Question 40
The Russians are filling supply depots outside Ukraine. If they staff MASH units, they will probably go.
One of the interesting conclusions that a citizen might make with all the Voters Rights/Rules controversy is the unspoken suggestion that the current Constitutional right to vote is actually beyond the government's ability to enforce. If that is true, why would new local rules make a difference?
49% of poll respondents say Biden is doing more to divide the country, and only 42% see him as unifying it. How do those 42% think?
And, regarding voter ID, a Monmouth poll this year found that 80 percent of Americans support voter ID requirements and only 18 percent oppose them. That’s not a new finding. In 2016, Gallup also found that 4 in 5 Americans support voter ID requirements, including 77 percent of nonwhite voters. An aside; who would oppose them?
“Black Americans, compared with any other racial group, have come the greatest distance, over some of the highest hurdles, in a shorter period of time. This unprecedented progress can be verified …if one were to total black earnings and consider black Americans a separate nation, he would find that, in 2008, they earned $726 billion.” That's the late Walter Williams.
I'm not sure that comparing that improvement, starting from so low, is actually fair but the success certainly is impressive.
Last year, via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the Cato Institute discovered that the FBI had opened an investigation into Concerned Women for America in the absence of any kind of criminal predicate. (The group's stated purpose is to "protect and promote Biblical values and Constitutional principles through prayer, education, and advocacy.")
Last year, via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the Cato Institute discovered that the FBI had opened an investigation into Concerned Women for America in the absence of any kind of criminal predicate. (The group's stated purpose is to "protect and promote Biblical values and Constitutional principles through prayer, education, and advocacy.")
Sounds like a rough group.
A Pigouvian tax, named after 1920 British economist Arthur C. Pigou, is a tax on a market transaction that creates a negative externality, or an additional cost, borne by individuals not directly involved in the transaction. Examples include tobacco taxes, sugar taxes, and carbon taxes.
A Pigouvian tax, named after 1920 British economist Arthur C. Pigou, is a tax on a market transaction that creates a negative externality, or an additional cost, borne by individuals not directly involved in the transaction. Examples include tobacco taxes, sugar taxes, and carbon taxes.
So you legislate the inside to control the outside.
Science and the economy share an aversion for direction and control. You can advance technology with focus and money but not knowledge or the random progress of innovation.
A short talk by Ridley on the Virus: Virus:https://twitter.com/i/status/1481715983693885440
A good summary of the universe of the Virus from O'Neil:
And what about the culture of freedom? Forget, for a moment, the way our legally guaranteed liberties were put on ice during this crisis. That was bad, no question. But a more injurious if sometimes intangible process was taking place alongside this temporary unwinding of our rights. The culture of freedom was undermined. The individual self-confidence and social trust that freedom depends upon, which freedom cannot exist without, was pummelled, day in, day out. We were educated to distrust others, to distrust ourselves. People are vectors of disease, the messaging went, not fellow citizens in the cause of the common good. Your friends, your neighbours, your colleagues, they will infect you. They’re bad for you, and you are bad for them. That was the propagandistic menace through which lockdown was maintained. Anyone who thinks that such weaponised distrust will not have consequences beyond the crisis itself is kidding themselves. You cannot sow suspicion, tear citizen from citizen and criminalise community life and then expect everything to be hunky-dory once you say: ‘Right, back to normal!’ The beast of fear is easy to unleash, but rather more difficult to heel.
Science and the economy share an aversion for direction and control. You can advance technology with focus and money but not knowledge or the random progress of innovation.
A short talk by Ridley on the Virus: Virus:https://twitter.com/i/status/1481715983693885440
A good summary of the universe of the Virus from O'Neil:
And what about the culture of freedom? Forget, for a moment, the way our legally guaranteed liberties were put on ice during this crisis. That was bad, no question. But a more injurious if sometimes intangible process was taking place alongside this temporary unwinding of our rights. The culture of freedom was undermined. The individual self-confidence and social trust that freedom depends upon, which freedom cannot exist without, was pummelled, day in, day out. We were educated to distrust others, to distrust ourselves. People are vectors of disease, the messaging went, not fellow citizens in the cause of the common good. Your friends, your neighbours, your colleagues, they will infect you. They’re bad for you, and you are bad for them. That was the propagandistic menace through which lockdown was maintained. Anyone who thinks that such weaponised distrust will not have consequences beyond the crisis itself is kidding themselves. You cannot sow suspicion, tear citizen from citizen and criminalise community life and then expect everything to be hunky-dory once you say: ‘Right, back to normal!’ The beast of fear is easy to unleash, but rather more difficult to heel.
I dunno. Small-arms fire?
No comments:
Post a Comment