Collaborations

 

Collaborations

Are the failed efforts at political-cultural affiliations, as exemplified by the Budweiser, Target and Dodgers fiascos, different from the successful collaborations and identification that the Pillow Person and Relief Factor has forged with the Right?

Hyenas Shopping

 

Hyenas Shopping


Nearly 40 pupils have been killed at a school in western Uganda by rebels linked to the Islamic State group (IS). Five militants attacked the Lhubiriha secondary school in Mpondwe at around 23:30 (20:30 GMT) on Friday. They entered dormitories, setting fire and using machetes to kill and maim the pupils, officials said.

The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF) - based in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) - have been blamed and a manhunt is under way. Uganda's information minister said 37 students were confirmed to have been killed but did not give their ages. Twenty of them were attacked with machetes and 17 of them burned to death, Chris Baryomunsi told the BBC. Survivors said the rebels threw a bomb into the dormitory after the machete attack. It is not clear if this resulted in a fire in the building which was reported earlier.

In June 1998, 80 students were burnt to death in their dormitories in an ADF attack on Kichwamba Technical Institute near the border of DRC. More than 100 students were abducted.

If this doesn't remind you of the Heroes of Beslan, it should.

On September 1, 2004, armed Chechen rebels took approximately 1,200 children and adult hostage at a school in Beslan, North Ossetia, Russia, at approximately 9 a.m. local time.

The siege ended on September 3, 2004, with more than 330 killed, including 186 children, and more than 700 people wounded.These people always talk in high ideals but, whenever possible, attack the most innocent, the most vulnerable, the least armed, and strangely, those with almost no input to whatever the struggle is said to be. Schools, nunneries, churches, hospitals--not hunting grounds because scavengers are not hunters.
(some from BBC article)

Sat Stats/NYC Arrests

NYC Arrests

Some numbers on the debate over crime, misdemeanors, and bail in New York, from Tabarroc.

On average, each arrested person had 3.2 prior felony arrests and 5 prior misdemeanor arrests.

The people who do not make bail are on average more dangerous—they have twice as many arrests and twice as many convictions on average as those who are released. For example, the average defendant who doesn’t make bail has 6 previous felony arrests and 4 previous failures to appear.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics found that the average person sent to state prison in 2014 had 10.3 previous arrests (median 8) and 4.3 previous convictions (median 3)!

(These are not including the arrest and conviction that sent them to jail.)

Nearly a third of all shoplifting arrests in New York City last year involved just 327 people, the police said. Collectively, they were arrested and rearrested more than 6,000 times, Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell said. Some engage in shoplifting as a trade, while others are driven by addiction or mental illness; the police did not identify the 327 people in the analysis.

The way bail reformers like to frame the issue of eliminating cash bail is to point to a misdemeanor case and say ‘look this ordinary person was denied bail because of a misdemeanor!’ In fact, what is going on is that judges are dealing with serial offenders–they are setting high bail rates for those who have already failed to appear on multiple previous misdemeanor charges. Eliminating cash bail for misdemeanors is one of those policies which sounds reasonable on its face but in practice it leads to shoplifters who have already been arrested 20 times being arrested and released again. The issue of “unaffordable bail” is also misleading. Judges set high bail amounts for a reason!

Mean Regression

Mean Regression

The Golden Knights won the Stanley Cup going away. They final game was a blowout. The two final teams played well to get to the finals, but it looked as if the Panthers were just exhausted with the effort.

Neither team was supposed to be there; the teams with the great players --Toronto, Edmonton, Colorado--never came close. So, the playoffs could not showcase the games stars. Such is the advantage--and price --of parity.

Hockey has reached parity. Every team is limited to spending the same amount every year; more money for superstars means less for the other players. So, some teams are top-heavy, others homogenous. And any team can beat any other. The competition will be tough and close.

But, as with all socialism, no brilliance.

American Poverty

American Poverty

Matthew Desmond’s argument, that the last 50 years have seen no progress in America against poverty, is based on the official government measure of poverty. It is true that the official poverty rate has fluctuated between 10 and 15 percent for the past 50 years.

But there’s a problem with that interpretation of the data. “It’s for a very simple reason that serious researchers have known for a very long time: The official poverty measure does not include much of the government assistance,” Corinth said. “If you were to include all the benefits we provide, you get a much different picture of poverty.”

Corinth and other researchers have calculated the “full-income poverty rate,” which includes all the government assistance poor people receive. Where the official poverty rate was 10.5 percent in 2019, the full-income poverty rate was 1.6 percent. The full-income poverty rate was around 19 percent in 1963, around 7 percent 20 years later, and gradually declining to 1.6 percent since then — a long-running decline, contrary to Desmond’s portrayal.

Scott Winship, director of AEI’s Center of Opportunity and Social Mobility, illustrated the absurdity of Desmond’s use of the official poverty number by running it in reverse. He said, “If you use today’s official poverty line, the poverty rate in 1963 would have been 70 percent.”

Captains of Our Souls

 

 

Captains of Our Souls

US Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy released an advisory recently addressing the “epidemic of loneliness and isolation” affecting the country and laying out a framework for a “National Strategy to Advance Social Connection.”

These are the same people who shut the country down during COVID. The center of repression and limits is going to free us.

Government attracts people the same way fire departments attract arsonists.

But this is a grand topic, the subject of countless studies and examinations by the renowned. The Lonely Crowd, Civilizations and its Discontents, Lear and every other single thing written about the elderly. But Fireman Vivek is not daunted. His heart is pure, and he has immense power to do good.

And, fortunately, the government has communities shovel-ready; he already has the rigid identity framework to assign people to so they can find friends.

The Trump Case

 

The Trump Case

This Trump case is revealing. The accusations are specific and look to be dangerous for him.

There are some prominent questions.

First, does the government and the press handle these questions evenly from one political view to another. No. The government and the press have a political bias that will influence how this is managed. Leaks to the NYT are heroic. Hilary and Hunter were not handled the same way as Trump. Do these inconsistencies invalidate the charges? In themselves, I don't see how. They can be unfairly lenient and unfairly harsh, but the question is, is the complaint against Trump legitimate? Fairness is a reasonable question, but a separate one.

Second, this was avoidable. Why did Trump, an important man and important to the country, allow this to happen?

Three, his handling of people is simple tribalism. Bill Barr, one of the bright spots of his administration and an impressive guy, was giving an honest legal opinion and said he thought Trump was very vulnerable if just 1/3 of the charges were true. Trump immediately called him a 'low life,' a 'coward,' who deserved being fired. Low life? Coward? And Barr resigned; he wasn't fired. Opinions in this culture have to be viewed in the context of loyalty. Objectivity is secondary.

Four, this will create a confidence disaster in this country. This was originally a civil case that matured into a criminal case. Every president goes through this silly debate when he leaves office. On the assumption that Trump is wrong here, why would the government be so aggressive about it? Why not just walk away, as they do all the time with others? Will the disruption be worth it?