Good Title

Joel Kotkin, one of my favorite writers (among so many) at the estimable City Journal, has described the “watermelon” (Green outside, Red inside) mindset perfectly:

Climate Stalinism

The Left’s fixation on climate change is cloaked in scientism, deploying computer models to create the illusion of certainty.  Ever more convinced of their role as planetary saviors, radical greens are increasingly intolerant of dissent or any questioning of their policy agenda.  They embrace a sort of “soft Stalinism,” driven by a determination to remake society, whether people want it or not—and their draconian views are penetrating the mainstream.  “Democracy,” a writer for Foreign Policy suggests, constitutes “the planet’s biggest enemy.”

And right there, in that last quote, is the whole game given away.  As Kotkin observes, most people outside the wealthy and academia are hugely skeptical of the whole “global warming / -cooling / climate change” movement because they have correctly deduced that regardless of all those laudable intentions to “save the planet”, the final costs of doing so would be catastrophic for their own livelihoods and prosperity, e.g.:

Imagine what will happen if a President Elizabeth Warren bans fracking in places like Texas, North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania;  in Texas alone, by some estimates, 1 million jobs would be lost.  Overall, according to a Chamber of Commerce report, a full ban would cost 14 million jobs—far more than the 8 million lost in the Great Recession.

Confronted with the abject failure of Communism everywhere it’s been put into practice, all that’s left for these would-be Stalinists is to try to bypass democracy and enforce their control over the population by diktat  — the very definition of Stalinism — using climate change as the fig-leaf.

I’ve written about this topic so often I’m starting to bore myself;  in Maskirovka (2017) and Proper Analysis (2019), to list but two of the more comprehensive posts, I outlined the eco-freaks’ mindset and the (failed) accounting behind the move to curb “greenhouse gases” respectively.  And of course, on any number of occasions I’ve debunked the junk statistics (which Kotkin derisively calls “scientism”) that these Marxists are using to try to give their loony theories some form of respectability.

Make no mistake:  these control freaks and their lickspittle fellow-travelers in the mainstream media are not going to quit.  We’ve already seen how has-been President Urkel’s EPA passed regulations which furthered the goals of the watermelons, stopping or delaying fracking, construction of new pipelines and so on.  Expect the same, or worse, from future Administrations run by Communists of the Warren / Sanders / [insert socialist candidate here]  ilk — which is why these bastards need to be implacably opposed at every turn, whether in local / state government, Congress or the White House.

Now, more than ever, is the time when we need to deny them ever getting their hands on the levers of power because once they do, it won’t just be your guns they come after:  it’ll be your cars, your jobs and your money.

And after they get into power via the much-maligned democratic system, don’t expect them allow themselves to be voted out of office too easily, either.

Under the Communists, the First Amendment will increasingly come under attack (“hate speech”), ballot boxes will get stuffed (by illegal immigrants), and regulations will be promulgated which bypass the legal system.  And if that little shit Beta O’Rourke did nothing else, he announced with absolute clarity these would-be Stalinists’ intentions towards the fourth  box.

I can’t put it any clearer than that.

In the past, I’ve treated Nov 19 (National Ammo Day) and April 15 (Buy A Gun Day) as two separate entities.  That time, I think, has passed.

 

Not that my Readers would need any reminders or encouragement, of course…

Capital Flight

I haven’t spoken at all about the situation in Hong Kong before, mostly because there wasn’t much to be said:  (somewhat) free colony opposes colonial power’s aggression, mayhem ensues.

Several people have wondered why the ChiComs haven’t sent in the tanks, à la Tienanmen Square, to crush the waves of protests, but the answer is simple:  Hong Kong provides a means whereby the ChiCom government can move money around the world without provoking too much notice because currency movement in Hong Kong is completely unregulated.  Crush the protests, make Hong Kong just another province (like, say, Jiangxi or Shandong) and that flexibility disappears.

