Minimum Wage NPR Nonsense

When not running the chainsaw the other day, I listened to a liberal economist talk with the earnest voices of NPR about his work calculating the “right” minimum wage for California. What struck me was his softly spoken arrogance. Softly spoken, because he and his crowd just assume that an advanced degree in economics confers upon the holder an omniscient genius. If not immediately omniscient, he assumes the ability to take our grant money, keep researching, and become all knowing — at least about his field.

Such people treat “social sciences” — among which economics is a hybrid — as “hard science,” subject to experimentation, and hard results. But, where human behavior is concerned, it is not possible to know and quantify all of the motivations for behavior. Even if that were possible, then there is the moral question of what would be the “right” re-distribution of income — in every circumstance, in every lifetime.

Not knowable. Not quantifiable. Not subject to the same kind of scientific experimentation that assures us that gasoline + oxygen + a match will start a fire.

The false underlying assumption is that human beings are, after all, just matter, and human behavior is, therefore, the output from the various inputs. This is the “mechanistic” worldview that acknowledges no God. Life began accidentally, evolved according to natural forces only, and — here we are!

And, there is an economist, defending states’ raising the minimum wage and trying to convince all of us, that people like him ought to have the legal power to make the adjustments their “research” deems necessary.

The haughty assumption of power to take a person’s property is little more than theft. He certainly cannot judge what would be “right.” The program took callers. Some self-employed business operators called in. Some of these people struggle financially, with businesses that do not produce a fountain of diamonds. Suddenly, given the same number of workers, the payroll expense goes up $100,000 for the year. Would you notice your income taking a $100,000 hit? Maybe that represents your total annual income?

Economists like the NPR guest don’t care; you are just a casualty along the way to their manipulation of the rest of us. But, I am sure he will be applying for more grant money to study the effects of the raise to $15 per hour, and will report on whether it really should have been to $14.27 per hour — as if he can make such fine distinctions. So, one of the chief effects of the legislation is to enrich the governing class and its sycophant minion experts.

And, there’s this immediate impact.

This is why the government should have no say-so in how much any employer ought to have to pay any employee. One of his arguments was that, in California cities, the average wage at the time did not suffice to pay for the cost of living.

So, move somewhere more sensible. That’s what people have done before. Move, and let the market shortage of labor raise the wage for those who remain. Let the abusive city or state be humbled by the loss of its people who choose to more somewhere else.

And, leave the creative entrepreneur alone to spend profits as they see fit, not as some committee of experts sees fit.

Once again, a big NY Times Trump-Russia nothing

Here’s the dead giveaway: big accusation and then, instead of showing us what the Times puts out there as this damning email, it’s described “according to three people with knowledge of the email.”

Meh. I am unimpressed.

There is, however, this admission: “There is no evidence to suggest that the promised damaging information was related to Russian government computer hacking that led to the release of thousands of Democratic National Committee emails.”

And this one, exonerating Trump Jr. from “colluding” with the Russians [always implying, the Russian government]: “Mr. Trump acknowledged that he was interested in receiving damaging information about Mrs. Clinton, but gave no indication that he thought the lawyer might have been a Kremlin proxy.”

And, there is no evidence that the lawyer was a Kremlin proxy.

I have come to believe that there was no Russian government election mischief. I have no doubt they attempt to hack politicians’ correspondence, and into other government computers. I expect that; hope we are successfully doing the same. But, last week we saw the “17 intelligence agencies” boast plop to the floor. And, Clapper is their source for this: Clapper, infamous for assuring us that the NSA was not intercepting our phone calls. Perhaps the Russian government was trying to collect email and other documents to use against Hillary later on. But, then, it was not necessary, was it? Can’t blackmail someone whose party couldn’t get her elected.

Truth: 63 million fed-up voters colluded to put Donald Trump in the White House.

NYT: Weird. Deranged. Not to be believed.

Deadly Multiculturalism Myth

Austrian couple murdered by “radicalized” Islamic grocery delivery man. The Tunisian man had lived in Austria for 28 years. Years, not days. After 28 years, he murdered the Austrian elderly couple whose groceries he delivered, solely because they were infidels who — he inferred — did not like the modern wave of Islamic invasion.

The report says, “At this stage, he is thought to have acted alone and not under the umbrella of a formal organization.”

This is not true, of course; he acted under the influence of Islam, reading daily headlines about the deeds of ISIS, AQ, and so many more Islamic battle groups, regardless of the shifting leadership, names, and initials. Rather than simply returning to Tunisia, and instead of adopting the kind Austrians as his new countrymen, he resonated to the call of the New Caliphate. After 28 years.

Westerners, take heed. Liberals, you think you will crucify western civilization and it will die because of your mob riots and internal takeover of the government. You are wrong.

Western civilization is being slaughtered, and the Muslim jihad will not spare you just because you vote (D) and are all for LGBTQ+whatever people.

Democrat Billionaire Cronyism In Newsrooms

Democrats, if you are looking for some travesty to be outraged about today, here’s one that meets all but one of your narrow-minded criteria: your fellow liberal, billionaire mainstream media owners are looking to subvert the U.S. government to line their pockets.

