You can vote your way into socialism, but it can very difficult to vote your way out of it.
Impossible to vote your way out of socialism. You have to shoot your way out
“I speak, of course, of the humble earthworm.”
Chat GPT: Write a speech about an earthworm in a Churchillian style:
Title: “The Humble Earthworm: Guardian of Our Soil”
Ladies and gentlemen,
We stand here today, not to speak of grand battles or heroic deeds, but to honor a creature often overlooked in the pages of history. It does not wear a crown nor command armies, but it toils silently beneath our feet, an unsung hero in the grand theater of life. I speak, of course, of the humble earthworm.
In the dark recesses of the soil, where the sun’s rays do not venture, this creature wages a tireless campaign, turning barren earth into fertile land. It is a laborer of the soil, a steadfast sentinel in the struggle for life, enriching the ground so that the seeds of tomorrow may find purchase and grow strong.
Let us consider, for a moment, the earthworm’s role in the grand design of nature. It is a creature of persistence, burrowing through the earth, aerating the soil, and creating channels through which water and life-giving nutrients may flow. It transforms decaying matter into rich humus, the very lifeblood of the earth. Without it, our fields would be barren, our crops sparse, and our world a poorer place.
The earthworm does not ask for recognition; it seeks no reward. It works in the shadows, often unseen, yet its impact is felt across the land. It is a reminder, a living testament, that even the smallest among us can make a profound difference. For in the earthworm, we find a reflection of our own endeavors—the quiet, persistent work that builds nations, strengthens communities, and nurtures the future.
In the grand tapestry of life, we must not forget those who labor in the background, whose contributions, though humble, are the very foundation upon which all else stands. The earthworm teaches us that greatness is not measured by size or power, but by the quiet, relentless pursuit of purpose.
So let us honor this modest creature, this guardian of the soil. For in its simplicity, it embodies the spirit of resilience, of dedication, and of the quiet strength that sustains the world. As we tread upon the earth, let us remember the unseen worker below, and be inspired by its example to fulfill our own duties with equal diligence and care.
Thank you.
Not bad.
There is a big risk in using a term like “The left believes“. The entire modus operandi of the left in all its forms is that of agitprop.
There can be a large gulf between what they assert and what they actually believe.
If they actually believed much of what they assert, they’d be far more willing to openly discuss and debate it.
That is an interesting chart of UK voting, showing that the higher the family income the more likely the Brit was to vote for Labour.
It may be that what this reflects is the total distortion of the English economy. People who work for the UK government or one of its dependencies are likely being paid more than those who work in what remains of private industry in that dismal country. It would be quite rational for an individual in a well-paid government or para-government slot to vote for Labour. Self-defeating in the longer term, of course. But who cares about the longer term?
Labour does not represent labor any more than the current Democrats do in the US. I had a chart showing how the rich has shifted to (and purchased) the Dems but cannot find it at the moment. Marxism was never about economics anyway. It was always about power, and still is. Orwell made that point in “1984”, during a period he was still atavistically socialist, but coming to his senses.
This reminds me of a favorite graph I don’t think I’ve posted yet. The heat map depicts affinity, displayed as a function of distance from oneself. The conservatives at left have strong affinity for those closest to themselves — family, friends, neighbors. “Liberals” save their ardor for those far away - foreigners, refugees, abstract ‘others’. ‘No human is illegal’, etc. In the context of evolution, “liberal” proclivities are maladaptive. In the context of society, they express mental illness and delusion.
These two groups are fundamentally different, and like oil and water cannot remain mixed.
What is the other dimension used? Distance from oneself is one dimension, but the graph is showing more than one dimension.
I found the paper; see Here. Based on a quick read of the paper and the supplementary material, I don’t see a clear explanation for the azimuthal spread. I had assumed it was a measure of variability and that the orientation of the primary radial was arbitrary, and don’t see anything to contradict that.
Inflation went way up as soon as Biden took office, of course, but there’s another corner in the graph around May or June of 2022. The effective Fed funds rate went from 0.33% to 1.21% between April and June of that year, which likely accounts for the decline in the inflation rate.
A more effective way to curb inflation more quickly would have been to raise capital reserve requirements for banks, currently it is zero percent (another legacy of covid).
That would reduce lending by banks. But it would not address the real issue – what are the funds that are lent spent upon?
The need is to invest (i.e., patient long-term returns) in the real economy – mines, factories, infrastructure, R&D, etc. Instead, in this financialized economy, funds lent by banks get spent on get-rich-quick speculation or other forms of financial distortion (e.g. stock buy-backs).
The real need is to roll back excessive regulation, force large numbers of regulators back into the productive real economy, and put Big Law on a short leash. Unfortunately, that cannot happen until after the Collapse.
I agree with you about investing and eliminating regulations especially regulations. My point about reducing lending is about curbing inflation. Increasing capital reserves is more effective than increasing interest rates.
Chicago and Detroit
Minneapolis and DC are not safe cities
Same goes for Philadelphia and New Orleans
added: Kroger (grocery) margins
edit: Grocery store prices are a reliable gauge (not gouge) for inflation because the profit margins are less than 3 percent. Credit card fees are about 3 percent so they probably break even or lose money on CC transactions.
I took a quick look at these data. The average Democrat (D) percentage is 68, with a standard deviation of 13, while for Republicans (R) the numbers are 39 and 18. But there are two obvious outliers: Chicago and Detroit. Without them, the D mean (standard deviation) is 72 (7) and the R values are 43 (15). Both numbers are starkly different.
The scatterplot of D vs. R suggests a weak correlation but that vanishes once the two outliers are removed (R2=0.08, not shown):
Not only do Ds see these cities as safe but also they do not see much difference among the cities (once Chicago and Detroit are excluded). The next scatterplot presents D vs. the D-R difference, without the two outliers. There is no correlation.
The plot of R vs. D-R has a significant correlation, however, showing this is driving the differences. The most dramatic example of the partisan difference is in the perceptions of Seattle safety. The D score (85%) is the highest among all the cities listed, while the R score (42%) is close to the mean R response. Personally, I would judge Seattle as both relatively unsafe and probably a little unsafer than average.
So, it seems Democrats are much more likely to be blind to crime in these large (and largely D-run) cities. I credit the Kool-Aid they drink in mass quantities. Republicans are more likely to see crime as a problem and to see some as worse than others.
A lot of Democrats consider smash and grab, carjackings, shoplifting and other property crimes to be ‘victim-less’, a combination of Stockholm syndrome and willful ignorance/blindness
added: