In his debate with Kamala Harris, Donald Trump discussed allegations that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio are eating the residents’ household pets:
<blushing> I'm sure I have no idea of what you are referring to. . .
In my old office, which I shared with what felt like two dozen colleagues (no joke, we hade about one square yard of floor/desk each if all where present), I had a drawing of a man giving a talk, the podium carrying a poster saying "Seminar on freedom of speech", and the man calling out: "You there at the back, shut up!".
Several of my politically red (European red) colleagues complained about it.
Well, my FFFFG complained until an office colleague was forced to remove a very racy poster from his office. That I didn't think over-policing, but I disagreed with her insistence that guys in firehouses etc. should not be permitted to post racy and racier posters and calendars in their locker spaces. My feeling is that if women wish to work in undeniably hyper-masculine environments they should be prepared to deal with (legal, non-contact) horsefoolery [invented but suitable word].
thank you, Tardigrade. the final move probably still a year away, because of necessary renovations in the new place and various complications with selling the old place, but I hope to have my office moved into the new house in the coming months.
Did they not learn from laughing at him when he correctly warned they were too dependent on Russian gas? Whoever runs these social media accounts is taking taxpayer funds to get ratio’d. If only those burns could help fuel the factories instead of deindustrializing Europe back to the Stone Age…
Germany was only too dependent on Russian gas once Biden chose to blow up the pipeline. Until then it was a fair and mutually beneficial free trade relationship. A win-win proposition.
German deindustrialization and economic recession is the point. Joe Biden did that while Scholz looked on and said nothing. Germany's future has been sold out by the traffic light coalition. 1 million dead Ukrainians all just to save face for weak politicians.
Fair enough. The point I’m making is simply that it worked until it didn’t seems to prove Trump’s point. They were over reliant on Russian energy, for whatever reason. As US president he likely had some insight as to just how risky it was.
Doubtful Trump had any insight that Biden would later blow up the pipeline. Neither did Scholz.
Trump was saying that the U.S. is paying to defend Europe from Russia, so Europe should buy gas from the U.S. rather than Russia. A reasonable transactional argument.
The German gas deal with Russia was good for both countries. Low price and high volume. All countries that don't produce oil and gas are dependent on those that do.
Russian gas still flows through Ukraine to Europe. Despite all of the vitriol and sanctions. Just not through Nordstream.
The power that the U.S. wields over European countries is absurd. But they seem to be willing to do the U.S. bidding rather than pay the high cost for defense. Now that their economy has been trashed, Von der Leyen wants to spend heavily on a united Europe defense. Like all bureaucrats, she is always seeking to expand her government. But she is seeking the worst of both worlds. Much higher costs for defense while remaining under U.S. hegemony.
And no one is threatening to attack Europe. Least of all Russia, who only wants free trade with Europe. So there is really no point for Europe to spend heavily on defense. Except to keep alive the narrative that Russia is a threat to invade Europe. Which has always been a lie. Putin has no reason to threaten the people who would be his best customers.
Probably too powerful US interests like Cargill want yet more land for industrial farming/agribusiness. (Even though people like Joel Salatin have shown that regenerative farming yields more food per hectare.)
About a year ago I also read that some people in the USA want certain Ukrainian land for some large industrial waste dumps. Why pollute your own country when you can pollute others?
Exactly. Poorest comment of Yuri sofar. Germany wasn't too dependent upon anyone or anything, only too much of a coward, idiot and vasal acting against its own interests whenever the US demands..
Your argument is that a leash is acceptable as long as it has slack in it. But that is always determined by the person holding the leash, never the person held by it.
It might be news to you, but no country in Europe bar Norway is not dependent on energy imports. Many people in Germany now prefer the reliable, voluntary and mutually beneficial Russian energy 'leash' over the violently forced, much tighter and much more expensive American one.
Unless I make several unflattering assumptions about your character, I can see no sense whatsoever in your analogy. Russia has never behaved like a business with a leash-hold on its customers. The USA on the other hand behaves like a piracy both in selling and acquiring its 'treasure'.
Don't forgetthe previous case (2018) of the UN German delegation's open snickering and laughter when Trump called out their energy dependency on Russia in a speech to general assembly.
Praying we don’t continue to follow Germany’s path to deindustrialize our nation, why can’t we absorb all sorts of lessons being taught across the pond about how foolhardy and detrimental following the Green Utopia actually is and avoid following in their footsteps? Because all our governments have sold us out for money.