It is, however, a two-edged sword.  What has transpired since the protests began is that capital (money owned by individuals, that is) has been pouring out of Hong Kong and flooding into Singapore — to name just one such destination — thence on to parts unknown.  Which means that if Beijing does finally send the tanks into Hong Kong, they’re likely to find, like Old Mother Hubbard, that the cupboard is bare.  And the flow of  money is truly a deluge:  if you study how many major corporations have been purchased by Chinese-sourced money over the past few months, you’d be amazed.  Even better is that by and large, the corporations being thus purchased are characterized by their cash flow operations — in other words, the Chinese billionaires, canny businessmen that they are, are not just parking their money under an offshore mattress, they’re putting that cash to work and generating a revenue stream.

The ChiComs may not only be running out of other people’s money — they may soon be running out of their own.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of totalitarians.


By the way, you may have noticed that the above is somewhat short of details;  that’s because if I say more, I could jeopardize my several sources who are not only well placed in the area, but who do a ton of business there too and are close to said wealthy people.  One can never be too careful when dealing with Commie bastards.

Heroic Murderous Bastards

Many years back we took the kids to see the Smithsonian in D.C., only to be ambushed by the pathetic, self-flagellating exhibit of the 1941 Japanese-American internment.

Surprise, surprise, they’ve done it again.  Apparently, they also love that rat bastard Commie Che Guevara:

Che would write tender poetry for his wife, and when he departed for the Congo in 1965, left tape recordings of his favorite romantic verse, including Pablo Neruda’s “Goodbye: Twenty Love Poems”. He also left a letter for his four children to be opened and read only in the case of his death.

Oh, how nice.  Here’s how the Left prefers to remember the murderous asshole:

…while my favorite Che pic is this one:

And I find it satisfyingly ironic that when faced with his own death at the hands of his captors, the sadistic prick cried like a little girl and begged for his life.

Sic semper tyrannis.

Marxist Economics

From POTUS-wannabe Pocahantas comes this policy proposal:

Democrat presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren wants to use federal excise taxes to reduce gun and ammunition sales.
Her gun control, made public in August on Medium, shows Warren believes the current ten percent excise tax on firearms is too low. She wants to raise that tax to 30 percent while increasing the tax on ammunition to 50 percent.
Because excise taxes are paid directly by the consumer–the taxes are added to the price of the goods–this means a $500 gun would immediately cost $515 and the price for a $20 box of ammo would immediately rise to $30.
Warren claims this taxation policy would “bring in new federal revenue” that can used for “gun violence prevention.” And she simultaneously suggests the tax would raise the price on guns and ammo to a level sufficient to stifle sales.

So using her “economics”  it would go something like this:

  • Currently, 1,000 rounds of 7.62x39mm (eeevil AK ammo) @ $300* yields $33 (@11%) in excise tax revenue

So therefore Madame Marxist suggests that with her plan:

  • 1,000 rounds of eeevil AK ammo @ $300 would yield $150 (@50%) in excise tax revenue… whoopieeeeee a net gain of $127 stolen taxed by the gummint.

Except of course that in the real world, AK ammo sales would fall to 100 rounds and yield only $15 in excise taxes (a 50% loss in revenue).  “Yay yay yay, but ammo sales have fallen!” she would pronounce.  But why  would sales fall so precipitously, she asks?  Because of the higher tax?

Because, you Commie coksucquer, during the months before you could enact this poxy tax increase, we AK owners would buy countless millions  of rounds of ammo, so that we’d have enough stored for the lean years — just like we did before the term of that other socialist asshole Barack Obama — and resume buying once an actual American became president again.

Ditto all those eeevil AR-15s and AK-47s you hate so much:  we’d buy so many before you could touch them, the gun factories would have to institute 365-day / 24-hour shifts just to cope with the demand.

I swear, I’m a huge fan of the First Amendment and I like to hear politicians spell out their proposed policies;  but I would also propose that anyone using idiotic economics theory (like the above) to create policy should be forced to wear a dunce cap and be beaten with wet spaghetti — just because of their naked stupidity.

And this phony bitch wants to run things?


* (example) Wolf Performance (WPA) is $304 / 1,000 at Cheaper Than Dirt at time of writing.

More Blue State Idiocy

NYGov “Fredo” Cuomo just ruled that the tides may not rise past a certain level in New York, ever again.

