September 14, 2013

The left professes that they care so much about the poor.  But when we look at their enthusiasm for immigration, it tells a different story.  Mass immigration of poor people from the third world is not beneficial for poor or working class Americans.  Poor immigrants lower salaries and take jobs away from lower income Americans.  They also lower the value of non affluent neighborhoods.  In sum the poor suffer from immigration by more poor people.  If you have ever read John Sinclair´s book “The Jungle” it talks about how mass immigration of poorly Educated Eastern Europeans, who did not speak English, led to horrific exploitation in Chicago 100 years ago in the meat processing business.  The whole system was inhuman, but that level of mistreatment by the meat packing companies would not have been possible without attendant mass immigration.  The system is really not that much changed today.  The owners of capital benefit from cheap exploitable labor, while the immigrants and native poor suffer from an ample supply of labor which drives down pay and working conditions.  Plus the rich get the state to pick up the tab for all of the social services that these immigrants need.  In addition the affluent get cheap and willing gardeners, maids and nannies.  Finally they live in such lilly white exclusive neighborhoods that they need not worry about the darkie immigrants moving into their neighborhood and messing things up.  The working class has to worry about that.

With all these advantages it is not wonder that our elites are gung-ho on mass immigration.  Here is a section from Numbers USA.

Please leave a comment on “Did Demographics Cause 1970s Stagflation?” by Megan McArdle of Bloomberg View.

McArdle begins by quoting this post from Karl Smith at Forbes in which he writes: Economists are so sensitive to any argument against immigration they seem to forget that any growth model that I am aware of will predict a decline in per capita GDP if the population rises fast enough.

McArdle herself explains how inequality has historically been reduced during periods of tight labor markets be they post-World War II or post-Black Death:

The labor shortage made the common folk much wealthier, but it made people who lived off capital poorer, because relatively scarce labor was now much more valuable than plentiful capital.

McArdle concludes that we may be chasing a chimera when we talk of going back to the halcyon days of the 1950s and 1960s. If it was labor scarcity that drove the income compression, well have a hard time replicating those conditions.

But McArdle herself avoids the obvious immigration angle. Immigration is accounting for more than three-quarters of U.S. population growth. The U.S. government has been driving the labor surplus. This is not a natural phenomenon; it is public policy.

The Senate immigration bill would double immigration. Is it any wonder that the money and power behind the “comprehensive immigration movement” comes from corporate owners of capital?

Youtube Satire

September 9, 2013

I enjoy watching comedy channels on Youtube like BarelyPolitical and Bart Barker.  There is a lot of funny and witty stuff there.  Still, what I have noticed is an almost complete lack of parodies of Obama.  This is ironic because BarelyPolitical began its career with Political Satires, mainly with Obama Girl, who supports Obama.  There have been 2 or 3 cutting Romney parodies during the 2012 Presidential Campaign, but only 1 satire of Obama (that I know about) during these last 5 years.  Why?  Certainly with all the contradictions and scandals of this administration, there should be ample fodder for satire.  And yet almost nothing.

I suspect that ParelyPolitical is afraid of the accusation of racism if they make fun of Obama, or the administration is apply pressure on them to keep mum about Obama.  Either way something smells fishy here.  What do you think?

Obama´s Rush to War

September 9, 2013

I find it curious that Obama is pressing so hard to attack Syria.  Why is this?  His background and base should be skeptical about military intervention.  He even won the Nobel Peace Prize-Ha Ha!  Opposition to attacking Syria is broad among the American people, and it is bipartisan.  This is not surprising.  We were lead to war in Iraq by lies, and people are simply not buying it anymore.

I suspect that there is something else behind this, probably military contractors who need to be appeased by yet another military entanglement.  What do you think?

Peter Schiff

September 8, 2013

Peter Schiff is not always right, but he makes excellent points, which are usually ignored by the establishment.  One of them is that our government statistics are manipulated.  Those in power love to talk about how inflation is supposedly so low, and the economy is improving.  But the reality is that inflation is most probably above 5%, and if we factor that in, then we have been in continual recession since 2008.  This helps to explain why the recession has been officially over since 2009, but the economy continues to feel like it is in recession…because it has never left recession.  We are still in it.

Peter Schiff points out how GDP and inflation figures are manipulated to look better than they are.  Unfortunately he is one of the few who dare to point out these amazingly fundamental facts.  All these talking heads and experts in the mainstream media, academia and politics base their arguments on phony statistics, and no one points it out.  Government statistics are treated like the unquestionable Gospel truth, despite the fact that there is abundant evidence that the Government is jiggering them.  In addition to that the Government has abundant incentives to lie, and they control the process.  So why not?  What is even more disturbing is how much the rest of the establishment is so co-opted to go along with the charade, and no one in the establishment is calling for the truth.

Peter Schiff also points out how GDP is not an ideal measure of real wealth, because it only measures economic activity and not real achievements.  Paying people to dig trenches and then fill them back again increases GDP, but it does nothing to enhance our quality of life, which should be the real motivation to do work.  We should not work just to increase GDP, but to get pleasure out of it or because of what it can produce for us.  The government pursues policies (usually funded by debt) that increase GDP, but because so much of it is little more than busy work/make work it does not actually do anything for us, and yet it is counted as GDP.  People like Paul Krugman would probably want to bomb a city if it could increase GDP in the rebuilding effort.  But, such an effort would squander assets and get us not get us any farther ahead.