…and our MEDIA will not tell the truth about Europe. We could learn a LOT about what NOT to do, starting with mass illegal immigration. Europe is a hellhole because of that one massive mistake.
heads in the sand here in US. Nope, really they just do not want you to discuss or debate anything. We MUST!! have mass illegal immigration so we can show EU how benevolent and compassionate we are 😏
Because that is the end game. Destruction. Their goal, all of them, is to turn us into their serf workers, and they will dominate us in their global world. This is the dream. Only I don't believe God will allow this to happen.
> This dynamic explains a great part of Trudeau-era Canadian politics,
This dynamic explains essentially _all_ of _all_-era Canadian politics. It's not in any meaningful way unique to Trudeau, its just maybe more visible and blatant in the era of social media.
For my favourite example, one I've probably brought up here before: My dad was a doctor and was pretty involved at a high level in the administrative side of medical politics in Canada. According to him, he as well as most of the doctors in Canada think that the Canadian healthcare system is FUBAR and that moving it towards a more American style system would be both more long term sustainable and lead to better health outcomes for Canadians.
And yet, Canada has "universal" "healthcare", and I would bet a large sum of money that they will never change that system until forced to (eg if it goes bankrupt and generally collapses). Why? Because it's a symbol of being not-Americans.
Anyone being honest with themselves knows that Canada is just America's hat. Nothing Canada does on the world stage is meaningful in the shadow of the US, just on sheer scale alone. Canada can not and will not ever meaningfully defy the US on anything the US cares about. The white house says 'jump' and parliament says "how high?". So a major part of the Canadian psyche is dedicated to these sorts of small, symbolic acts of rebellion against that to make it clear that We're DIfferent.
The healthcare system is one of the most obvious examples. The US system is not great, it has a lot of problems, and if I had the benevolent social planning dictator's magic wand, I would change a bunch of things about it. But as someone who has had experiences with both systems, it is beyond obvious that the US system is better. But Canadians would rather have hundreds of thousands of needless deaths and people suffering, than Be Like America
This one principle explains essentially all of the cultural, and 95% of the political, quirks of Canada (the remaining 5% of the political quirks are explained by 'Quebec' but that's a story for another day). It is not unique to Trudeau, not at all
If Canada really wants to distinguish itself from the US, they should go for a small, efficient government and foster entrepreneurism, i.e., the Hong Kong, Singapore economic model. Instead, they take their cue from a statist, dying Europe.
For a bunch of reasons but probably the biggest one is that they will _never_ be able to compete on salary with thr US for top tier talent. And because it's so easy for convenience to work in U.S., all the top tier Canadians just do that to make double their salaries.
Canada would need to effectively abolish the North American free trade agreements in order to have any hope of pulling this off, and that's not going to happen.
> The US system is not great, it has a lot of problems, and if I had the benevolent social planning dictator's magic wand, I would change a bunch of things about it.
Personally, I'd be curious to see what it could do if it was actually a free market...
I wrote an essay about this once in a reddit comment, and never saved it after deleting that account. But I think that a truly free market in health care would be a dramatic improvement, except for one small problem, which is that people are insane.
Here's the thing. In practice, every health care system exists for the same purpose: old people, and chronically ill people, are too expensive to keep alive, but people dying makes us sad, so the healthcare system exists to obscure the massive draining of wealth from productive people who deserve life, to shitty useless people who don't.
My essay, in super short, is that if we split health care into four different things, we would have dramatic improvements in three of them.
