message loud and clear to our representatives in Washington. It is time for them to listen.”

Read the full op-ed here.

Leave a Comment

Dems weaponize the Small Business Administration, AMAC

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 2:44 pm

Biden Turns Federal Government Into Democrat Vote Machine

Posted on Tuesday, May 14, 2024

by Aaron Flanigan

3 Comments

AMAC EXCLUSIVE

Less than six months out from Election Day, troubling signs are emerging that President Joe Biden is using government power and weaponizing taxpayer dollars to retain his grip on the Oval Office.

As Fox News recently reported, the House Committee on Small Business issued a subpoena to the Small Business Administration (SBA) over its lack of transparency regarding the Biden administration’s efforts to promote voter registration in the key battleground state of Michigan—a move that looks like a blatant attempt to use government resources to register voters for Biden.

The subpoena was issued to SBA Chief of Staff Arthur Plews and Special Advisor Tyler Robinson on May 7 when they failed to attend a scheduled interview and hand over documents relating to a program that is, according to the House Committee, “diverting its resources away from assisting Main Street so it can register Democrat voters” in Michigan.

The program in question, which was announced in March, was created to “promote civic engagement and voter registration in Michigan” and was touted as a “first-of-its-kind collaboration” between the SBA and the Michigan Department of State.

“Protecting and strengthening our democracy is critical to our economic success and a core goal of the Biden-Harris administration,” SBA Administrator Isabel Guzman said about the program, pledging to “help connect Michiganders to vital voter registration information from the State of Michigan” and “help facilitate voter registration and civic engagement, so their voices are heard.”

Notably, the House Committee on Small Business found that 22 of the 25 voter outreach events set in motion by the SBA program “have taken place in counties with the highest population of Democratic National Committee (DNC) target demographics.”

According to Fox, the Michigan program originated with a 2021 Biden executive order on promoting “access to voting,” which has been slammed by House Republicans for going “beyond the power of the President and the statutory authority given to federal agencies.” Among other far-reaching directives, the order calls for “soliciting and facilitating approved, nonpartisan third-party organizations and State officials to provide voter registration services on agency premises.”

The committee made clear that Tuesday’s subpoenas—which mark the first time in history the House Committee on Small Business has subpoenaed the SBA—were issued only because SBA officials failed to voluntarily comply with the Committee’s oversight requests.

“It is unconscionable that during such a precarious time for our nation’s small businesses, the sole federal agency created to serve as their advocate is instead utilizing their limited taxpayer resources and time to advance partisan political campaigns,” Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA) told Fox regarding the program.

Of course, the notion that the Biden administration is actively coordinating with Michigan’s Democrat administration to boost voter registration raises the prospect that similar, perhaps even more under-the-radar initiatives are underway in other swing states.

The SBA program is not the only instance of the Biden White House’s efforts to boost Democrat voter registration. As Gabe Kaminsky of the Washington Examiner reported earlier this month, during Biden’s first year in office, the White House convened a Zoom meeting with progressive activists seeking to implement “sweeping election policy changes.”

Though the meeting was initially branded as “nonpartisan,” documents have revealed that meeting attendees were overwhelmingly aligned with left-wing causes and included the likes of a former Stacey Abrams operative, Black Lives Matter activists, left-wing think tank staffers, and employees of organizations that promote far-left priorities like open borders and defunding prisons.

Moreover, the left also has a well-established history of weaponizing nonprofits to keep Democrats in power—yet another systemic advantage that the GOP apparatus has largely failed to grapple with.

The fact that the Biden administration is ostensibly wielding the muscle of the federal government to increase its electoral prospects should be of grave concern to every American—regardless of political affiliation—who purports to care about preserving the democratic process and maintaining the integrity of our institutions.

These reports are also surfacing at a time when Biden is trailing presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump by as much as six points in national polling, as well as in the swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia—lending further credence to the notion that the Biden team is using agencies like the SBA as campaign arms to boost liberal turnout in crucial swing states like Michigan.

Thankfully, this week’s Washington Examiner report has reportedly captured the attention of House Republicans, who are vowing to “use every tool at [their] disposal to stop these blatant political acts.”

As the November election fast approaches, Republican leaders should be taking every possible measure not only to investigate and expose the left’s election interference strategies, but also to stop them in their tracks and counter them with thorough, effective, and innovative conservative get-out-the-vote initiatives that will set the stage for Republican landslides up and down the ballot this fall.

If the GOP is serious about delivering victories for conservatives in 2024 and beyond, it has no choice but to grapple with the left’s election interference campaign before it’s too late.

Aaron Flanigan is the pen name of a writer in Washington, D.C.

Leave a Comment

May 12, 2024

Full-Time Jobs Down, Mises.org

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 4:03 pm

Mises Wire

Full-Time Jobs Fall Again as Total Employment Flatlines in April

ES Lee esto en Español

Tags:Money and Banking

05/03/2024•Mises Wire•Ryan McMaken

Print this page

According to a new report from the federal government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics this week, the US economy added 175,000 jobs for the month of April while the unemployment rate rose slightly to 3.9%. The new reported job growth was considered a “miss” in that it came in below expectations, and for the first time in months, the media did not declare the jobs report to be “a blowout” or “strong.” Instead, the official narrative seemed to be that the “slowing economy” will bring down CPI inflation, and thus the Federal Reserve will soon force interest rates back down and bring about the fabled “soft landing.” Not surprisingly, then, the lackluster jobs report led to a rally in stocks, as Wall Street anticipates a Fed rate cut.

For anyone who has taken a more skeptical view of the jobs reports over the past year, there isn’t much that’s surprising in this report, except for the fact that it appears payroll jobs may finally be reflecting reality. Overall, this report is simply a continuation of ongoing trends: namely, full-time jobs are falling and the “job growth” reported so enthusiastically by the media doesn’t seem to show up in terms of actual people employed. If we look more closely at this report, what we really find is that the total number of employed persons has flatlined while half a million full-time jobs have disappeared over the past year.

Establishment Survey vs. Household Survey

The establishment survey report shows that total jobs—a total that includes both part-time and full-time jobs—increased, month over month, in April by 175,000. The establishment survey measures only total jobs, however, and does not measure the number of employed persons. That means that even when job growth comes mostly from people working multiple part-time jobs, the establishment survey shows big increases while the total number of employed persons does not. In fact, total employed persons can fall while total jobs increases. For April, as total jobs rose by 175,000, total employed workers rose only 25,000.

This part-time jobs situation may help explain why there is a sizable gap between the establishment survey and the household survey since early 2022. If we look at the total increase in both measures over the past three years, we find a gap has opened and persisted over more than two years. Indeed, as of the April report, the gap is at 3.6 million. The household survey also shows that total employed persons has been virtually unchanged for nine months. Since August 2023, total employed persons have decreased by 9,000. Over the same time period, total “jobs” has increased by more than 1.8 million. Since November, total employed persons has fallen by 375,000. Overall, the total number of employed persons has flatlined for the past nine months. gap

Assuming that the establishment survey is a realistic picture of the economy at all—an assumption that may or may not be true—then the current economy is producing many more jobs than actual workers.

A Recession in Full-Time Jobs

Looking at total growth in employed persons, versus total growth in “jobs” we find that there is virtually no growth in employed persons in spite of constantly rising totals of jobs. It appears the job growth we do see is overwhelmingly part-time jobs.

Over the same nine months that total employed persons has stagnated—and total jobs increased 1.8 million—we find primarily growth in part-time jobs. Over the past twelve months, total part-time jobs increased by 1 million. During the same period, full-time jobs fell by more than 500,000. That is, net job creation during that period has been all part-time. The graph compares how much full time and part time jobs have grown since January 2022. We find that since early 2022, full-time job growth is up 2 percent while part-time job growth is up nearly 8 percent. Since early 2023, full-time jobs have flatlined while part-time jobs have grown considerably.

Over the past three months, in fact, the year-over-year measure of full-time jobs has fallen into recession territory. Full-time jobs were down, year over year, in February, March, and April. Over the past fifty years, three months in a row of negative growth in full-time jobs has always been a recession signal and has occurred when the United States has been in recession, or about to enter a recession:

The full-time jobs indicator now reflects what we’ve seen in temporary jobs for months. For decades, whenever temporary help services are negative, year over year, for more than three months in a row, the US is headed toward recession. This measure has now been negative in the United States for the past eighteen months.

This is to be expected in a weakening economy. Empirical studies have shown that economies tend to shift to part-time work in times of economic downturn as a means of allowing employers more flexibility in reducing costs. This has been observed internationally, and not just in the United States.

Similarly, temporary jobs are often the first jobs to be eliminated by firms, and as the BLS puts it, “flexible labor arrangements provided by temp agencies allow firms to scale down their operations readily and without the added expense of separation pay or having to let go of their best workers.” In a weakening economy, there is no longer a need to use THS workers as a means of screening potential new workers or adding work hours to supplement the full-time work force. It appears that over the past year, the need for new workers is fading fast and dropping temp workers is a cheap way to cut costs.

If we take a larger look around, we find plenty of worrisome data in the leading indicators: The Philadelphia Fed’s manufacturing index is in recession territory. The same is true of the Richmond Fed’s manufacturing survey. The Conference Board’s Leading Indicators Index continues to point to recession. The yield curve points to recession. Commercial real estate is in big trouble. Net savings turned negative for only the second time in decades in 2023, and has been negative now for four quarters in a row. The economic growth we do see is being fueled by the biggest deficits since covid.

Indeed, we now finally may be getting to the point where more insightful but cautious observers start to declare the US economy as truly “in recession.” Indeed, today on the Forward Guidance Podcast, Fed watcher Danielle DiMartino Booth said this:

“Given how weak industrial production has been, given what the revisions say to personal income minus government transfers…Given what we’re seeing, it’s looking increasingly like the US has indeed entered recession.” She suggests the current recession began in October 2023.

Is today’s soft jobs print a sign of labor market weakness hiding under the surface?

Here’s how @DiMartinoBooth is seeing things:

– Recession likely started in October 2023

– Census data reveals economy began shedding job losses in Q3 (192,000 *net* job losses in third… pic.twitter.com/ND6Qnv2guV

— Jack Farley (@JackFarley96) May 3, 2024

In spite of all this, some members of the permabull-booster caste of economists and investment salespeople continue to suggest that a “soft landing” is in the works, and “disinflation” will soon kick in.

