* * *
There is nothing new about this. Rich Democrats never give very much money to charity, particularly Democrat politicians. Self-styled "champions of the poor and downtrodden" spend their days trying to force the taxpayer to shell out more money for welfare, so they feel as if they've done enough and don't need to spend any of their own money helping the less fortunate.
Besides, their supporters never, never, ever take them to task for it. The same voter who will excoriate a Republican for "only" donating ten percent of his income to charity will defend "Beto" O'Rourke's third of a percent as "generous". Or find another way to defend and/or excuse it.
Super-rich socialists like Bernie Sanders will tell you that they worked for their money and earned it.
So, in this one short interview, we've learned a few things from Sanders:But again, he claims to speak for the "poor and downtrodden", which is he doesn't feel it necessary to pay more in taxes than the law calls for, even as he demands that "the rich" should "pay their fair share". When he says that, he means the other rich people.1. He believes that providing an in-demand product or service justifies high incomes for those who produced it.That's quite a little capitalist manifesto from Sanders.
2. There is a connection between income earned and the total number of customers served.
3. If you do the same, you can be a millionaire, too.
* * *
Related: people bitching about the millions pledged to rebuild the Notre Dame cathedral. " If you're so concerned about the poor take that cell phone back to the store, get your money back for it, and cancel the service; then send that hundred bucks each month off to some charity." Exactly. Exactly.
* * *
Intel worries about hiring the right mix of ethnicities and genders, and the result is about what you would expect. As a company that manufactures integrated circuits, Intel needs to hire people who can design and fabricate integrated circuits. Most of the people in the world who are the best at designing and manufacturing integrated circuits are white and asian males. When you hire by qualifications, rather than by any other criteria, you end up with a mostly white and asian male workforce, and then people get on your case because you are not hiring enough (any) lesbians of color. "You don't have enough women, blacks, or hispanics! You don't have any transsexuals! You don't have any lesbians!" The fact is irrelevant that finding any qualified applicants is already an extremely difficult prospect, because designing high-performance microcircuitry is not something you can do in a garage with hand tools.
At Intel, though, divrsity comes first--and so Intel is choking on 10nm processes at a time when everyone else is moving to 5nm.
* * *
At that last link, the fifth comment:
Took my sister and nephew to Kennedy Soace Center yesterday.(they wanted to go) it is like an aging failed theme park with no rides. All you can see is the hollow husks of rockets that we used to go into space with. Now, they run movies about when we did it, as opposed to actually doing it. It was like being in one of thos apocalyptic movies were the survivors scratch out a living in the ruins of their forefathers. All I came away with is bitterness, and a burning hatred for progressive politicians.I was there in 1976. That's what it felt like then, too: "This is what we used to be able to do. But hey! In five years we might get something else flying!" In 1976 it was the Space Shuttle. These days it's Antares or whatever the hell it is they're trying to get flying now, but which keeps running into delays and overruns.
The comments at that article are, in fact, full of great points.
* * *
Sure, just spend a thousand dollars on a desk chair. Why not? Actually I wouldn't mind getting one of those Unicomp keyboards ($94) but a thousand dollars for a desk chair seems excessive.
The last chair I had cost $150 and the one before that was around $120. This one is a $60 Ikea chair that has probably already passed its retirement age. I need a new chair, definitely...but I am not spending any $1,000 on one. Shit.
* * *
Not discussed: possible other reasons those 100,000 people could die. A scaremongering report says that 100,000 people die "prematurely" per year because of "fine particulate emissions" (FPE). As far as I could tell from my admittedly brief run-through, it does not say why they die (such as, "FPE causes cancer/emphysema/the galloping doots") but merely looks at the number of deaths versus the FPE pollutants measured in 2011.
If you are a person of average health who does not smoke, your immune system should be more than enough to keep FPE from hurting you. We evolved in a dirty environment, one full of dust and grit and pollen, and later ash and soot. A fiver says that hundred thousand people had other health issues that contributed to their deaths. "We estimate that anthropogenic PM2.5 was responsible for 107,000 premature deaths in 2011," the thing says, but it does not appear to control for any factors such as tobacco use, asthma, emphysema, age, cardiovascular condition--none of that. Just, "Hey! We figured that 107,000 people died prematurely, so you need to give up your SUV and central heating and go freeze to death in a cave somewhere."
* * *
Socialism always has the same end result. The left insists that Cuba is dirt poor because of the trade embargo. Of course that's 100% bullshit; the trade embargo was only with the United States. Prior to Obama's lifting of the embargo, people from other countries were free to go to Cuba. Germany, England, France, Italy, Mexico, Canada, Spain--in fact, all of the countries of the world save the US--all of them had no restrictions on trade or tourism with Cuba.
In 1993 a friend of mine was visited by relatives from Germany. They had, as part of their itinerary, gone to Cuba before they came to the US. That surprised me, until I remembered the embargo only applies to American citizens and companies.
The entire rest of the world could trade with them, and yet Cuba was (and is) dirt poor.
Why do you suppose that is?
I'll tell you one thing: it is not because of the trade embargo.
* * *
THIS is SATIRE.
* * *
So, the "drag queens reading to children at libraries" thing has resulted in charged and/or convicted sexual predators being allowed near children. "...as though the fact that a man who dresses like a woman doesn't throw up enough red flags."
All such considerations are secondary to making sure that tolerance of transsexuals is maintained!!!!!
* * *
LOL "Aw lawd he comin'!" LOL LOL
* * *
Oh well. At least tomorrow is Friday.