1) emergency care. "oh shit I crashed my car and I'm going to die" care. An _actual_ insurance model would work perfectly for that. To put it in perspective, I have $1M supplemental healthcare costs coverage as part of my car insurance, and it costs $30 a month. Emergency care could be that cheap, if we stopped using the healthcare system as a way to hide the fact that we're paying $1M/mo to keep grandpa alive
2) Preventative care. Your routine checkups, recommendations for healthy lifestyle interventions, etc. First off, you could massively scale this up. I'm imagining a clinic where you go in they take your temp/bp/hr/etc, you're in and out in 5 minutes that'll be $20. For that matter, your phone can take most of these measurements these days, so this kind of care is already free. You could also expand this kind of care to include inexpensive lifestyle interventions (like diet or fitness coaching) that prevent costs down the line
3) enhancement care. This is essentially anything that you don't need, but which makes you better. My representative example is adderall. ALmost everyone Iv'e ever met who says they have ADHD, doesn't have ADHD. They just need adderall to do their jobs better. It's kind of fucked that _your_ healthcare premiums go to paying the $500/mo that _I_ use to work at my $200k/yr job. This shit should be full on free market. Regulated for safety but nothing else. I should be able to go to Walgreens and buy adderall over the counter. Hell, you could charge $1000 a month for it, i'd still pay it; it's an investment in my career and more than makes up for the cost. You could even use the extra revenue to subsidize 'deserving' causes
4) Chronic care. This is the problem with every healthcare system: this is extremely expensive for no benefit other than it stops white women from crying. In my ideal system, we'd look at these people, decide what amount of money we're comfortable just giving them as disability payments, and then tell them they're on their own, if they can't afford healthcare, have fun dying.
I think this last one is a more reasonable position than it first appears. For one, if we had a real free market, a lot of more common chronic ailments would become much cheaper to treat. Generic insulin, for example, is cheaper than a cell phone, and if a diabetic's life depended on affording insulin they wouldn't be willing to pay the $1000/mo fancy patented new version. A lot more of the costs here are also, frankly, unreasonable to expect. Things that our grandparents' generation just did not have access to, and they were fine with it. Stupidly expensive cancer treatments, eg. And finally, you have no idea how much we spend on care for old people. Something like 1/3rd of all healthcare spending is spent letting 80 year olds live to 85 and, to be blunt, you guys had your time, now you're just parasitizing the next generation. If you want to leave your children with no inheritance, spend your own money trying to stave off the inevitable, but it is beyond fucked that you make the rest of us pay for it.
We are of an accord here. Even -- perhaps particularly -- about Grampa.
Minor quibble: Having purchased all of my various medications with nothing but a "discount card" at a point in my life when I had no insurance, (and this is 2022, so not like, decades ago) I can tell you that generic Adderall is not particularly expensive. $50 / month, not $500. Now, one of the antidepressants I was on at the time, *that* was $500 / month. But again, in the absence of the "zero risk mentality" FDA, that drug wouldn't have cost that much.
When I go to HEB they fill my script with name brand adderall and once you account for what insurance pays, it's approximately that expensive. I'm sure that generics are cheaper in general.
But my point is, the current US insurance system subsidizes my performance-enhancing drugs, and that's kind of ridiculous. They increase the premiums of people who make way less money than me, so that my drugs will be cheaper. In a sensible system, that wouldn't happen!
It may actually be worse, in a net-impact-on-the-world sense, but trust me, this dynamic has been in play the whole time.
Hell, CanCon quotas are a perfect example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content. Canadians are so afraid of US cultural dominance that they have a law that says that all media broadcasting channels must have a minimum threshold of Canadian-created content. They're so insecure about the US that they don't even try to compete with them culturally, they just pass a law that says they win
Same with Cda's military. I spent 28 yrs as an officer in the Cdn Airforce, and can attest to that penis envy. Whether with NORAD, NATO, the UN, or at our flagship embassy in Washington, I was part of the follow-behind troop bringing up the American rear. Even so, it was enough to massage the fragile egos of our generals, and that's all that counted. (Well said, Eidein!)
A few years ago i met a guy here in Texas. He was previously a Leiutennant(?) (He commanded a platoon) in the Canadian army. When Covid happened, his platoon got orders to prepare a plan to implement internal security checkpoints, and he quit the army because of how horrendous that was.
To hear him say it, the Canadian military is a joke now
"And yet, Canada has "universal" "healthcare", and I would bet a large sum of money that they will never change that system until forced to (eg if it goes bankrupt and generally collapses). Why? Because it's a symbol of being not-Americans."
More basic than that. It's really no different in principle than the US Social Security system. A pure Ponzi scheme, it will inevitably collapse someday, despite all the spit and baling wire Congress can apply. But once an entitlement is in place, it will never be repealed. It's why Obama Democrats made outrageous bribes to opponents to get Obamacare passed. Entitlements are forever.