Wednesday’s FOMC press conference, however, suggests that chairman Powell and the Fed economists have noticed that the disinflation narrative doesn’t seem to actually reflect reality. As last month’s CPI data showed, price growth hit a seven-month high in March, rising to 3.5 percent. The so-called “core CPI” came in at 3.8 percent, almost double the Fed’s arbitrary two-percent price inflation target. In spite of this persistent price inflation, Powell essentially declared that he won’t be raising the target policy interest rate any time soon. This suggests Powell is well aware of the weak jobs situation and knows the fragile jobs market can’t handle any additional rate hikes.

In other words, consumers should get used to ongoing price inflation. The Fed won’t let interest rates rise—although it should—to combat price inflation, Rather, the Fed is still hoping it can thread that needle of pushing down inflation while somehow keeping the easy-money fueled jobs boom going. But, it may be that it’s already months too late for the Fed to pull off that fantasy. It wouldn’t be the first time the Fed is months behind on admitting the truth about recession. Back in 2008, months after the Great Recession had begun, Fed chairman Bernanke was going on TV and saying there was no recession on the horizon. Powell may soon find himself in a similar position.

Leave a Comment

Weaker Growth, Higher Inflation, Mises.org

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 4:01 pm

Mises Wire

Get Ready for Weaker Growth and Higher Inflation. The Consensus Was Wrong.

05/06/2024•Mises Wire•Daniel Lacalle

Print this page

The weak GDP figure for the first quarter came with a double negative: poor consumer spending and exports, plus a rise in core inflation. The US administration’s enormous fiscal stimulus underscores the importance of considering the weaker-than-expected data.

A deceleration in consumer spending, a decline in the personal savings ratio to 3.6%, and poor exports added to a set of figures for investment that were also negative when we looked at the details.

The gross domestic product is much weaker than the headlines suggest. If we look at consumption, both durable and non-durable goods were flat or down, while the only item that increased modestly was the services factor. Residential and intellectual property boosted investment, while equipment remained weak in the past two quarters. The slump in export growth coincided with a significant increase in imports, which weakened the trade deficit. Government spending continues to rise, albeit at a slower pace, and becomes the main factor to disguise what is evidently a concerning level of growth for a leading economy with enormous potential.

It is precisely because of the unnecessary increase in government spending, designed to bloat GDP and provide a false sense of economic strength that inflation remains elevated and rises over a three—and six-month period.

Rising public debt has bloated the economy and left it at a disappointing level compared to its potential, as evidenced by higher inflation and weaker growth.

When the Fed’s preferred inflation measure rises to 2.8% in March from a year ago and the core PCE deflator rises to 3.1%, there is no strong economy. The propaganda repeatedly claims that the fight against inflation is over, but inflation has accelerated on a quarterly and half-year basis.

It is important to understand why these figures are negative. The average American household is poorer. Rising inflation and declining savings, inexistent real wage growth, employment-to-population, and the labor force participation rates remain below 2019 levels, and bloating GDP with an unacceptable deficit means higher taxes, lower growth, and weaker real wages in the future.

We must remember that Biden’s economic plan started with a full-blown recovery in place. This administration did not suffer the consequences of the COVID-19 lockdowns. By the time the Biden administration arrived, America was already creating almost 250,000 jobs a month.

Biden should have picked the fruits of a fast-recovering economy that is almost energy-independent and, therefore, should not have suffered the impact of the war on Ukraine while enjoying the tailwinds of the largest fiscal and monetary stimulus.

The multiplier effect of the chain of implemented government programs may have inflated GDP, but gross domestic income (GDI) presented a significantly different picture. The GDI revealed a stagnant economy with persistent inflation.

The government’s wasteful spending of newly printed money is adding gasoline to inflationary pressures, a result of careless fiscal policy and massive deficit spending. When the government prints more money than the private sector needs, inflation occurs, and the purchasing power of that money decreases.

The evidence from the past four years indicates that if the government had abandoned its spending and tax hike plans, the United States economy would have recovered better and with higher productivity growth. Despite the recovery, tax revenues fell short of expectations and spending rose to create what is now a completely unacceptable deficit.

Many economists argue that the economy is growing, and that inflation is a secondary problem. Not for the average American. Citizens are poorer in absolute and relative terms.

The consensus was wrong about the expected multiplier effect of government spending on growth and also about inflation because market participants decided to ignore monetary aggregates and the reality of unproductive spending.

Can the United States government boast this level of growth? One could argue that delivering $1.6 trillion of GDP with a $2 trillion increase in debt is not a success. This isn’t growing; it’s getting fatter. This negative situation has not improved since 2024. Every 100 days, the U.S. national debt rises by $1 trillion. Therefore, this means more taxes, less growth, and weaker real wages in the future. We can conclude that the United States’ public finances would be stronger and the economy would be more productive if the gigantic public spending packages and tax hikes had not been implemented.

The United States administration needs to focus more on the productive sector and less on increasing the size of the bureaucratic machine. Even if the rise in mandatory spending is offset by cuts in discretionary spending, it will still be difficult to reduce debt. Therefore, prioritizing is key. Taxes are already high enough, and there is plenty of evidence that shows how the recent increase in the tax wedge for businesses and families has made the economy weaker.

The government needs to understand that it is the cause of inflation. Only the government can make all prices rise in unison and continue to increase, and it achieves this by diluting the purchasing power of the currency and issuing more than demanded.

The next two quarters are going to be key to understanding the extent of the damage caused by reckless fiscal spending.

The US government has sabotaged the Federal Reserve’s modestly hawkish policy. The public deficit has added up to $2 trillion of newly created money per year, only to deliver less economic growth and cancel out the now insignificant $1.6 trillion decline in the Fed’s balance sheet. Whether there are rate hikes or not, the Fed cannot achieve price stability if the Treasury ignores all warning signs and adds more debt.

Since 2018, the United States has added roughly $7 trillion of GDP, while the government has increased debt by $12 trillion. Implementing fiscal stimulus by increasing expenditures and raising taxes is clearly ineffective.

Markets ignore the Fed’s hawkish messages because they see insane public debt and unsustainable deficit spending, and participants know that monetary destruction will resume regardless of persistent inflation.

There is plenty of time to correct the inflation and low growth problems. Only one measure will help: cutting spending. Everything else has failed.

Image Source: Midjourney AI

Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.

Comments (1)

May 10, 2024

Chicago Teachers’ Union, by Tammy Bruce

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 9:04 pm

Chicago Schools Crumble While Teachers Make Extremist Demands

Posted on Friday, May 10, 2024

by Tammy Bruce

19 Comments

We hear all the time that whenever the left takes something over, nothing thrives. But that’s not entirely true. Three things thrive when the left is in charge: madness, chaos, and failure. Every day the Biden administration provides an example of this for the world to see, but let’s look at the latest gob-smacking illustration. The Chicago Teachers Union’s (CTU) bizarre, extreme, and detached from reality contract demands.

In leaked documents exposing their contract negotiations with the Chicago Public School System, the CTU’s demands include pay hikes, free abortions, housing for illegal aliens (whom they call ‘newcomers’), LGBT ‘training’ in schools, climate initiatives, and the right to close schools for remote zoom classes for any situation the teachers deem a “trauma.” The Daily Mail reported, “After any ‘traumatic event’ that happens at a school – which is not defined – the superintendent will be required to meet with the head of the teachers union to discuss closing the school for some time. ‘No school will reopen until all necessary supports, both physical and emotional, are in place,’ according to the contract.” Any closures of this type will also prevent teachers’ performance from being evaluated for that entire calendar year. How convenient.

And it doesn’t end there. They also demand school board policies that would prohibit being compelled to disclose to parents when a child declares they’re ‘transgender,’ and they want ‘gender-affirming care’ provided for all union members.

It’s one thing to negotiate for a reward or raise when you’ve been successful at your job. But the opposite is true for Chicago schools. Only 12.2 percent of low-income 3^rd graders are reading at grade level, and only 21 percent of 8^th graders are proficient at reading. Wirepoints reports, “They never tell parents the truth about how literacy has collapsed in Chicago Public Schools, particularly for black students. Only 2 of every 10 can read at grade level, according to CPS data. In many city schools, it’s 0 out of 10.” Moreover, the Illinois Policy Institute reports, “About three-quarters of Chicago Public Schools students cannot read at grade level on the Illinois Assessment of Readiness in 2023. Nearly 83% did not meet proficiency in math. Students in Chicago and statewide are still performing worse than they did before the pandemic.”

And what is the response by the CTU for this failure? They want a raise! “Union President Stacy Davis Gates’ audacious plan calls for members to bank at least 9% wage increases each year through fiscal year 2028. The average salary of a teacher in Chicago Public Schools is $93,182…Therefore, the average teacher’s pay will increase by half to $144,620 in the 2027-2028 school year… That figure would equate to more than double the median household income in Chicago, according to Census Bureau statistics,” reported Fox News.

The mendacity of this is shocking. The overall cost for the madness? 50 billion dollars. Or more specifically, “$50 billion and 3 cents” according to Union President Stacy Davis Gates who, as Fox News reported, declared: “We are asking you to give us an opportunity to tell our story,” Gates said in a speech in March referring to the union’s plans. “It will cost $50 billion and three cents… yes it will, and so what, that’s audacity.”

Actually, audacity is destroying young people’s lives by failing to teach the basics, and then pushing them out into society unprepared and illiterate. No teacher enters the profession hoping to destroy a student’s life. And yet, here is union leadership making preposterous demands about ‘social justice’ and political issues, all while the education of the children in their care is abandoned in favor of left-wing activism. Every teacher in every city who cares about their students should take note of what happens when you hand the control of your union, city, or country over to leftist agitators.

There is a method to their madness, however– the left relies on perpetual victimhood, and producing generations of functionally illiterate individuals, which will certainly keep the victim coffers full.

And why would they expect this, or any part of this chaos, to pass? “’ The Chicago Teachers Union spent nearly $2.3 million to get a union employee elected mayor, in large part because they want to legislate via their union contract. These demands read more like a political agenda than a serious contract intent on supporting teachers’ wages and benefits, and promoting the education of Chicago students,’ said Mailee Smith, Senior Director of Labor Policy at the Illinois Policy Institute. “These demands are far outside the scope of traditional bargaining, putting taxpayer dollars on the line in pursuit of more union power and social activism,’”

The destruction isn’t limited to Chicago: Wirepoints tells us, “In 2023, there were 67 Illinois schools where not a single student tested was proficient in math and 32 schools where no student tested was proficient in reading. What’s worse, officials in those schools graduated nearly 70% of their students. More than 12,000 students attend Illinois’ zero-proficiency schools. Every single one of those children will struggle in life because they lack basic reading and math skills.”

