Not So Fast

So there’s this poll result which says the following:

53 percent of Californians are considering moving out of state due to the high cost of living.  Millennials are even more likely to flee the Golden State — 63 percent of them said they want to.

Seeing as everyone’s all okay with using personal data these days, how about this thought:

Cross-reference all those Californians who want to leave California with their voting records in the last presidential- and /or mid-term elections.  If they voted Democrat in either, then they can’t leave to live in a red state.  If they voted Democrat in both, then they have to stay where they are.

Sound fair?

Dire Consequences

…in this case, what happens when you elect a Socialist asshole vegan from New Jersey [some overlap]  to Congress:

Sen. Cory Booker said in an interview published Tuesday that the continuation of meat-eating will destroy the planet.

“We will destroy our planet unless we start figuring out a better way forward when it comes to our climate change and our environment,” he added.
Despite his apocalyptic claims, Mr. Booker cautioned that he doesn’t want to ban meat-eating or even preach to people.

Of course  you don’t, you lying fuckwit.  You’re a Socialist:  your kind has a collective orgasm by banning stuff and preaching to people because — wait for it — you know better than we do what’s good for us (and in this case, the planet).  And vegans are even worse.

Go choke on a celery stick, Spartacus, and the sooner the better.

Are We There Yet?

From Stephen Green:

Now we have this bit of non-thinking from studious non-thinker Alexandria Occasional-Cortex.
• NYC was going to give Amazon a three-billion dollar tax break; i.e., not collect that much in taxes from Amazon’s new NYC HQ2.
• Now that Amazon has cancelled HQ2, AOC believes that NYC can spend that money they never collected, from a business which isn’t coming to NYC, on NYC’s favorite progressive causes.

As BidnessMan said:  

And please note the date on his post… so much more stupid has flowed since then.

Time For A Little Assistance

…or, as some might call it, benign colonialism.  Looks like somebody’s about to get rich, real quickly:

On the coast of South America, just north of Brazil, lies the obscure and impoverished former British colony of Guyana, distantly remembered for a bizarre mass suicide four decades ago that begot the term “drinking the Kool-Aid.”
But today, the discovery of a massive trove of oil off its shores, including two finds just this week, put Guyana on the cusp of becoming one of the world’s wealthiest nations, in the league of petro-states like Qatar.

How big a trove?

Since 2016, Exxon has made a dozen discoveries in Guyana that now total more than 5 billion barrels of recoverable reserves. This is enormous — for perspective, the industry calls a 1-billion-barrel field a “supergiant.”

Needless to say, the Guyanese are totally unprepared for this:

Guyana has barely gotten organized for what, in other countries, has triggered a free-for-all of chaos, corruption and war.
The country has been in political turmoil since last year. In December, the Parliament ousted the government of President David Granger in a vote of no confidence. That set in motion new elections within 90 days, but the government is challenging the move in court.
No plan has been devised for how to begin to build and upgrade the country’s roads, communications and institutions. Neither is there a plan for building up the capital of Georgetown.
No one has determined how to both husband the wealth, and to share it.
Insanally said the reaction in Guyana runs the gamut: “There are people who are excited, people who are apprehensive, and people who think oil should be avoided as a curse altogether.”

Ordinarily, I’d suggest that as Exxon/Mobil is an American company, that they (or the U.S. or even British governments) should step in and lend a helping hand in the organization.  But that would lead to loud cries of “Colonialissssssss!” from the Usual Suspects.

My modest proposal, therefore, is a little different:  let Norway  step up to the plate and show Guyana what they did with, I should point out, a relatively much smaller income stream than the one under discussion.  After all, nobody associates Norway with eeeevil colonialism, and indeed, the “Scandinavian model” is applauded by all the neo- and actual socialists out there.  And let’s be honest, if nobody on the West gets involved, then the Venezuelans will.

It may fail, of course, because nobody can fuck up a Good Thing better than the socialists — except of course for the Third World, who could fuck up Paradise in an afternoon without any effort at all.

But it’s worth a try.  Come on, Norway:  uff da, or whatever.

The Danish Solution

I’ve spoken before about how Denmark, surely the most tolerant of countries, has decided to reinforce their traditional Scandi-values on the immigrant population they’ve allowed into their country.  Chief among these, of course, is the little 17-acre island where they’re going to be dumping the ingrates (i.e. criminals) amongst said groups:

Remote, not easily reachable or escapable… sounds a little like Alcatraz, dunnit?  Which is indeed the title of the linked article.

As I was reading the piece, I couldn’t help thinking that the Danes are onto a good thing — which, inevitably, led me into thinking about a similar solution on this side of the Atlantic.

Granted, our little criminal-immigrant problem is somewhat larger than Denmark’s, but then again, we have Catalina Island — all 75 square miles  of it, which could surely be put to better use than it is now.

Considering that California is in large part responsible for a lot of our current immigration problem, I see no reason why the .fedgov shouldn’t ummmm appropriate this real estate, kick out the rich farts and hippies who currently infest the place (most of whom, I suspect, support untrammeled immigration), and dump all the malcontent immigrants (of whatever origin) onto its admittedly-pretty shores.

Then mine the waters around it.