That's not what they said, of course, but that's the effect their idea to give "families" $300 per month per kid is going to have. $3600 per year, per child; and furthermore, the household income can be up to $100,000 per year (for married, filing jointly) before it starts to be pro-rated.
Not mentioned: where the money will come from to pay for all this.
* * *
The Bablon Bee has a good one today: "Nation Prepares To Celebrate 1st Anniversary Of Two Weeks To Flatten The Curve"
* * *
Hartford, Connecticut, wants to fine owners of storefront properties $100 per day if their buildings are empty. So if you own a building with a storefront, and there's no business in that storefront, you pay the city $100 per day that it's unoccupied.
I'm sure they could find a much more efficient way to drop downtown property values into the dirt. How about having the government set off a small thermonuclear device instead? Turn it into a nuclear test range; that'll quite literally crater property values in your town!
* * *
Ratings for Sunday's Big Sportsball Tourney hit an all-time low water mark. Big surprise; Americans used to like to watch football, but it's turned into "wokeball" and no one wants that.
Someone performed "the black national anthem" instead of "The Star Spangled Banner", and no one dared take a knee for that horseshit.
Then they wonder why people don't watch football.
Something else unsurprising: the "institutional left" has perfect control over whether or not antifa riots. Ace has the skinny but I'm not going to comment on it because it's totally 100% not at all even remotely surprising in the least.
I think the right needs to stop calling attention to leftist hypocrisy, in fact. If we must comment on it, it should be utterly without outrage: "Well, the left did X right after saying Y. Wow, how surprising that the left is being hypocritical again." Like that. They get off on our outrage, after all.
* * *
I don't know why people think Donald Trump will fail to be convicted of "high crime and misdemeanor" in connection with the article of impeachment stemming from the ginned-up events of January 6. The republican wing of the Gangster Party desperately wants to make sure he can't run in 2024; they imagine that the 2024 elections will be free and fair, rather than "fortified", and they want a fellow gangster to pretend to fight the democrats, rather than end up having to pretend to support someone who puts out mean tweets.
There will be enough votes to convict. Right now there are 56, but there will be 60 votes when the question is called. McConnel and Graham are two of them, I'd bet, and then they just need two more. Richard Shelby is the senior senator from Alabama, a republican, and he's announced he's not running for reelection, so he'll be a third. Right there we have 59 votes to convict, and finding the 60th is a matter of doing more research than I care to. I know someone will provide it, though, as surely as I know the sun will rise tomorrow.
I'd really like to return to the optimism I had prior to the 20th of January, when I thought--hoped!--something was going to happen that would put a stop to all this--but it's not going to happen, worse luck.
And so Kim du Toit and I are of a like mind on this point. The republican leadership is saying, "Well, we have to pull together now, because otherwise the democrats will win...." and my response is simply, "No, we don't."
Actually, a quote from Hillary Clinton, of all people, seems most apt: "At this point, what difference does it make?"
The democrats are working on making "election fortification" wholly legal and the official policy of the federal government. The only way republicans will win elections will be if the democrats let them.
That bill basically federalizes all elections in the USA and makes them the purview of the federal government. Further, it will enable every last possible way of cheating that you can think of. There won't be an "election day" any longer, but an election week or month or however long it takes the democrats to get to the "right" number of ballots (not votes but ballots) to "fortify" the elections in their favor.
The republicans are done as an independent political party, anyway. Assuming they were, after the Clinton administration. There's literally no reason to vote for them when they will not fight the democrats on any point, even to letting them do away with the filibuster. (And mark my words: they will, Mitch McConnell; they will.)
I do not have to--I will not--support the traitorous political party that refused to support their own President, and utterly ignored their oaths of office. When this useless passel of spineless weasels is out of power, then I might vote for their replacements. But as I said right after the thing happened, I will not vote for any republican who was in office on the date of that travesty.
Or this one.
* * *
How coincidental, that Joe Biden went to church with exactly the same people, in exactly the same clothes, and all of them just happened to sit in exactly the same locations, and were photographed from exactly the same angle, on two different occasions that were months apart. Believing in this staggeringly improbable coincidence is a lot easier than believing the election was fair.
* * *
I really haven't been able to process the article from Time about the election being "fortified". I don't have words to describe the sheer unmitigated gall, the galactic mass of chutzpah required for some leftist to write that fricking thing.
I imagined, today, going back in time and trying to explain to Dad about the 2020 election. He'd tell me I'm a lunatic! He wouldn't believe it was possible. Hell, I'm not sure I believe it's possible, and I'm living through it.
My thinking is that the purpose of that article is the left wing trying to get out in front of some big reveal, to spin it their way: "Trump was going to steal the election! We had to do something! We made sure his evil plans were countered by our own conspiracy to make sure the election came out as it should!"