The madness, chaos, and failure unleashed in Illinois and Chicago’s schools immediately affects the families involved, but it also portends a disaster for America in general. We’ve seen the mess leftist activists have made of school boards and districts throughout blue states and cities. How much talent, passion, brilliance, and ingenuity are we losing when we allow students to be thrown into the leftist volcano? The CTU is an example of what the left has always done— co-opt an important issue and then parasitically invade organizations involved in work important to all Americans. The left then rides the issues to power and money, destroying everything it leaves in its wake.

What’s happening in Chicago and Illinois is also what’s happening at our universities—very few people are taking control of the environment to pursue their own failed, Marxist agenda, to the detriment of everyone else.

The leaked CTU negotiating document has not yet been released as their official bargaining stance, but no matter what they edit, soften, or re-write, all of this is part of the Marxist agenda which they fully intend to implement, no matter how long it takes.

Tammy Bruce, an Independent Conservative, has traversed a unique political journey that reflects her commitment to principles rather than party affiliations. She joined Fox News in 2005 as a Political Contributor, hosting her show “Get Tammy Bruce” on Fox Nation and providing insightful commentary on various issues for the Association for Mature Americans (AMAC).

Comments (1)

May 2, 2024

Veterans’ Values, by AMAC

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 7:42 pm

Preserve America’s Sovereignty – Stop the WHO Pandemic Treaty White List AMAC – how?

Forward this Message | Join AMAC | View in Browser

Preserve America’s Sovereignty – Stop the WHO Pandemic Treaty As citizens deeply concerned about the future of our nation, we must rally against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proposed pandemic treaty scheduled for May 2024.

This treaty would empower the WHO in significant ways that must not be ignored by the American people.

Here is why we must act:Threat to Sovereignty: The WHO treaty could compromise our nation’s ability to make independent decisions regarding public health policies and emergency responses. We must maintain control over our own healthcare decisions to best serve the needs of American citizens.Lack of Accountability: The proposed treaty fails to adequately address issues of transparency and accountability within the WHO itself. Without proper oversight, there’s a risk of mismanagement and misuse of resources, potentially exacerbating rather than alleviating future pandemics.Potential Economic Impact: Surrendering control to international bodies could have detrimental effects on our economy, including increased regulatory burdens, shortages, and diminished competitiveness in the global market. We cannot afford to jeopardize our economic stability in the name of international cooperation.Protection of Civil Liberties: Upholding our constitutional rights and liberties is paramount. Any treaty that encroaches upon these freedoms must be vehemently opposed to preserve the principles upon which our nation was founded.You can read more of this treaty from AMAC Newsline by clicking here.

It is likely that President Biden will sign the WHO pandemic treaty in May. It should then be submitted to the US Senate for consideration and a floor vote that requires a two-thirds majority vote to become international law.

Following the Biden Administration’s inadequate response to COVID-19 and the WHO’s mishandling of the pandemic, Americans must take action to prevent further violations of personal liberties and freedoms. Tell your Senator to vote NO on the WHO pandemic treaty<.

Leave a Comment

April 24, 2024

Stop W.H.O. takeover of U.S., AMAC

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 3:08 pm

Preserve America’s Sovereignty – Stop the WHO Pandemic Treaty White List AMAC – how?

Forward this Message | Join AMAC | View in Browser

Leave a Comment

April 21, 2024

Understanding African Slavery, Mises Wire

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 4:09 pm

Understanding the History of African Slavery: The Europeans Were not the Only Slave Traders

ES Lee esto en Español

Tags:Labor and Wages,Media and Culture,U.S. Economy,World History

04/06/2024•Mises Wire•Lipton Matthews

Print this page

In the vast pantheon of history, black people have been both victims and oppressors. Yet history has been so politicized that we hear endlessly about the former and almost never about the latter. Rhetoric has eclipsed facts. It is a fact, for example, that Africans participated in the transatlantic slave trade. History is now frequently used as a cudgel to hammer white people into submission.

Instead of recognizing nuance and complexity, many who should know better have embraced the simplistic narrative of activists. Mainstream publications like the Atlantic and the New York Times desperately want it to be true that blacks have only ever been victims of whites. Yet editorial sentimentalism cannot change the facts. A proper reading of history shatters the feel-good shibboleths of left-wing activists.

Such activists constantly invoke Europeans’ role in the transatlantic slave trade to evoke feelings of guilt among contemporary whites. Hidden behind the propaganda is the fact that Africans actually facilitated the trade. Slavery existed on the continent prior to contact with Europeans; Africans were therefore well accustomed to the business. In Slave Traders by Invitation, historian Finn Fuglestad argues that in some cases Europeans were solicited to partake in the trade. In fact, slavery was so lucrative for Africans they sometimes badgered European traders with business proposals. In The Golden Trade, Richard Jobson recounted that a trader expressed shock when the former declined his offer of slaves.

By entering the African slave trade, Europeans were only deepening a long-entrenched practice. And they were not oblivious to the reality that success meant genuflecting to African elites. Historian Pieter Emmer has overturned the politically correct consensus that Africans were marginal actors in the slave trade. He notes that if Europeans had set the terms, they would have procured a greater number of slaves from the coastal parts of West Africa closest to the New World—to reduce transportation risks. Yet most slaves were obtained from sections of the African coast that were distant from the New World and therefore harder to reach. Because Africans set the terms, Europeans resorted to purchasing more women than required. The type of slave supplied was contingent on the interests of African traders.

Africans made sure that Europeans understood the trade was being conducted on their turf. They established the conditions for trade arrangements so that cargoes scheduled for Africa reflected the peculiarities of African tastes. African elites were fastidious consumers who carefully scrutinized imports for flaws—sometimes to the chagrin of Europeans. In the 1660s, one German trader reported that Africans could quickly differentiate between high-quality Dutch or Indian textiles and their inferior competitors produced in England and Germany. His accounts are laced with complaints that Africans would defraud Europeans by combining gold with less valuable substances, and then barring Europeans from penalizing the suspected cheaters.

Without cooperating with Africans, Europeans could do no business on the continent. European traders were merely tenants on African soil, who had to pay elites to construct their trading posts. In the Asante empire, Europeans were mandated to pay ground rent or tribute whenever they built settlements. Similarly, the Whydah kingdom compelled European merchants to pay customs fees and distribute gifts to the king and his agents. Overcome with greed, one king in 1700 extracted fees equivalent to ten slaves from each European slaver to open the market, and then ordered them to purchase his slaves at an exorbitant price.

This was the pattern throughout Africa; rulers constantly reminded Europeans that Africans were in charge. Even the powerful British paid a yearly rent to the Fante to occupy the lands on which their forts were constructed. The cost of doing business in Africa increased further due to bureaucratic delays, despite mechanisms to expedite trade issues and settle commercial disputes. But because the Africans were so formidable, they could punish Europeans for challenging their authority.

James Nightingale, the governor of Fort Charles in the 1680s, expressed opposition to policy in Annamaboe and was promptly stripped naked, beaten, and removed from the fort. Europeans were also killed for supporting the wrong side in local civil wars or in wars between rival African rulers. Political authority in Africa often precluded Europeans from expanding their commercial enterprises.

The desire of Europeans for mines and plantations irked African leaders who believed that such acquisitions entailed a loss of sovereignty. As such, Europeans were unsuccessful at monopolizing production of African gold. Perhaps the only gold exported from Africa that was manufactured under European supervision emanated from Brazil in the late seventeenth century, having been sent to Africa as payment for slaves. Given the agency Africans had in their dealings with Europeans, some consider the slave trade a sign of Africa’s strength rather than a sign of weakness.

As historian Matthew Heaton writes, the trade became so important for certain states that it led to major rivalries. Blacks conquering and enslaving other blacks was evidently not uncommon:

In the early eighteenth century, Whydah and Allada attempted to tighten their control of the slave trade by establishing coastal monopolies over access to European traders. . . . The king of Allada did not forbid hinterland merchants to trade with Europeans but instead declared monopoly rights to the purchase of firearms and cowry shells. . . . This move infuriated Dahomey, one of the largest inland procurer of slaves, whose King Agaja, retaliated by attacking the port of Jakin in 1724, and Whydah in 1727, bringing them both into the Dahomey tributary network.

These facts should slay the myth that Africans only ever occupied a subordinate position in the slave trade. Further evidence should puncture the argument that slavery did not benefit Africans. Obviously, the trade was bad for the people who were exported, but concrete evidence for its devastating effects on Africa’s industries is lacking.

Historical analysis shows that the slave trade failed to deliver outsize profits for the parties involved, as it was a very costly activity. And evidence suggests the terms of trade gradually shifted to favor Africans by the late eighteenth century. Of course, this does not mean that profits from the slave trade enriched African societies. After all, the benefits largely accrued to elites. But it does negate the thesis that Europeans were the sole beneficiaries of the trade.

Another pernicious myth is that Africans did not benefit from European imports. Trade with Europe thrived because Europeans were willing to provide goods that Africans demanded, such as textiles, metals, and other luxury goods that could be manufactured more efficiently elsewhere. Europeans also introduced goods that were not previously produced on the continent. The historian Daniel Domingues da Silva has argued that most imports were not substitutes for locally manufactured items.

In some regions, he maintains, imported goods were diffused within the broader public, rather than being concentrated among elites. Da Silva’s conclusions complement David Northrup’s argument that “imports supplemented rather than displaced locally made products in inland regions.” Because elites craved luxury items that signaled their status to the community, imported textiles became wildly popular. Europeans cannot be faulted for responding to the market.

And on the matter of slavery, it is noteworthy that activists focus on the brutalities of the transatlantic trade while downplaying or ignoring those of the trans-Saharan trade. Research on the latter is rather sparse, even though it began much earlier and therefore lasted much longer. Arab slave masters tended to be particularly cruel, raping the women and castrating the men to prevent them from reproducing.

Slavery differed in the Arab world in that the most common motivation was acquiring women for sexual purposes. When traders could obtain Circassian, Slavic, Greek, and other white women at reasonable prices, they were generally preferred to blacks. Like Europeans, Arabs devised outlandish “theories” to justify their enslavement of black Africans:

Ibn Khaldun’s explanation is particularly disturbing: The only people who accept slavery are the Negroes (Sudan), owing to their low degree of humanity and their proximity to the animal stage. Other persons who accept the status of slave do so as a means of attaining high rank or power, as is the case with the Mameluke Turks in the East and with those Franks and Galicians who enter the service of the state in Spain.

Another myth that has become widely accepted is that black people were uninterested in colonialism. In 1822, the American Colonization Society established Liberia as a destination for freed black slaves. Since such individuals had faced severe racism in America, one might have expected them to advance the interests of the native black people in their new homeland. In fact, the opposite occurred.

The natives of Liberia were granted few civil rights by Liberia’s Constitution of 1847. Only a small number attained the franchise and the right to work in government departments. Like the British, the settler elites governed through indirect rule, which created its own problems. Corrupt and badly trained soldiers ravaged villages, pillaged farms, and raped women. The government imposed an annual “hut tax” on adult men. But the program became mired in corruption, with the village chiefs using the payments for personal business.

Elites lived lavishly and rarely paid taxes, while barely providing social infrastructure to the population. Local rebellions were quickly suppressed. The situation in Liberia got so bad that in 1930 the League of Nations investigated the allegation that Africans were being enslaved.

Many locals expected the arrival of African Americans would raise living conditions in the country, only to become disillusioned by the settlers’ incompetence. This perceptive letter from King Yado Gyude of the Cape Palmas Grebo tribe illustrates the frustrations of native Liberians:

In the year 1834 a batch of black colonists . . . reached our shores in search of a home. Pitying their condition and . . . anticipating that by their settlement among us the benefits of Christian enlightenment and civilization would be disseminated . . . our fathers opened their arms to them. . . . Our fathers have always befriended the Liberian Republic as a struggling nation of our race but the government soon began to despise us, placing us in their room and they in their masters’, just in the same fashion as in their slavery days in America.

The historical studies reviewed in this article reveal the complexities of humanity. All groups have the capacity to do bad, as well as good. Diminishing blacks’ capacity for bad, and casting them as the helpless victims of whites, is not only untruthful but also patronizing. It removes blacks’ agency, consigning them to a subservient role in every historical episode. The past must never be airbrushed or distorted in a misguided effort to elevate blacks’ self-esteem.

Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.

Leave a Comment

The Economy is NOT doing well; Mises Wire

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 3:59 pm

Mises Wire

Let’s Be Honest: The Economy Is NOT Doing Well

ES Lee esto en Español

Tags:Big Government,The Fed,U.S. Economy

04/10/2024•Mises Wire•Connor O’Keeffe

Print this page

The American economy is not all right. But to see why, you need to look beyond the dramatic numbers we keep seeing in the headlines and establishment talking points.

Take, for instance, the latest jobs report. For the third month in a row, the American economy added significantly more jobs than most economists had been expecting—a total of 303,000 for March. On its face, that’s a good number.

But as Ryan McMaken laid out over the weekend, things don’t look as strong when you dig into the data. For instance, virtually all the jobs added are part-time jobs. Full-time jobs have actually been disappearing since December of last year. In fact, as McMaken highlighted, “The year-over-year measure of full-time jobs has fallen into recession territory.”

Also, most of these new part-time jobs are going to immigrants, many of whom are in the country illegally. There has been zero job creation for native-born Americans since mid-2018. While immigrants are not harming the economy by working, the scale of new foreign-born workers has papered over the employment struggles of the native-born population.

Further, government jobs accounted for almost a quarter of those added—way above the standard ten to twelve percent. Just like with government spending and economic growth, government hiring boosts the official jobs number while draining the actual, value-producing economy.

Some economists, like Daniel Lacalle, argue that the US economy is already experiencing a private-sector recession but that government spending and hiring are propping up the official data enough to hide it.

A recession is inevitable, thanks to the last decade of interest rate manipulation by the Federal Reserve—and especially to its dramatic actions during the pandemic. The recession-like conditions in full-time jobs is further evidence that Lacalle is right.

But jobs numbers are only part of the story. The stock market has been fluctuating a lot recently, not because of changing consumer needs or the adoption of some new technology, but based on what Federal Reserve officials are saying about what the central bank will do this year.

At the same time, prices are still high. And they continue to rise at a rate that frustrates even some of President Joe Biden’s biggest economic cheerleaders. Our dollars are worth about 20 percent less than they were four years ago, with no prospect of that trend reversing. That hurts.

But instead of addressing this economic pain, much less their role in creating it, members of the political class are still pretending everything is great. They’re even gearing up to make things worse by, for example, sending even more of our money to the Ukrainian government. All to prolong a war it’s losing, not because of a lack of money, but because of a lack of soldiers.

And at home, President Biden is scrambling to put the brakes on energy production and to transfer money from the working class to his base of college graduates, all before he’s up for reelection in November.

Predictably and appropriately, the establishment’s head-in-the-sand economic strategy is coinciding with a notable decrease in support for the Democrats—the establishment’s preferred party these days. President Biden is behind in the polls in six of the seven swing states and is losing support from working-class and nonwhite voters.

The political establishment and its preferred candidates deserve to lose support, not only for failing to acknowledge America’s economic problems but for causing them in the first place.

Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.

Leave a Comment

April 5, 2024

Squatters, from AMAC post

Filed under: Political Commentary — justplainbill @ 10:05 pm

Squatter Rights Is A Growing Squatter Scam

Posted on Friday, April 5, 2024

by AMAC, John Grimaldi

44 Comments

WASHINGTON DC, April 5 — If you are planning a lengthy holiday getaway don’t leave your home unattended: beware the squatters. In some towns in the U.S. if homeowners take a lengthy vacation and squatters move into their home in the interim the intruders may wind up calling it their own “home sweet home.” And “yes,” it’s legal.

The issue of squatter rights is not something new; squatters have been around since the first European settlers arrived in America. What is new is the emergence of squatters in growing numbers as a result of the Biden administration’s open borders policy. Texas Senator John Cornyn tells us that “since President Biden took office, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has logged more than 5.4 million illegal border crossings, plus at least 1.5 million ‘gotaways’ – that is, border crossers who were detected by CBP technology, but who were never apprehended.” In that same period of time, squatting has become a nationwide issue that is on the rise, thanks to folks like illegal migrant Leonel Moreno who hails from Venezuela and who is encouraging fellow illegals to move into unoccupied homes.

Moreno has an audience in excess of half a million followers and is urging them to move into unoccupied homes, telling them that “if a house is not inhabited, seize it.” A recent Newsmax feature National Police Association spokeswoman Betsy Brantner Smith noted that “thanks to social media, [she] worries that the squatting trend will become more formalized. This is extremely concerning because as migrants become aware that this isn’t just a big city issue, they will go to suburbs and rural areas and find part-time occupied properties.” She said it wouldn’t be a surprise if people visiting their hunting cabins, lake homes, or motor homes this spring and summer encounter squatters who took up residence during the winter months.”

There don’t seem to be existing laws that provide homeowners blanket protections. But it is not too little, too late to enact new laws to protect property owners. In fact, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently signed a bill that protects property rights and provides penalties for squatters. “We are putting an end to the squatters’ scam in Florida. While other states are siding with the squatters, we are protecting property owners and punishing criminals looking to game the system. If you’re the victim of squatting, you can simply fill out a form, give it to your local sheriff and the sheriff is instructed to go and remove the people who are inhabiting your dwelling illegally. And that will happen very quickly.”

DeSantis’ Attorney General Ashley Moody noted that “Biden has allowed millions of illegal immigrants to flood across the border. After video evidence of their plan to take over homes emerged, we’re ensuring Floridians are protected from this egregious and brazen scheme. I’m grateful to Governor DeSantis for signing this important legislation into law, and to Representative Kevin Steele for carrying this bill through Session.”

When a reporter asked White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre to comment on the Florida law, she seemed to dismiss it. She called it “hypothetical” and said, “this is a local issue.”

John Grimaldi served on the first non-partisan communications department in the New York State Assembly and is a founding member of the Board of Directors of Priva Technologies, Inc. He has served for more than thirty years as a Trustee of Daytop Village Foundation, which oversees a worldwide drug rehabilitation network.

Leave a Comment

March 30, 2024

Inflation … , by Douglas French

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: civil rights, Economics, economy, greedflation, History, inflation, liberty, Money, money economics, Politics, Socialism, tea party, us constitution — justplainbill @ 2:44 pm

Mises Wire

Price Inflation Comes from Government, not from “Excuseflation” or “Greedflation”

Tags:Big Government,The Fed,Inflation,Monetary Policy

03/29/2024•Mises Wire•Douglas French

Print this page

Followers of the Austrian school of economics know that the term inflation refers to increasing the quantity of money or money substitutes. The result being a rise in the price of goods and services or a fall in the value of money. But, in the modern era, this rise in prices is called inflation and as Ludwig von Mises wrote, “This semantic innovation is by no means harmless.” The semantic change has people looking everywhere but where they should to blame for higher prices.

Bloomberg’s Enda Curran writes, “A prolonged period of elevated inflation has left consumers cranky and eager to cast blame.” With the term inflation evidently getting tiresome, Curren lists some new price increase buzzwords and phrases.

“Shrinkflation” This is the President’s favorite. He even mentioned it in his State of the Union speech. The White House posted on X, “President Biden is calling on companies to put a stop to shrinkflation.” In other words, put more cookies back in the bag or make Snickers bars the same size they used to be. Even Sesame Street’s Cookie Monster has complained his cookies were getting smaller.

“Drip Pricing” These are fees which are added for your luggage when you fly or resort fees added on to your hotel bill. Processing and service fees were called junk fees by President Biden in last year’s State of the Union speech and he vowed to fight “those hidden surcharges too many companies use to make you pay more.” As if the hotel clerk puts a gun to your head at checkout time.

“Greedflation” Ms. Curren says “It’s a modern take on profiteering — “‘making an unreasonable profit on the sale of essential goods especially during times of emergency.’” Of course, price is how goods are distributed during a shortage or any other time as opposed to, as the Economist magazine wrote,” something worse, such as rationing or queues.”

“Excuseflation” This one sounds a lot like the above-mentioned “greedflation.” Curren cites a paper by UBS AG chief global economist Paul Donovan, who claims developed economies are in a period “when some companies spin a story that convinces customers that price increases are ‘fair,’ when in fact they disguise profit margin expansion.” A baker in Chicago said on an Bloomberg Odd Lots podcast that global news events allow him to raise prices “without getting a whole bunch of complaining from the customers.”