Just kidding.  Actually, he did this stupid thing (among so many  others):

The Cuomo administration is ordering National Grid to provide natural gas hookups to over 1,100 previously denied Brooklyn-based customers.  The Public Service Commission, the state body that licenses and oversees public utility companies, announced Friday that National Grid must provide service to customers or else face “millions of dollars in penalties.”  Previously, 1,157 customers had been denied service due to National Grid’s moratorium on all new gas hookups, announced in May.

Why did National Grid do this?

As you may recall, plans for a new natural gas pipeline from New Jersey were killed off by the state government under pressure from environmental activists.

In other words, there isn’t enough gas flowing into New York to provide service to new customers.  So what’s going to happen when gas demand starts to peak (as it usually does) in the bleak midwinter?

If they continue to hook up new customers, you’re going to see the backpressure in the lines start dropping during peak demand hours. If you look at the configuration of a typical gas furnace installation you’ll note that if the incoming gas pressure drops too low, the furnace will simply shut down for safety reasons until the pressure is restored. The same is true for many other appliances that use natural gas or propane.  Since peak demand typically hits during a severe cold snap in the winter, what Cuomo is ordering could result in a lot of people suddenly going without heat, most likely near the furthest extreme of the gas lines.

And New Yorkers are gonna start dying of cold and exposure.

Here’s my take:  Fuck ’em.

If the people of New York are going to continue to vote assholes like Cuomo into power year after year, decade after decade, I fail to see why I should have any sympathy when said assholes’ idiotic policies turn round and start biting the very people who voted them into power.

Foreign Entanglements

I’ve been wondering where Socialist POTUS-candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have been getting the foundation for their Lefty economic policy proposals because, frankly, neither strikes me as much of an intellectual heavyweight — Warren’s tokenist Harvard Law degree notwithstanding.

I wonder no more, and the headline to this article alone tells us why:

Two French economists from Berkeley advising Warren and Sanders on wealth tax

As the expression goes, it’s hard to see how you could fit much more annoying shit into a single sentence.  As for their economic philosophy, we have this:

There are competing explanations for the rise in inequality. Those on one side argue that wealth concentration is natural as a result of globalization, technology gains, and economic growth, which give enormous rewards to the smartest, innovative, and most hardworking people. Drastically increasing tax rates, they say, would discourage innovation and hurt the economy.
The other camp sees rising inequality as unfair, immoral, and a threat to society.
Saez and Zucman are firmly in the second camp.

Saez, 46, and Zucman, 32, are both originally from France and have each worked in the past with Thomas Piketty, the famous French economist whose research on wealth and income inequality made him a best-selling author.

Ah, jeez.  Piketty’s work is horribly slanted — it’s full of the Chomskyist research “methodology” so eloquently debunked by Bill Whittle, in that by taking a shovelful of beach sand and extracting a few black grains and discarding the rest, one can “prove” that all beaches contain not white, but black sand.  Ditto Piketty, whose oh-so data-driven proposals for taxing wealth (as opposed to just income) were initially latched onto by many European governments:

So far, at least 15 European countries have tried wealth taxes. All but four, though, have repealed them, most recently Saez’s and Zucman’s homeland of France.

As we saw recently with Frogland, when their dotgov imposed more and more restrictions on wealthy Frenchmen, capital and its owners simply fled the country for more tax-hospitable climes.

Which of course means that despite the documented failure of such policies, our own home-grown Lefties like Warren and Sanders are keen to implement them Over Here.

But that’s the Left for you:  never let facts get in the way of theory.  And the Marxist “problem” of “income inequality” has proven to be, well, insoluble short of outright Leninism — confiscation of wealth and murder of an entire economic class (the kulaks) being the hallmarks thereof.  (And for Lenin’s “kulaks”, read our modern-day Leninists’ “gun owners” as the disposable class, cf. Beto and Swalwell’s statements thereof.)

Which should tell you all you need to know about Warren and Sanders.  It’s not just your guns they’ll confiscate:  it’s your pension fund, your property and your livelihood as well.

Prove me wrong.