The same people who would scream if the government sent $1 to a religious organization’s food-for-homeless program, are begging the government to subsidize the New York Times. How about a “no establishment…” clause for propaganda papers?

Just like Democrats’ “What happened to civility?” hypocrisy, yet another Democrat article of faith gets destroyed. You think Bezos and Buffett are looking out for you?

The NYT suffers from technological changes, but the NYT is also destroying itself by culturing the deadly germ of fake news purveyance. How about becoming known for your hardcore determination to find and tell the truth?

Funding Politically Malignant “Science”

Social science has gone way, way out there Left. This is obvious to most of us, but this article states the stats and raises the alarm. It is fair to say that — if the social sciences were ever sciences at all — now they are just a political movement. So, ultra-liberal college professors and the like, here is the question for you: Why should I, as a conservative taxpayer, fund your Marxist playground?

Expect the people to demand more from university trustees.

NYT Dying By Lying

Two stories today tell it all.

In one, persisting insanely with the Trump-Russia slanders, the NYT goes at it again, looking for Russians under every rug in Trump Tower. Never mind that the Russians would have preferred their sister Marxist in office.

In the other, Sarah Palin’s defamation suit against the Times goes forward. Public figures like Mrs. Palin get less protection from defamation than the rest of us. To award her damages, a jury must find that the NYT reporters and editors reported the false story just to hurt her. That’s a paraphrase of the legalese, but, basically, Mrs. Palin has to prove that they were just nasty people, using their nasty paper for their nasty purposes.

Looking like that’s exactly what they did.

New Yorkers, I like your city. It’s a fun place to visit. I’ll probably go back there. Not as safe as downtown Indianapolis, but the buildings are higher. Central Park is a wonder. But, you need to understand, for the rest of us, the city you may think is the center of the universe is a bizarre faraway place akin to a more-dangerous Disney World. We get to see places featured in movies: there’s the Brooklyn Bridge that Tarzan dove from! There’s the tram in that great Spiderman action scene! We get to stand at intersections made famous by Hollywood: there really is a 34th Street! We ride your trains — if they are running. We see the Statute of Liberty and we reflect on the site where Islamic infiltrators murdered thousands of us. We have a blast in New York City, and we go home. Because, your city is a massively over-urbanized mess where the rest of us would not live for anything. You can have it.

So, having tried to state some perspective on where we all our in the world, noting that we provincial people out here hold a different view from you provincial people inhabiting NYC, that circles me back to the NYT: to the rest of us, your paper is nothing. Well, it was something, and now the Marxism and madness of the reporters and editors is dismantling your paper. Your paper — a lightweight local rag more along the lines of the National Inquirer. It serves to provide mockery opportunity on Drudge Report.

I absolutely do not care what they write about Donald Trump.

Why our thinking is so messed up

Wondering why in the world liberal thinking could be so bizarre? It was planned that way. Great essay here, tracing current liberal insanity back to Communist propaganda campaign roots.

I like the suggested response for now, short of armed re-taking of our country from them: hound them in public life with ridicule and shunning.

In other words, boldly, bluntly, point out how wrong they are from “We are causing the earth to heat up to a crisp!” to “We need thousands more Islamic settlers here, and then things will be peaceful.”

There are lots more fallacies: “We can fix all problems through higher taxes and more debt, if you only give us your money and power.” “Only the police and military need guns.” “Police are hunting down black men.”

And, yes, the State Department is full of squishy Marxism.

Fake News, Fake Science

It takes “adjustments” made to data, to create global warming numbers. “Adjustments.” In other words, the “data” they run through their models is not data at all. Just go ahead, and make up some numbers and quit spending temperature collection money. If they were applying for a loan and reporting their income, that would be called “fraud.”

Ideally, to assure the statistical validity of data, the scientist would be very careful about data collection and protection. Instead — because the actual temperature measurements do not support global warming — they fudge the numbers.

Then, they pretend to be scientists and clamor for grant money.

From the report on the study:

“Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever – despite current claims of record setting warming,” according to a study published June 27 by two scientists and a veteran statistician.

Fake science. The MSM then report fake news about fake science.

About Judge Who Blocked California’s Magazine Ban

Judge Robert Benitez just overturned California’s statute not only banning the future banning the sale of magazines holding over 10 rounds, but also mandating that they be confiscated. I took a closer look at the judge who wrote that California’s statute is unconstitutional.

Judge Robert Benitez was appointed a federal judge by President George W. Bush. Elections have consequences. Thank you, President Bush and to all voters who chose him over his Democrat opponents. Not enough voters, and Judge Benitez would not have been there to stop the Communists of California’s Democrat Party.

Judge Benitez was born in Havana, Cuba in 1950. This means that his parents fled Castro’s communist takeover of the island. Perhaps Judge Benitez heard his parents recount the takeover of Cuba by the Communists. Perhaps because of them, he sees himself as guarding against the howling mob demanding dictatorial rule — in California.