“Sellers’ Inflation” This term is credited to Isabella Weber, an assistant professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts who claims large corporations have market power and “have used supply problems as an opportunity to increase prices and scoop windfall profits.” Her solution is price controls, which would lead to long lines and rationing.

“Disinflation” Prices are rising but at a lower rate of change.

Immaculate disinflation. Curren says this is the “optimistic notion” that Jerome Powell and the economists at the Eccles Building can bring prices under control without putting a bunch of people out of work. The Federal Reserve can either create money fast or create money slow. That’s all it has. Jerome Powell is not the economy’s Geppetto.

Murray Rothbard explained where inflation comes from everywhere and always:

The fault of inflation is not in business “monopoly,” or in union agitation, or in the hunches of speculators, or in the “greediness” of consumers; the fault is in the legalized counterfeiting operations of the government itself. For the government is the only institution in society with the power to counterfeit — to create new money. So long as it continues to use that power, we will continue to suffer from inflation, even unto a runaway inflation that will utterly destroy the currency.

Inflation, or whatever you want to call it, is nothing more than government taxation in stealth form. Only the government can conjure up new money from nothing, using it to bid away resources from private individuals.

[Note from me: available as pamphlets from mises.org/store are: Rothbard Ten Great Economic Myths; Salerno The Progressive Road to Socialism; Hoppe What Must Be Done; Paul The Dollar Dilemma; Rothbard Economic Depressions; Deist The Imposers and the Imposed Upon; Hoppe Social Democracy; Hulsmann How Inflation Destroys Civilizations; and Hoppe Hoppe Unplugged. All are short, insightful essays printed as pamphlets. For the really big stuff, get the Mises’ books, listed elsewhere, and for you Founders’ Fans, Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty.]

Leave a Comment

March 2, 2024

The Myth of Democratic Socialism, by Murray Rothbard

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: communism, Economics, History, Politics, Socialism — justplainbill @ 4:16 pm

The Myth of Democratic Socialism

Tags:Free Markets,From the Archives

02/29/2024•Articles of Interest•Murray N. Rothbard

Downloads

Myth of Democratic Socialism, 1977.pdf

Originally published September 1977 in Libertarian Review.

In any debate between a socialist and a free-market capitalist, all too often the socialist quickly puts the free-market advocate on the defensive, and the entire time is consumed by the free-market person fending off attacks on the ability of the market to prevent inequality, or business cycles, or even the ravages of affluence and “materialism.” Being on the offensive, socialism emerges spotless and unbesmirched, and it is implicitly assumed on all sides that the market economy must prove its worthiness to be in the same moral and ideological ballpark as socialism. In fact, the morality of socialism is rarely questioned in these discussions, the critic confining himself to doubts about socialism’s practicality or workability.

Yet, in truth, socialism is neither workable nor moral; both in theory and in practice, it is a system unsurpassed in brutality, despotism, mass murder and exploitation. It deserves no solemn respect or moral salute.

Before turning to socialism, the morality as well as efficacy of the contrasting system of the free market can be established very quickly. The free market is a vast network of two-person exchanges, conducted voluntarily at each step of the way by each participant because each believes he will benefit from the exchange. Since the exchanges and choices are free and voluntary, the free market economy is harmonious and cooperative, while allowing fullest room for the free play of individual choice. And the economy works splendidly, because the free price system and the profit-and-loss incentives arising from that market bring efficiency and order out of the “anarchistic,” seemingly chaotic interplay of free and voluntary choices. Yet it is an order arising spontaneously out of freely adopted choices, rather than one imposed by violence and coercion. Such a free market, in its pure form, does not exist anywhere in the world today.

Let us contrast the system of socialism. What is socialism? It is the ownership or control by the State of the means of production in society. In short, it is total control by the State apparatus over the means of accomplishing virtually any goals that individuals might pursue in society. Since the State has a monopoly over the instruments of violence, and is distinguished from all other organizations or social institutions by the continuing use of violence to achieve its ends, this means that socialism is a system of total coercive violence over all citizens to be wielded by the rulers and managers of the State apparatus. If we briefly contrast socialism to the free market, we can see immediately that socialism implies the coercive outlawry by the State of the myriad of voluntary and mutually beneficial exchanges that make up the free society. For voluntary exchange and mutual benefit, socialism substitutes the rule of maximal coercion, violence and compulsory command. Socialism has been aptly labelled the “command economy.”

Socialism, in short, places the lives, the fortunes, and the sacred honor of every citizen under the total command of the State and its ruling elite. In the name of maximizing human freedom, in the name of eliminating class rule and the exploitation of man by man, in the name even of the “withering away of the State,” socialism gives all power to the State, and therefore to its ruling class; in this way, socialism brings about a class rule and a system of despotism and exploitation of man by man to put all previous systems into the shade. But what else could we expect from a system that places all power into the hands of the State—the State, the biggest mass murderer, exploiter, parasite, robber, and enslaver in all of human history?

At the turn of the twentieth century, such consequences of the seemingly exciting new system of socialism could have been predicted. But now, with almost a century of hindsight, it is all too clear that socialist practice has confirmed our analysis. For this century has seen a great number of socialist regimes spanning much of the globe: Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, and on and on. And what has socialism wrought in this century but mass murder, despair, concentration camps, mass enslavement, shortages and famine?

Unfortunately, in discussions of socialism in the United States, socialists have usually been allowed to get off the hook with a general disclaimer: that it is terribly unfair to tar them with the brush of Hitler, Stalin and Mao. For that is not the kind of “socialism” they want and advocate; in fact, they don’t consider these regimes to be “socialist” at all—despite the fact that these regimes precisely fit the general linguistic definition of socialism that we have mentioned above. For their socialism would be peopled by “good guys,” not by those terrible people who have staffed the actual socialist regimes of this century.

But these disclaimers are simply not good enough. The essence of socialism is not the specific people that the individual socialist would like to see in power. The essence of socialism is the system itself: total State power over the means of production. And if the result of all the socialisms so far has been grisly and monstrous, and if no “humanist” nice guys have yet come to the fore, then perhaps, as the Marxists would say, “this is no accident,” but a result embedded within the system itself. And that is our contention: that Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al. are inherent systematic tendencies within socialism itself.

Let us briefly examine the reasons for our contention that he who says Socialism must ineluctably also say Auschwitz and Gulag.

First, there is “Rothbard’s Law,” namely that he who is given power will use it. If the State is given total power over everyone else in society, it will doubtless use it both to achieve an increase in wealth and to exercise power and control for other purposes, ranging from power for its own sake to grandiose schemes of social reconstruction. Hence, Auschwitz, Gulag, et al.

Second, there is Hayek’s great insight in the famous chapter of his Road to Serfdom, “Why the Worst Get on Top.” Briefly, the insight holds that for any activity in society, the people who will tend to rise to the top in that activity will be those best suited for it, either in ability, temperament, or enthusiasm. The free market selects for its leading positions those people who are most able to innovate, to satisfy the desires of the mass of consumers better and more efficiently than anyone else. Socialism, on the contrary, selects for Its leading positions those people most adept at the functions they perform: namely, bureaucrats schooled In elaborating red tape and Byzantine court intrigue, at bootlicking superiors and lording over inferiors; and despots and thugs adept at the wielding of force and violence. The market, In short, selects for Thomas Edison, while socialism selects for concentration camp commandants and secret police torturers.

Third, since socialism means central planning, any possible scope for “democratic” revisions or checks and balances will be virtually non-existent. For, since the plan is central, this means that no one will be permitted to interfere with the plan once the State and its technocratic “experts” have made their decision. For who are the public or even a legislature to dare to throw monkey wrenches into the State’s carefully chosen plans? The role of the voters, whether at large or in a parliament, will be strictly plebiscitary: they will only be able to vote Ja, to ratify the plan chosen by the central planners.

Fourth, another chimera of social democrats is that socialism will be able to allow civil liberties, freedom of speech, press, and assembly, while maintaining a command-and-obedience system in the purely economic sphere. These spheres, however, cannot be separated. Stalin murdered millions of Soviet peasants, not because they were political dissenters, but because they resisted being expropriated and nationalized by the Soviet central planners.

Fifth, as a corollary, civil liberties cannot be maintained under socialism for the simple reason that the government, as the owner and manager of all the means of production, of all resources, has the power to allocate these resources to those people and those uses which it favors. There can be no genuine freedom of speech, press, or assembly if a single coercive agency, the government, has the sole power to allocate all newsprint, paper, assembly halls, etc., to uses which it prefers.

Consider, for example, a Socialist Planning Board, which, with all the good will in the world, has the task of allocating precious, scarce newsprint, assembly halls, presses and so forth. Can anyone visualize such a Board actually turning over any of these resources to an anti-socialist periodical? Indeed, from their point of view, why should they? As a result, resources will tend to be allocated to those individuals or groups who do bask in the favor of the regime. Hence, the usual vices of bureaucracy: favoritism, cronyism, and logrolling will proliferate under socialism unhampered by the profit-and-loss checks to which they are subjected on the free market.

Hence, the only freedom to criticize under a socialist regime will be, as in Russia and China, a freedom to criticize petty bureaucrats on the lower level—especially those who are out of favor with the ruling elite. But no criticism whatever will be permitted of the fundamentals of the system: of the ruling class, or of the socialist system itself.

Our discussion of an anti-socialist group trying to obtain an allocation of newsprint and presses from the Planning Board should illuminate the true meaning of the famous case of the Soviet Planning Board’s refusing to allocate resources for the production of matzohs. The important point here is not that the Soviet Union is anti-Jewish, which was the attitude of the Western press. The important point is that it is absurd even to expect that a socialist government committed to atheism would allocate much of its scarce resources to a minority religious group. This problem is inherent in socialism itself.

Sixth, we have stressed that the Socialist government will be the only allocator of resources, of producers’ goods. Hence, it will be the only employer, the only source of jobs in the economy. This will mean that everyone in the society will be totally dependent for their livelihood on one source of employment or income: the ruling class of the State apparatus. While any given socialist government may graciously allow employees to change occupations, jobs or places of work, this can only be a grant of permission by the government rather than a human right basic to each employee: for the government always remains the only employer. This grisly dependency on a single employer is part and parcel of the socialist system. It is particularly ironic that socialists who complain bitterly about the necessity for Americans to choose among hundreds of thousands of employers, think that this alleged condition of dependence can be remedied by confining all people in society to the tender mercies of one single, compulsory employer! This is a remedy for “alienation”?!