The Left vs. the Right

September 8, 2013

I watch Fox News and MSNBC from time to time.  Both are biased and highly partisan, but while Fox is not objective, I find their arguments at least make sense to me a lot of the time, and no infrequently they really nail it home.  In contrast, MSNBC is usually like entering some kind of loony world.  The bias is the same as Fox, but their whole outlook is find surrealistic.  Rachael Maddows I find to be nice, but she is far too biased for me to approve.  She does not hold our president´s feet to the fire, because he is a Democrat, which is a shame.  Chris Mathews is paranoid and suffers from some kind of obsessive compulsive disorder.  He sees racism everywhere, he is obsessed with the birther issue, and when he has a non-leftist on his show, he tries to badger and bully the guest until he gets a Gotcha line that he can take out of context to hurt the person.  Chris Mathews is not interested in actually listening to his guests.  He just wants to find a weak chink in the armor which he can exploit.  For him this is about political war between his tribe (the Democrats) and the other tribe (the Republicans) and all he cares about is scoring points.  You can hear him very begrudgingly “listening” to Ron Paul as Ron wins the argument.  For Chris this is too much for his self-righteous ego to handle.

In this interview with Ron Paul, Chris tries his usual tactics of attempting to make Ron Paul look like a racist, and that his ideas would return the US to Jim Crow if implemented.  Of course this is absurd, but Chris Mathews keeps trying to get an out of context sound bite from Ron Paul that would hopefully make him out to be an evil racist.   Ron Paul is having none of it, and sees the trap.  He also stands up to Chris Mathews and does not allow Chris to bully him.  He calls Chris out on his BS, and ends up soundly winning the debate.  This is a great clip.

Here Chris is back to bullying and badgering his guest.  This just shows how little Chris understands-or attempts to understand-those who are not exactly like him (an elitist guilt ridden leftist).  He lives in such an echo chamber, and has become so filled with paranoia that he actually believes that the guest took his gun to the rally to start a shoot out or assassinate the president.  He actually believes this, and seems to find it hard to understand why the man bought the gun, instead injecting all kinds of nefarious reasons.   This is what happens when people do not get out.  They marinate in their own tribal juices to the point where everything becomes a war of their tribe against the other.  Actually very primal and primitive thinking this is.  Fox does this too-and I wish that they did less-but somehow I find MSNBC to be more loony.  It also gives us a psychological look into the mindset of much of the establishment…and it is scary.

One final observation.  In the 1960s Liberals were called that because they were actually liberals.  They protested against those in charge and the government.  They questioned things, and wanted to “stick it to the man”.

Today the left has become “the Man”.  They are so bought off by government money, power and privilege, that they cannot imagine a world without more and more government controlling and taxing everything.  They have become co-opted and compromised.  Bought off.  Now when someone like a Tea Party person or Ron Paul speaks about Liberty, they automatically become hostile and defensive, and start immediately trying to interject all kinds of evil motives (and endless racism) to those who want to give people more freedom, and governments less overarching power.  The hatred of the Tea Party by the Left is so palpable and primal that it puzzles me.  It goes beyond just political opposition.  It is as if the Tea Party raped and killed their children.  The hatred is that deep and visceral.

And I would like to add that, while I sympathize with Libertarian causes, I am not a true 100% libertarian.  I believe in balance.  Still, if the Libertarians can help get there, I am all for it.  Government has become too big and powerful, and we need to bring it back to a more sensible center and make it more accountable.  People like Chris Mathews, however, hate such ideas.

Here is a final example of leftist paranoia, hate, invective, group think and double standards directed at Tea Party members.  The Left love to get all indignant about Intolerance and Hate, but then feels free to self-righteously practice as much Intolerance and Hate as they wish, just like the other hypocritical and double standard labels that they love to throw around: Diversity, Inclusion, Racism, Sexism, etc, etc.  I could do an entire paper on this…but I will leave it for another day.

Max Keiser

September 2, 2013

This video by Max Keiser is one of his best.  So many important points are made-points that are conveniently ignored by our elites, whether political, academic, corporate, syndicate, etc.

Realities brought up in the video are:

-The total insecurity of “the Cloud” now that the NSA and company are systematically violating privacy and security.  And to add to it, due to the Patriot Act, companies cannot reveal if the government is snooping on their data or not.  What organization would want to put their sensitive information into such a system?  If things don´t change soon, I expect web services to spring up in places like Iceland.

-The out of control fusion of corporate interests and government spending and power, where corporations increasingly rely on government welfare, and control policy and legislation to prevent competition, and rig the whole system, in giant cartels.  For instance, now they want to take away the tax exemption status of credit unions to reduce competition.

-We have a government which only seems to grow and never shrink.  We have 17 intelligence agencies with little really to do and a lot of opportunities to get into mischief, and even more dangerously so being in bed with large corrupt corporations.  We have little to no accountability as these bureaucratic behemoths spread their tentacles into everything, and Obama is not providing leadership on the issue.  I imagine that he is spending his time schmoozing with his donors and supporters.

-Numerous welfare programs are maintained to keep the unemployment numbers low, keep the population from revolting, and keep them dependent on government largesse.

The whole war on Cannabis was created to give previous government anti-prohibition workers a new job to do.  The last thing that the DEA wants is to reduce the drug problem.  The war on drugs is its lifeline, and they will fight to keep it that way.

I´m back

September 2, 2013

Sorry for the absence of blogging lately.  I have been on vacation for the last 6 weeks.  My intention was to blog, at least occasionally, during the break, but due to limited computer and internet resources, as well as time, I was not able to do any blogging.

Anyway I have returned and will resume my posts.  I am not paid and often do not have a lot of free time, so I do not blog as often as I would like.  Still, I do it when I can.  Thanks you for all the nice feedback.