Tag: Government

Automotive Control

Drive Time, Gummint, Nannies

Over the past couple years, I’ve taken a lot of guff from people when I’ve stated my implacable hostility towards the Internet Of Things [spit]  intruding on my private life, and specifically when it comes to my car.

“Oh but Kim,”  the response comes, “think of the convenience of not having to drive!” , etc. etc.  My retort to giving up control of one’s vehicle is usually, “Giving up control to whom, exactly?”

Well, here’s a little example of what I could see was coming down the pike:

The bipartisan infrastructure bill includes a provision that would require auto manufacturers to equip “advanced alcohol monitoring systems” in all new cars.
Buried in the massive proposal—which is already longer than 2,700 pages—is a section titled, “ADVANCED IMPAIRED DRIVING TECHNOLOGY,” which mandates new vehicles include “a system that … passively and accurately detect[s] whether the blood alcohol concentration of a driver of a motor vehicle is equal to or greater than the blood alcohol concentration” of .08, in which case the system would “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation.” Automobile manufacturers would have a three-year grace period to comply with the regulation.

Here’s another prognosis to this already-ghastly invasion of our privacy:  it won’t stop at “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation”.   Given the all-pervasive network of operations from Skynet, what is to stop the government (federal, state, local or a combination thereof) from levying a fine for drunken driving (to be deducted automatically from your bank account), as well as sending your car’s GPS coordinates to Officer Friendly at Hometown P.D.?

Tell me I’m exaggerating or overstating the thing, I dare you.

But it’s all for our own good, isn’t it?  So why would I be so upset about this?  After all, seatbelt mandates have saved countless lives, so why not apply the same rationale for car immobilization and punishment for intoxicated driving?

By all means, let’s all get upset when the government suggests implanting computer chips into guns so that they can be controlled by law enforcement during times of emergency — “That’s like totally beyond the pale, dude.”

This car nonsense is precisely the same thing, being suggested for all the same reasons.

I foresee a rush towards the purchase of older cars which don’t contain computers of any description — until, of course, the government outlaws ownership thereof.

Once again:  tell me I’m exaggerating or overstating the thing, I dare you.

No Kidding

Health, Politics

Via Insty:

Read my lips: We’re not going back to masks and lockdowns again

Thankfully I live in Texas, where the state government isn’t entirely run by power-hungry assholes like those in California and New York, to name but two.  Which means that this mask foolishness is unlikely to get any traction except by members of the Perpetually Fearful Set, who are concentrated in Democrat hell-holes like Austin and suburban north Dallas.   The mommies shopping at Trader Joe can wear a dozen masks at a time for all I care;  I’ll just shop in my normal manner.  (And if Trader Joe starts that “only ten people in the store at a time” nonsense, I’ll shop elsewhere until they come to their senses.)

As for lockdowns… forget it.  The boys at Meal Team Six can stay home playing Medal Of Honor or working in the JiffyLube grease pit.

Outcomes

CRT, Wokism

As I’ve often said, Marxism/Socialism/[whatever the Left calls it now] has always ignored the consequences of their stupid “philosophy in favor of its intentions.

Here’s a very interesting take on the whole CRT business, from someone who’s had to live with its consequences for over a decade:

The overarching truth is that an idea pushed South Africa to the brink. You guys know this idea, because it animates the sermons of critical race theorists trying to force you to take the knee and atone for your supposed sins. I am going to call it the Beautiful Idea, because it is beautiful in a way — but also dangerous.
The Beautiful Idea holds that all humans are born with identical gifts and should turn out to be clones of one another in a just society. Conversely, any situation in which disparity survives is in itself proof of injustice. This is the line promoted by CRT pundit Ibram X. Kendi, who blames all racial disparities on racist policies.

Read it all.

Then there’s this:

And here’s the ultimate outcome of such a philosophy:

And there ya go.  Now apply that to schools, universities, government departments, corporations and just about every other institution, and consider the inevitable outcomes.  To the Leftists, though, the outcomes are irrelevant, as long as the policies are noble and virtuous.

Death To The Death Tax

Taxes and Theft

Leaving aside the universally-loathed (by taxpayers) the tax on wages (misnamed the “income” tax), the most unpopular piece of governmental theft is that of the inheritance tax.  And with good reason.

In the not-too-distant past, inheritance taxes were the only stream of tax revenue which actually cost more to collect than the revenue thus obtained.  (In 2005, as I recall, the cost of collection per dollar was $1.07, and prior to that it went as high as $1.13, before the IRS — with the willing aid of Congress — “improved” their tax collection ratio simply by disallowing many of the cutouts and exceptions.)

But what’s interesting about these taxes is that they were hated even by Americans who would never pay a dime after their parents passed away — the implicit unfairness of the tax’s rationale that the inheritor never “earned” that inheritance, and therefore it was “unfair” and should be redistributed confiscated by the State, was understood by everyone to be total bullshit (born of pure Socialist wealth envy).

Now try this little piece of bastardy, courtesy of President Braindead’s handlers:

Democrats in Congress have made no secret of their desire to slip all sorts of tax hikes into the various massive legislative packages that have thus far (thankfully) remained bogged down in the Senate. They would like to see a significant increase in the gas tax to pay for the liberal wish list known as “infrastructure.” There’s also a continued push for a so-called “wealth tax” on people who are considered by the Dems’ socialist wing to have “too much money.” But one of the most controversial of these plans is the call to greatly expand the inheritance tax, more correctly known as the death tax. However, describing it as either an expansion or an increase isn’t accurate. The New York Post took a look at the plan this week and revealed that what they really want to do is create an entirely new category of taxation for the estates of the deceased, treating the transfer of assets to survivors as a capital gains event.

And it gets better:

For those of you who are thinking that this is “somebody else’s problem” because it only applies to the rich and famous, think again. If you’ve ever read Thomas Stanley’s 2010 bestseller, “The Millionaire Next Door,” you probably understand how this works. If you work throughout most of your life, put money away into any sort of retirement plans, and own your own home, you can break the millionaire barrier without too much trouble by the time you are in your sixties. No, not everyone in the middle class manages it, but this applies to a lot more people than you might think.
If you are fortunate enough to live for a very long time after you retire, you may burn through a fair bit of that wealth. But if you unfortunately only make it to somewhere around the national American average life expectancy, in your mid-70s or even late-60s, you could still be sitting on a tidy sum to help your family along. But nearly 80% of that wealth would evaporate under Biden’s new scheme.

And to reiterate:

Good luck figuring out the arguments in favor of a system of governmental robbery like this. Aside from envy and a desire to eat the rich or “redistribute” everything, there aren’t many. But one of the most compelling arguments  against this capital gains concept is that we would be treating wealth held in individual estates the same as income. And all of that money and value  has already been taxed. Every estate tax represents a case of double taxation on the same income via renaming the fingers coming to pick your pockets. Don’t let them get away with it. Estate taxes should be repealed, not effectively doubled.

This would be my suggestion to stop them getting away with this new kind of theft, but no doubt someone will have a problem with it.