Again, civil liberties cannot be secured in such a society. For critics and dissidents can be “sent to Siberia” in the most literal as well as figurative sense. After all, someone has to be allocated to Siberia, right? So who is it going to be in practice: favored persons or those considered by the regime to be trouble-makers?

And so the essence of socialism is forced labor. Where but under a socialist regime could a Mao decide to “end the contradiction between physical and mental labor” by shipping hundreds of thousands of urban students to live permanently in the frontier province of Sinkiang—and to force them to grow rice in a dry climate for the good of their souls—or, to use a more Marxian term, for the benefit of their “reeducation”?

Seventh, socialism with democracy or civil liberties is a chimera because the socialist government will necessarily have total power over the processes of education: over schools and the media. Possessing that power, the ruling cliques will use it to try to mould a subject population that will be filled with love for their rulers and eager willingness to obey their every command. Call it what you will: “brainwashing,” “cultural rehabilitation centers,” or whatever, it is inevitable that a ruling elite given total power over education will use it for such “social” purposes, to create an eagerly sought New Socialist Man: a Man who will love and obey his rulers and who will put his rulers’ commands above any personal qualms or considerations. Hopefully, human nature is such that the government cannot succeed; but the society is a living Hell while the rulers try their best.

Eighth, just as the worker is treated like dirt under a socialist system, so too is the consumer. In a free market economy, the consumers are wooed and courted by business firms as the sole source of income. All the terms of exchange, from quality of product to price, are made to please the consumers and gain their patronage. But, under socialism, the income of the State and its bureaucracy is decided by themselves rather than by the consumer. Instead of the consumer being wooed and cosseted, he is treated as an annoying source of wasteful depletion of the State’s precious scarce resources. Under socialism, the consumer is only grudgingly allowed his meager rations.

The result of all this is a striking contrast in the quality of life as well as the standard of living between socialist and non-socialist nations. Socialist countries are invariably filled with grey, pallid, dispirited people shuffling to line up for their rations; Western non-socialist countries are filled with lively people and smart shops, with a large variety of consumer goods. For example, the contrast between East and West Germany, or even between market-oriented Yugoslavia and the rest of the socialist bloc in Eastern Europe.

Ninth, on top of all this moral and social horror, socialism can’t work; that is, lacking a free price system, socialism cannot operate an advanced industrial economy to suit even the goals of the rulers of the State. A socialist industrial economy will suffer grave shortages, poverty, famine, and breakdown, and ultimately the death of a large portion of its population.

We conclude that Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al, were in no sense betrayers of socialism; instead, their regimes were socialism’s fulfillment. Let us turn, for example, to what is surely one of the most monstrous regimes in the world today—of course, a socialist one: the government of Cambodia. When the socialist regime took over Cambodia, it was faced with a swollen urban population in the capital city of Phnom Penh, a population which had become enlarged by refugees fleeing war, devastation, and American bombs in the countryside. But, being socialist, the new regime decided to depopulate Phnom Penh by coercion: and masses of people were sent to rural areas on a veritable death march as people were yanked out of hospitals, even during operations, and forced to march out of the city. That the logic of socialism is brutality and death has never been more clearly demonstrated.

I would like to conclude by comparing and contrasting the responses of two “democratic socialists,” both fervent opponents of the Vietnam War, to the gross violations of human rights now taking place in varying ways in the socialist countries of Indochina. One is the distinguished French journalist Jean Lacouture, who angrily refers to the new socialist Cambodia as “the most tightly locked up country in the world, where the bloodiest revolution in history is now taking place.” Lacouture continues:

Ordinary genocide . . . usually has been carried out against a foreign population or an internal minority. The new masters of Phnom Penh have invented something original, auto-genocide. After Auschwitz and the Gulag, we might have thought this century had produced the ultimate in horror, but we are now seeing the suicide [read: murder] of a people in the name of revolution; worse: in the name of socialism.

Lacouture goes on to describe the situation in Cambodia as one where

a group of modem intellectuals, formed by Western thought, primarily Marxist thought [with heavy admixtures of Rousseau], claim to seek to return to a rustic Golden Age, to an ideal rural and national civilization. And proclaiming these ideals, they are systematically massacring, isolating, and starving city and village populations whose crime was to have been born where they were

Lacouture adds that the subjects of Cambodia’s leader, Khieu Samphan,

remain in terror-stricken confinement, one of this regime’s more rational decisions: for how could it let the outside world see its burying of a civilization in pre-history, its massacres? When men who talk of Marxism are able to say . . . that only 1.5 or 2 million young Cambodians, out of 6 million, will be enough to build a pure society, one can no longer simply speak of barbarism; what barbarians have ever acted in this way? Here is only madness.1

But Lacouture’s noble instincts have outrun his intelligence on this question. For, pace Thomas Szasz, the new rulers of Cambodia are not “mad.” They are, simply, socialists, trying to bring about the New Socialist Man of their Marxian-Rousseauan aspirations. Their social system, of course, is no less horrendous for that; quite the contrary.

Contrast this noble if mushy-headed reaction of Lacouture with the reaction of the distinguished Princeton international law professor Richard A Falk to recent disclosures of the admittedly far less horrendous but still abominable “cultural reeducation” concentration camps being conducted by the new socialist government of Vietnam. When such sincerely civil libertarian and anti-war leaders as James Forest and Nat Hentoff called upon the Left to denounce these Vietnamese concentration camps, let us study the shameful Aesopian language of Professor Falk’s measured response:

I referred to the special problems faced by Vietnamese leaders committed to building socialism and facing resistance and opposition. Hentoff contends that I believe that anything goes if it is done to build a socialist society, a grotesque view that I ardently oppose. My actual view is that in the Vietnamese setting what has been done to date has not involved systematic or severe abuse of human rights. What has been done is to remove temporarily from the political order some of those who seem obstructive in a period of national economic emergency. Such removal may be the only alternative to renouncing a socialist development program, a renunciation that would violate the dynamics of self-determination embodied in the outcome of the war.2

We rest our case; for the moral obscenity of Professor Falk’s position should not be allowed to obscure the hard-headed consistency of his socialist outlook. If “removing temporarily from the political order” is the Aesopian phrase with which Professor Falk chooses to cloak bloody oppression, he is absolutely correct when he points out that “such removal may be the only alternative to renouncing a socialist development program. . . .”

In short, Professor Falk has stated the choice before mankind correctly: it is socialism, or human freedom. It is one or the other. Humanistic or democratic socialism is a chimera, a contradiction in terms.

1Jean Lacouture, “The Bloodiest Revolution,” New York Review of Books (March 31, 1977), pp. 9–10. Lacouture’s subsequent “corrections,” much crowed over by the American Left, do not affect the substance of his argument. See Lacouture, “Cambodia: Corrections,” New York Review of Books (May 26, 1977), p. 46. Chomsky and Herman brusquely dismiss such statements of Cambodian officials simply because they appeared in the Thai press. To dismiss any reported statements by government officials themselves merely because they were not authorized and published by the officials is a singular position for authors who presumably applaud the exposures of the Watergate horrors. Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, “Distortions at Fourth Hand,” The Nation, June 25, 1977, pp. 789–794.
2The Village Voice, March 21, 1977, p. 4.

CITE THIS ARTICLE

Rothbard, Murray N., “The Myth of Democractic Socialism,” Libertarian Review (September 1977): 24–27, 45.

Leave a Comment

Central Bank Digital Currencies (Bad), by Daneil Lacalle

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: bitcoin, crypto, cryptocurrency, Economics, finance — justplainbill @ 4:13 pm

Mises Wire

Central Bank Digital Currencies Are Dangerous and Unnecessary

03/02/2024•Mises Wire•Daniel Lacalle

The main central banks have been deliberating on the concept of introducing a digital currency. However, many citizens fail to grasp the rationale behind it when the majority of transactions in major global currencies are carried out electronically. Nevertheless, a central bank digital currency is much more than electronic money. I will explain why.

Central banks are raising interest rates and enacting restrictive monetary policies as quickly as governmental regulations allow because they are aware that monetary factors are the primary cause of inflation. Central banks have recently lost credibility by initially disregarding the inflation danger, then attributing it to transitory factors, and finally responding belatedly and gradually.

In a world where there is an excess in money supply growth, there are mechanisms in place to prevent a significant rise in consumer prices caused by the destruction of the purchasing power of the issued currency. Quantitative easing is subject to some constraints that partially prevent inflationary forces. As the banking channel serves as the transmission mechanism of monetary policy, credit demand acts as a constraint on inflationary pressures.

Now, consider if the transmission mechanism was direct and utilizing only one channel, the central bank. It is not the same to have a police officer walking down your street than to have a police officer in your kitchen watching your every move.

A central bank digital currency would be directly issued to your account held at the central bank. At best, it is surveillance masquerading as currency. The central bank would have precise information of your currency usage, savings, borrowing, spending, and transactions. It can enhance the fungibility of money to prevent the common but unfounded problem of “excess savings.” Moreover, as central banks become more politically involved, they might impose penalties on individuals who spend in a manner they consider unsuitable, while rewarding those who follow their recommendations. The entire privacy system and monetary limit mechanism would be removed. Moreover, if the central bank makes a mistake and creates an excess of money supply, as shown in 2020, it would immediately make consumer prices rocket. If the money supply increases dramatically in a year, we would experience massive inflation levels as the existing constraints of the transmission mechanism are eliminated.

Consider a scenario where you have a single account, a central bank, and the government. Guess what would happen? Full monetary financing of government spending leading to elevated inflation within a few years and the destruction of the private sector. Central bank digital currencies are likely to be a computerized rendition of the French Assignats. High inflation, complete government control, and financial repression.

Central bank digital currencies are unnecessary and dangerous. You cannot initiate an experiment pf such magnitude when the autonomy of central banks has been questioned for years and there is abundant evidence of mistakes made with policy measures that do not acknowledge the danger of increased inflation and economic stagnation. Central banks have never successfully prevented bubbles, high levels of risk-taking, excessive debt, or identified inflationary pressures. Given such history, no one should support a proposal that would grant them complete authority and control over the financial and monetary system. What do central banks mean when they discuss a novel digital currency? It is a further advancement in the ongoing process of eroding the purchasing power of the currency,

disguised under the objective of enhancing oversight of payments and facilitating the tracking of specific payment methods.