But to the left, an election they win (using whatever means are necessary) is one that came out as it "should", and an election they lose was stolen from them, regardless of how honest it was.
I hope I'm right about my suspicions. As I said the day the thing came out, there are at least seventy-four million people who aren't reading that thing they way the left intended it to be read; and to that seventy-four million, it reads like the confession of a criminal.
Some folks have said that the National Guard remains in DC in at least brigade strength because the politicians are afraid that Americans will rise up in revolt. But as I alluded in my fictional example the other day, I don't think that if there are people who will resist the Biden regime, they are not stupid enough to engage a standing army in a straight-up fight, and the Guard is not suited to the kind of fight the feds are likely to get from any organization so inclined.
And things will have to get a lot worse before that point is reached, anyway.
* * *
A scathing indictment of my generation, and I could not agree more.
If you want to understand the Baby Boom generation you might start with this epigram: Extremism in the defense of vice is our liberty. I don't think anyone ever put it quite that way, but it could be a Boomer slogan. And it's part of unlocking the secrets to their generation and to many of the problems they have inflicted on America. Never has any generation in this country--or perhaps any other--so monopolized every aspect of society, for so long, and for such selfish ends while congratulating each other on their selfless righteousness.Our parents got us the Moon, and we were too busy freaking out over the breakup of the Beatles to care.
Tear apart the family, the churches, the charities, the schools, and everything else in your path; encourage mass drug use, promiscuous sex, and spend-spend-spend-materialism; even saddle your kids and grandkids with tens of trillions of dollars of debt to make sure you can keep the party going "Big Chill"-style, until the very last Boomers depart for the Strawberry fields where it's always 1967.
The 1970s were a drug-addled haze of hippies and anti-Americanism disguised as pacifism, and it was all Baby Boomers. The 1980s were called "the decade of greed" and gave us yuppies and "conspicuous consumption", and it was all Baby Boomers. The 1990s were the "family" decade when the Baby Boomers decided they needed kid-shaped accessories to make their lives complete. 2000s were the ritalin years, when their kids had to be drugged into a stupor because education had been so dumbed down, and the "participation awards" were invented because no Boomer liked the idea of his kid not getting a trophy. And it just went on like that, until now in the 2020s we're celebrating a year of "two weeks to flatten the curve", mainly because Baby Boomers are the ones who have the highest vulnerability to COVID-19.
I want to blockquote a comment from that post here, because there's a point I want to make.
I was born in 1952 so I guess that makes me one of the "early" boomers. Most of my childhood friends are decent, hard working Parents, Grandparents, and Great Grandparents. I don't see all the "whining" and other crap that's being spewed towards boomers. And that nice home that's unaffordable to the millenials - we didn't START OUT with a big nice house. We had what you call a STARTER home - usually two bedrooms and one bath. We could afford those on our wages and then when our jobs got better we bought bigger and better homes. The nitwits now think they should start out with a 3000 sqft $450,000 place. And the reason we could get by on one salary is because we LIVED WITHIN OUR MEANS! Of course we didn't have cable tv, cell phones, and high priced lattes! I guess it's the later boomers that are the spoiled ones because I surely don't see any of that crap with my friends and others who were in school with us!Specifically, "that nice home that's unaffordable to the millenials - we didn't START OUT with a big nice house," he says.
Okay, that guy was born in '52. That means he was 20 in 1972. In 1972, the median salary in the US was about $11,000. The house I live in, the bunker, was $20,000 in 1965. In 1972, that would be about $27,000. The bunker is not a particularly large house, but adequate for two adults and four kids. Not a "starter house" but not a mansion, either.
And it cost less than three times the median income.
Today, if you want to buy a house made to order, as this one was? You're looking at $500,000 easy at a time when the median income is $68,000. That means the house in question is about 7.35 times the medan income. If you go to a new development, which likely has cookie-cutter houses with "options" to make them look different, around here you're looking at about $300,000-$400,000 for a new home. Average 350k, that's 5.15x the median income. And those "starter houses"? In the better areas, those "starter houses" are torn down to make room for McMansions.
No, in terms of real income and wealth, housing is much more expensive than it was in the Boomers' heyday.
"We lived within our means!" Sure. At a time when you could go to college on a part-time salary, usually without needing any serious financial aid. Cars were relatively cheap compared to how they are now. Housing was cheaper. Food was cheaper. Everything cost less, in terms of adjusted dollars, than it does now, with very, very few exceptions.
WTF, you could have a baby with a week's stay in the hospital for under two grand, period--no insurance, no deductible, you just write the hospital a check for $2k and you're clear. These days, two grand barely even gets you in the door.
"We have more options today!" Certainly we do. We have a million luxuries we did not have in 1972--but things like cable TV and cell phones and computers are cheap because of the advancement of technology; they are not the cause of millennials being unable to afford to buy houses and have children. You mean to tell me that there were no hobbies in 1972 that people spent money on? Millennials typically have cell phones rather than landlines--you can't claim that they can't afford to buy houses because they have a service which costs them less per month, in adjusted dollars, than your wired landline did in 1972.