The primary arguments for considering a central bank digital currency are efficiency and enhancing the transmission mechanism of monetary policy. However, none of them make sense. Central banks often claim the need to enhance the transmission mechanism of monetary policy, but many of their statements are founded on an inaccurate belief that there is an excess of savings that requires a change in behaviour. By manipulating the cost and quantity of the currency issued, central banks aim to correct what they perceive as imbalances. However, monetary policy rarely addresses the largest imbalances, which are the ones created by government deficits and debt accumulation. Disguising risk in sovereign debt leads to more imprudent fiscal policies and adds to the risk of bubbles in financial markets as perceptions of risk are clouded by low rates and high liquidity. A digital currency does not enhance the transmission mechanism of monetary policy unless the word “enhance” is used to hide a desire to boost the size of government in the economy through the erosion of the purchasing power of the currency and the constant monetary financing of public deficits. Another aspect to consider is efficiency. Central banks appear to prioritize the regulation of monetary transactions and encourage spending regardless of the risks involved. Creating a central bank digital money system is not more efficient. It is another form of financial control. If negative interest rates are ineffective in stimulating economic agents, some believe that implementing negative rates and devaluing the currency faster using a digital currency may be more successful. They are wrong. The economy does not strengthen by making the currency a disappearing reserve of value. Introducing a central bank digital currency is unlikely to reduce economic risks or stimulate productive investment but will encourage short-term malinvestment. Central banks are unable to compel economic agents to spend and invest, especially when their strategies continually focus on encouraging debt and prolonging government imbalances. The process of any asset becoming a widely used currency is highly democratic. It is beyond the jurisdiction of governments and cannot be enforced. When governments and central banks implement financial repression and devalue their currency, citizens may turn to other forms of payment that are considered genuine money. Cryptocurrencies have emerged due to a lack of trust in fiat currencies and the ongoing efforts of central banks and governments to devalue currencies in order to conceal underlying fiscal imbalances. A central bank digital currency is a contradiction in terms—an oxymoron. Citizens demand cryptocurrencies because they are not controlled by central banks that seek to grow the money supply and induce currency depreciation through inflation. Central banks should prioritize safeguarding the purchasing power of savings and salaries rather than seeking to destroy them. Using new means of financial repression may lead to a loss of confidence in the local currency. Once central banks acknowledge that they have exceeded the appropriate limits of their policy, it will already be too late.

Central bank digital currencies are unnecessary and dangerous.

The benefits of technology, digitalization and ease of transactions are already there. There is no need to create a currency issued directly to an account at the central bank. They are unnecessary as well because there is absolutely no need to compete with a digital yuan or bitcoin. China is moving closer to sound monetary policy and its central bank is purchasing more gold, not the opposite.

If central banks want to compete with other currencies or cryptocurrencies there is only one way: Make it absolutely clear that you will defend the reserve of value status of your currency. There is no need for the euro or the US dollar to compete with bitcoin or a digital yuan if the Fed and the ECB truly defend their reserve of value and purchasing power.

However, it looks like central banks want to behave like a monopoly that sells bad quality products but demands to remain the main supplier by eliminating the competition. The Fed and the ECB do not need to compete against cryptocurrencies if they show the world that they will defend the purchasing power of the US dollar and the euro.

The world’s financial challenges are not solved by imposing total control implemented by a monetary monopoly whose independence is seriously questioned, but by increasing competition and independence.

Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.

Leave a Comment

February 29, 2024

Obamacare Chickens Come Home to Roost and Ruin, by Sam Adolphsen

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: health, healthcare, medicaid, medicare, News — justplainbill @ 12:08 am

Obamacare Chickens Come Home To Roost And Ruin

Posted on Tuesday, February 27, 2024

by AMAC Newsline

51 Comments

AMAC Exclusive – By Sam Adolphsen

When you hear or read about Medicaid, one of the largest welfare programs in the U.S., the connection to Ernest Hemingway might not be immediately evident.

However, a piece of wisdom from Hemingway’s character Jake in The Sun Also Rises applies to the challenges facing Medicaid today: “Getting something for nothing only delayed the presentation of the bill. The bill always came.”

Nowhere is that sentiment truer than in the Medicaid program. And the bill is coming due in states around the country. Taxpayers and the truly needy had better look out, because the bill must be paid.

Medicaid (not to be confused with Medicare) is a program that was meant for the truly needy, the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. That was before Obama expanded the program to tens of millions of able-bodied adults, including adults with no kids at home, as one of the most controversial parts of Obamacare.

Just twenty years ago, there were only 7 million non-disabled, working age adults on Medicaid. Today, after a decade of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, which was partly funded by hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts to Medicare, there are nearly 40 million able-bodied adults on the program.

That means almost half of the people on Medicaid, a program meant for the truly needy, are able-bodied adults who can and should be working. But most of them are not working. State data shows that more than half of those tens of millions of able-bodied adults don’t work at all.

This unrestrained growth in Medicaid, especially among able-bodied adults, is having a major detrimental effect on state budgets. In recent years, the COVID-era deficit spending from Washington D.C. included extra Medicaid funding for states and papered over the budget problems.

Now with that extra federal money going away, the bill has come due for many states. More will soon follow.

California is facing a record budget shortfall of $68 billion after further expanding Medicaid to cover illegal immigrants and raising the income limit well into the middle-class.

New York is facing a $7 billion shortfall this year, much of which can be attributed to an increase of $10 billion in Medicaid costs in just one year. It doesn’t help that New York is also giving Medicaid to illegal immigrants and proposing a new scheme to keep people “continuously covered” for years with no eligibility checks.

So how will New York handle the bill coming due? Predictably, and sadly, by proposing cuts to care for the elderly and truly needy. The governor has already proposed a budget that cut tens of millions that was going to struggling nursing homes.

Where is the discussion of reining in the runaway costs and enrollment of millions of able-bodied adults? Nowhere to be found in New York.

Indiana, which foolishly expanded Medicaid to able-bodied adults years ago despite being a solidly red state, now faces more than a billion-dollar shortfall in Medicaid—just as many conservative opponents of the policy predicted at the time. The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration initially proposed cutting back a service that helps provide in-home care for elderly and disabled individuals. Meanwhile, almost half of Indiana’s two million people on Medicaid are able-bodied adults.

Arizona, another Medicaid expansion state, is facing a huge budget shortfall that could total in the billions of dollars. While the Democrat governor is trying to blame the shortfall on tax cuts and school choice, the reality is that Medicaid expansion is driving the problem. Arizona had just 500,000 people on Medicaid in 2000. After expanding Medicaid, they now have 2.3 million on the program. Nearly a million of those are able-bodied adults.

These are just a few of the states grappling with the Medicaid expansion budget problem. Colorado can’t cut property taxes like they want to because of Medicaid overruns. Maine is proposing to spend millions to hire new state workers to process Medicaid applications after expanding.

The Biden administration is making this problem worse. The Biden Medicaid office, run by the former Attorney General of California, has done everything in its power to keep states from limiting the growth of able-bodied adults on their welfare programs.

The Biden administration has even threatened states that have tried to clean the rolls up after COVID and demanded the adoption of policies that open the door to even more enrollment. This includes, no surprise, pushing states to adopt Medicaid expansion to even more able-bodied adults.

Unless states get the growth in able-bodied adults on their programs under control, there will be proposed cuts to the elderly and truly needy. There will be blown opportunities to cut property taxes. There will be cuts to road repairs and public safety. Or worse.

States that have avoided this Medicaid meltdown like Kansas, Texas, Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi, should stand strong against Medicaid expansion to protect the truly needy who depend on the program, and the taxpayers that fund it.

The bill will always come due. The only question is, who will pay?

Sam Adolphsen is the policy director at the Foundation for Government Accountability, and the former Chief Operating Officer for the Maine Department of Health and Human Services where he oversaw welfare eligibility and fraud investigations.

Leave a Comment

February 19, 2024

analysis of NYS Trump “fraud” trial, by Robert Charles

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: Donald Trump, fraud, News, Politics, Trump — justplainbill @ 4:26 pm

$355 Million Penalty – Pure Politics

Posted on Monday, February 19, 2024

by AMAC, Robert B. Charles

10 Comments

Scary. Respect for rule of law is in freefall. Democrats have disparaged Supreme Court rulings. State officials try hijacking a presidential election by misinterpreting the 14^th Amendment. Biden tries to imprison his opponent. Now, New York State Judge Arthur Engoron inflicts a $355 million penalty on the leading candidate for president – not a good look.

In his 92-page opinion, following a highly personalized trial, the judge makes a victimless non-crime called “business puffing” – no damages – into a crime. He declines the defendant a jury trial, holds kangaroo court, then inflicts a huge penalty.

To get this result, Americans must swallow never-before-asserted legal fictions, interpretations of law, and a politically hostile state prosecutor and judge overseeing the proceeding, despite their rank prejudice.

Almost certainly, this decision will be revised, perhaps thrown out entirely. It simply cannot stand. Why?

First, the facts are hardly damning. Loans were secured from banks with guarantees based on legal documents, clear representations, comparative values, assessing Trump’s credit, and due diligence.

The judge ignores expert witnesses who said no fraud occurred, the banks were content to lend to Trump, no entity lost money on any transaction, nor did any citizen suffer provable damage.

Despite this, the anti-defendant judge who repeatedly tried to gag Trump (reversed) and consistently insulted him – offers a conclusory view. He says Trump’s statements were “blatantly false… resulting in fraudulent financial statements.” Boom, one and done, over, next.

The whole concept that a biased state judge, abetted by a vengeful state prosecutor, is allowed to target, harass, convict, try to bankrupt, and end the campaign of a political opponent – is revolting, utterly anti-democratic. It violates a dozen principles of ethics.

Still, not a single leading Democrat has said this is wrong, political persecution, like the cases being brought by Jack Smith, a prosecutor sanctioned for a political case in 2014 (9-0, Supreme Court), and the embarrassingly unethical, unrepentant Georgia prosecutor.

What else is wrong with this fantastical $355 million dollar penalty, inflicted with apparent joy by two partisans on candidate Trump mid-campaign?

A lot. Throughout this opinion, the judge miscasts his own behavior, visible to the world, shamefully hostile to the defendant, telegraphing with his words, tone and temperament an intent to demean.

Moreover, the prosecutor and judge target the former president’s sons for punishment, making a crime of something never previously viewed as a crime, also not taught as a “crime” in law schools – including New York law schools, just “business puffing” in the subjective realm of value assessment.

The judge then pretends common law fraud is not under discussion, that his punishment is not a penalty, just a civil act of “disgorgement” – giving back money when it is plainly a debilitating punishment.

Listing elements of common law fraud – including false statement, knowledge that it is false, reliance and damages, he sidesteps the entire thing, saying this is not common law fraud.

Why? Because he cannot prove those elements “beyond a reasonable doubt,” cannot prove the statements were false, anyone relied on them, or any damages.

Instead, the judge and prosecutor create their own non-crime crime, saying the “marketplace,” which has shown no harm, is the victim – of statements never proven knowingly false, or exclusively relied upon, or for which there were any damages or complaints.

This pretzel-like approach to trapping a defendant, making up standards and victims, pretending damages exist, that they were somehow horrendous, that anyone has ever been prosecuted like this – is audacious. It is also profoundly anti-democratic, further eroding respect for prosecutors and the courts.

But, we are not done. This judge cites Executive Law 63 (12), from 1956, to shoehorn defendant’s “puffing” into a heinous criminal act, prosecuted in civil form to avoid proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” (criminal standard, versus “more probable than not” the civil standard), just another cheat.

Insufficient room exists to properly unpack this ugly, disingenuous opinion. It rambles, miscasting much of the trial, demeaning the defendant. It oozes prejudice, undisguised hostility. The words “fair administration of justice” do not pop to mind.

Last, one must look at the whole multi-act play. These two actors have knowingly interfered with an election, which is a federal crime. They take no responsibility for that, just plan to skip away scot-free.

Creating something from nothing – making “business puffing” a crime, trying it on a civil standard, imposing a monster penalty on a political candidate they hate speaks to no integrity.

Net-net, this is a judicial system gone wild. The disarray needs to stop with the next election. What a disgrace, what a sad day for America … a $355 million dollar penalty inflicted for politics. Scary.

Comments (1)

February 17, 2024

Our Military is Weak, by Dakota Wood

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: History, Military, Politics, Russia, World War II — justplainbill @ 6:44 pm

Our Military Is Weak. That Should Scare You.

Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2024

by Outside Contributor

50 Comments

Our government isn’t serious about defending the United States and its interests. In fact, it has fallen woefully short in carrying out this sacred obligation. I know this sounds harsh, but as we’ll see, the government’s own numbers prove the point.

That our military is weak is not an indictment of the men and women who have volunteered to serve. It is an indictment of a system largely defined by the government and those elected to high office.

That includes senior military officers whose primary obligation should be to ensure that our men and women have what they need to win in war—which is, after all, the primary purpose of our military.

Yes, many people will say the purpose of a strong military is to deter war, but deterrence derives from the belief of the enemy that they would be defeated in battle. So if our military is at great risk of not being able to win … well, it doesn’t have much deterrent value.

Our potential enemies can see this; the American public, not so much.

At present, the U.S. military is roughly half the size it needs to be. Moreover, most of its primary equipment (planes, ships, tanks, etc.) is 30 to 40 years old. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and guardsmen are training only a fraction of what they should to be competent in battle.

Yet senior leaders in the Pentagon, White House spokespersons, and even members of Congress who have access to the facts (and should know better) continue to say that we have the best military in the world, as if saying so makes it so. It does not.

Let’s look at the numbers, using references from near the end of the Cold War, when the U.S. last confronted a major competitor on a global stage. Recall that until the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the U.S. maintained forces able to compete with the Soviets in many regions at once, primarily in Europe (in land and air) but also across the seas where naval power was essential.

Back then, Washington had to focus only on one capital and the ambitions of one authoritarian regime. Regardless of where military actions occurred, the signals reverberated to Moscow.

Today, the U.S. must account for regimes in Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang, and a host of smaller powers and terrorist regimes that challenge U.S. interests. They have different objectives and possess different cultures, values, and networks.

Just because the U.S. acts in the Middle East to thwart Iran doesn’t mean that China alters its activities vis-à-vis Taiwan or its push on territorial claims in the South China Sea, or that Russia lessens its assault of Europe or attempts to divide NATO. They pose different threats to the U.S. in different ways.

What they have in common is the objective of displacing the United States as a global power and reducing America’s ability to shape the future in ways that benefit Americans.

To compete on a global stage against a multitude of adversaries who collaborate against the U.S., at least opportunistically, America must possess military power commensurate with the realities of the current world, not one that is imagined years from now nor held in fond memory.

Consider the following:

In the late 1980s, the Navy possessed nearly 600 ships, keeping approximately 100 at sea on any given day. Today, it has 292 yet maintains the same number deployed, thus working both ships and crew twice as much. It is not uncommon for ships to be 15% undermanned.

In 1989, the Army had 770,000 soldiers in its active component. Today, it has 452,000, shrinking by 33,000 last year alone. By the end of this year, it will shrink further, to 445,000.

Since 2011, the Army has lost 121,000 troops, 22% of its force. The service is the smallest it has been since the 1930s. Most of its major weapons were purchased in the 1980s.

During the Cold War, the average Air Force pilot flew more than 200 hours a year and often exceeded 300 hours. Our pilots made fun of their Soviet counterparts for flying half that number. Today, the average Air Force pilot flies fewer than 130 hours, while their Chinese competitors fly 200-plus.

The average age of an Air Force fighter is 30, older than the pilots flying the aircraft. The average age of the majority of refueling aircraft is 60 years—as old (or older) than the parents of the pilots flying them.

Fourteen years ago, America committed to modernizing its portfolio of nuclear weapons. Since then, our nuclear enterprise hasn’t produced a single new weapon. Meanwhile, China has produced 100 nuclear missiles just the past year and is on track to quadruple its inventory by 2030.

Iran is near-nuclear, having amassed enough uranium enriched to 60% to make a half-dozen warheads in 30 days if it committed to push the enrichment process to 90%, which it is capable of doing. Iran already possesses the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East and is placing satellites in orbit to refine militarily relevant technologies.

Although Russia has taken a beating in its war against Ukraine, it has moved to a wartime economy and is making more missiles and tanks now than before it invaded Ukraine. New equipment is rapidly replacing the old Soviet inventory that Russia has consumed or lost in the past two years.

And the soldiers who have survived the Russia-Ukraine war to this point are battle-hardened; U.S. forces last saw major combat when in Iraq, nearly 20 years ago.

Perhaps things wouldn’t be so worrisome if we could count on strong, reliable allies. Unfortunately, their story is worse.

During the Cold War, West Germany had 5,000 main battle tanks. Today, it has 300 Leopard IIs, of which fewer than 100 are considered operational. But that’s better than in 2021, when only 13 were available for deployment.

Germany’s defense minister has reported that the country won’t be able to field a ready division until 2025. Its military infrastructure is so decayed that it will take 300 billion euros (about $329 billion) and 50 years to modernize.

In the United Kingdom, the army is the smallest since 1710 and leaders have said they would struggle to put a single division in the field. Britain’s military services combined (160,000 service members) are smaller than the U.S. Marine Corps at 174,000. The Royal Navy possesses a mere 20 surface combatants.

France only has 19 large surface warships. In the days since the Cold War, the number of France’s tanks has dropped from 1,349 to 222 and the number of fighter aircraft from 686 to 254. A senior defense leader has questioned whether the French military could operate longer than four days in high-intensity combat.

Japan, a major U.S. ally in the Pacific, reportedly has such a limited inventory of munitions that its ships and aircraft could sortie only three times before having nothing more to shoot.

Back at home, 3 out of 4 young Americans are ineligible for military service, without a waiver, due to physical or mental health issues, obesity, criminal records, or substance abuse.

The recruiting environment is so bad that the Navy has increased the maximum age for new enlistees and has begun accepting enlistees in the lowest category of aptitude testing. In the Army, all captains are now automatically promoted to major. In the Air Force, all officers in flight school graduate, with less than one-quarter of 1% failing due to lack of demonstrated proficiency.

Many Americans perceive the military as more interested in pushing social policy agenda programs than in ensuring that our forces are able to win in combat.

Clearly, we have a problem.

All of this is captured in gory detail in The Heritage Foundation’s recently released 2024 Index of U.S. Military Strength. The point of the index is twofold: to inform Americans about the state of their military and to prompt Congress and the Biden administration to do something about correcting the multitude of problems in our country’s ability to defend itself and its interests in a very dangerous world that seems to be spiraling out of control.

Regular citizens can see to their needs for employment, food, medical care, personal protection, and spiritual fulfillment. They help each other in times of distress and routinely come together to celebrate successes in life. But they cannot defend the country at the individual or community level. That responsibility lies with the federal government, which is failing at the task.

This must change, and Americans should demand it. Waiting until the next crisis is upon us will be too late.

This commentary originally was published by The National Interest

Reprinted with permission from The Daily Signal by Dakota Wood.

Leave a Comment

Older Posts »

January 31, 2021

California Is Cleansing Jews From History

October 4, 2008

What does his article say?

How the Climate Elite Spread Misery

Most people are more worried about high gas and food prices, which green policies make worse.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

Don’t Believe the Hype About Antarctica’s Melting Glaciers

Two studies carefully explore the factors at play, but the headlines are only meant to raise alarm.

July 10, 2024

June 13, 2024

The Lesson of the Trump Conviction

May 18, 2024

The New MAGA Manifesto

May 15, 2024

DC Holds Training Sessions For Noncitizens To Vote

May 14, 2024

ICYMI: REBECCA WEBER: Congress Must Act To Stop Noncitizens From Voting

Biden Turns Federal Government Into Democrat Vote Machine

AMAC EXCLUSIVE

May 12, 2024

Full-Time Jobs Fall Again as Total Employment Flatlines in April

Get Ready for Weaker Growth and Higher Inflation. The Consensus Was Wrong.

May 10, 2024

Chicago Schools Crumble While Teachers Make Extremist Demands

May 2, 2024

April 24, 2024

April 21, 2024

Understanding the History of African Slavery: The Europeans Were not the Only Slave Traders

Let’s Be Honest: The Economy Is NOT Doing Well

April 5, 2024

Squatter Rights Is A Growing Squatter Scam

March 30, 2024

Price Inflation Comes from Government, not from “Excuseflation” or “Greedflation”

March 2, 2024

The Myth of Democratic Socialism

CITE THIS ARTICLE

Central Bank Digital Currencies Are Dangerous and Unnecessary

February 29, 2024

Obamacare Chickens Come Home To Roost And Ruin

AMAC Exclusive – By Sam Adolphsen

February 19, 2024

$355 Million Penalty – Pure Politics

February 17, 2024

Our Military Is Weak. That Should Scare You.

Email Subscription