Again, I'm talking about my own generation, here. When I say "Boomers" I mean me, too. I don't have their attitudes but I'm a member of that generation all the same. But I got screwed over by them the same way the successive generations did.
And, by the way, look at those assholes. A cheerleading squad composed of hexagenarians. Good gravy, they have no clue at all.
* * *
Did you hear that David "Little Shitler" Hogg is starting a pillow company? It's a leftist answer to "My Pillow", of course, and it's going to be "sustainable" and "made with union labor" and "made in America" and a whole bunch of other plaudits, and they have just about everything lined up except for, uh, actually making the pillows.
They're expecting their cost-to-manufacture to be $20-$30 per pillow and they think their manufacturing subcontractor can make 65-ish per day. "The first few batches will sell out in minutes!"
You can reasonably expect these pillows to retail at about $300 apiece. "It's not cheap to manufacture. Our competitors pay $2-$3 wholesale - we are looking at 10x that, minimum. And that's before all other expenses."
Wow, that's an expensive pillow to manufacture.$200. How much does a pillow cost from, oh, Target?
Usually you are looking at a cost to price ratio of 10:1 or more. This will be a $200 pillow for sure.
Target advertises run-of-the-mill pillows at $10-$14 depending on size and fill. Let's just say $14; for $300 you can buy twenty pillows.
Over at MyPillow.com--the pillow that Little Shitler is trying to take on--a king size pillow is $70. For $300, you can buy four of them, and have money left over for tax and shipping. And actually, right now, the king size pillow is $45 with a promo code, so you can actually buy six pillows and have money left over.
What a bunch of dickheads.
It's kind of amazing, in a way.
I can't wait for him to start complaining about unions and environmental costs and all the other horseshit.
* * *
Today I very nearly suffered a complete motivational failure.
Monday was hard, not the least because it was such an early day and I went out in the snow to check that box and I blew down the driveway after work was over. On top of that, gut malf last night. So when the alarm went off, I hit "snooze" one too many times, and I very nearly called off.
Still, I gutted it up and went, and proceeded to have a pretty flat day, all told. Did not get much done (I did get a few things done) and it was by far and away out of proportion to the aggravation I put up with.
On my way home I stopped at the hardware store for more driveway salt. So far I've used 2 50-lb bags of the stuff. This was a mild winter, until suddenly it wasn't; this morning the snow was a bare few inches from being as high as the sundial in the back yard. We got close to freezing today, though, so it compacted a bit. Still, if we get the snow they say we're supposed to get, I think it'll make it to the same level it hit in 2014.
Anyway, this evening I managed to get home and make dinner, but over the past few hours I've started to feel really flat. *sigh*
* * *
So I wrote an email to the maintenance supervisor who wants that phone installed, with my findings from my expedition to that service box, and the infrastructure guy sends me an email telling me that I "got a lot of stuff wrong". Actually the first thing I heard was him telling me never to send an email like that without talking to him first, and I was wondering what email I'd written that would prompt that kind of response.
No, it was about the phone and the switch in the box. So I read the email and looked it over; and during the subsequent discussion it became crystal clear to me that everything I'd said in that email was 100% accurate. And I think it also became obvious to him, too, because he suddenly told me just to have them run a cable because that was the right way to do the job (ie his way).
I don't really care. It's not my money he's spending. I desperately wanted to point out to him that I had not, after all, gotten anything wrong at all...but I realized there was absolutely no percentage in doing that. All it would do is make him resentful at being corrected on that point, so I just let it stand. Fuck it.
The thing I find most galling about it, though, is that this is the same guy who gets pissed off at me if I involve him in stuff like this; I had previously tried to get him involved with the whole tangled mess in the first place, when the maintenance manager initially came to me with the request to have a phone put out there. He just fluffed that off.
I might, tomorrow, send him that email as a reminder; and then again I probably won't. Just let it stand as is, because even though he's not as perfect as he thinks he is, pointing it out to him won't do me any good.
* * *
At work I managed to score, in rapid succession, a Grainger catalog, and then a McMaster-Carr catalog. They were sent to the plant, not to any specific person but to a position (something like "production manager" or something) and they ended up in the trash can by the mailbox...so I snagged them.
It's amazing what these catalogs contain. You can buy a golf cart from the Grainger catalog, or a pool table--crazy things you wouldn't necessarily expect. McMaster-Carr seems to be the same, but I haven't finished leafing through it yet.
But when you look at this kind of thing, it kind of hits home just how big the economy is. I mean, every last product in that book is manufactured somewhere, in huge quantities.
* * *
Well, it's just about bedtime. Might as well toss this up.