And yet, most Americans have been propagandized into believing we should have healthcare just like Canada's and the UK's because the one in the US is the worst in the world. They understand so little of your system and its drawbacks that they don't appreciate what we do have here. I know that if Harris is elected within 4 years there will be universal healthcare here, basically Medicare/Medicaid for all and our healthcare will be substandard except for the elites who will be able to buy their healthcare from private doctors. They were hoping to do this if Hillary Clinton won in 2016, but Harris has made this a point in her campaign. Some of the effects of Obama Care (the Affordable Care Act) have already caused a serious decline in the quality of our healthcare, as have the last 4 years of massive immigrants who have been given free care through Medicaid. It's a system that is already failing.
> And yet, most Americans have been propagandized into believing we should have healthcare just like Canada's and the UK's because the one in the US is the worst in the world
This is hilarious to me. I've told this story before as well, but will repeat it
My first girlfriend, in California, was chronically ill and on California's medicare-for-poor-people system. She would _constantly_ complain about how her healthcare sucked and how she wished we had the Canadian system. And yet, in EVERY measureable way, the healthcare she got as a poor person on welfare, was higher quality than the healthcare that ALL Canadians (in Manitoba, anyway) get.
It's especially hilarious because the people who are most vehemently supportive of a Canadian-style healthcare system are bougie liberals with cushy white collar jobs and _very good_ health insurance. They do not realize that if they got their way, their personal healthcare quality would fall dramatically. Have fun waiting six months to see a specialist. And oh, you don't like your doctor? Too bad, you don't get to choose, you get the one that's available
The Canadian system does have some benefits. For one, nobody is going bankrupt with healthcare costs. I'm skeptical that that's as big a problem in the US as people say it is, but it's still a problem and it's not a problem in Canada. For all it's flaws, the system is also pretty good at emergency care. You'll wait six months for a specialist under normal circumstance, but if you need one right now or you'll die, you will get one right now.
Finally, the Canadian healthcare system is very good at controlling costs. Part of why the US healthcare system is so expensive is because everyone is willing to pay it. Nobody, ever, is willing to make the conscious decision to accept a lower quality of care to save money. In the Canadian system, the government forces that on everyone which, while it is terrible in a bunch of ways, it does in fact control costs pretty well
> I know that if Harris is elected within 4 years there will be universal healthcare here, basically Medicare/Medicaid for all and our healthcare will be substandard except for the elites who will be able to buy their healthcare from private doctors
If you can buy your healthcare from private doctors, then you don't have universal healthcare. In Canada, that's _illegal_
> Some of the effects of Obama Care (the Affordable Care Act) have already caused a serious decline in the quality of our healthcare
Everything the Republicans said would happen, has happened, healthcare and health insurance is like 5x as expensive as 15 years ago, and nobody noticed or cared.
For what it's worth, _yet another_ story I've told before. My dad was high ranking in the Canadian healthcare system's administrative bureaucracy and he's convinced that within ten years the entire system will collapse because we can't afford it. Perhaps Americans will think twice about 'universal' 'healthcare' when canadians are dying left and right because they can't get any of it
Americans don't know how bad the situation in Canada is unless they personally know Canadians. I have some friends there and was so bothered when one relayed to me the time she was waiting to get appointments with specialists after her GP suggested she may have cancer. I knew it would take time but was stunned at how long getting tests, seeing specialists, having tests read, getting appointments for treatment, et.al., was. I offered to help her come here but she declined.
I've been aware for a long time of how detrimental universal care is for everyone. There's no perfect answer once people decide that healthcare is a "right". As someone who is in your fourth group of people needing care - a white woman who cries with chronic medical issues - I've cost the system a bunch, but not as much as my mom who had an accident at the age of 71 resulting in her being a quadriplegic who lived for another 14 years; or my mother in law who developed dementia around the same age and lived to be 91, both costing the healthcare system a buttload. I do think, however, that overall we had some valuable contributions during those periods of time.
What's difficult is that we've grown from country's that started with doctors who could make house calls and do basic care in exchange for a pig or a couple of chickens to hospitals where people have highly specialized treatments costing millions of dollars that must be paid for with actual money. What we haven't figured out is how everyone is going to do is pay. A small town doctor not getting a chicken could afford to let it slide; a hospital not getting paid tens of thousand of dollars doesn't have that luxury.
The difficult discussions about not doing life-saving treatments on elderly dementia patients, or not paying for the latest expensive dementia drugs for them because their efficacy doesn't warrant the cost are ones I'm very familiar with having had a dementia caregiver's support group.
These are things that need to be talked about. It affects many parts of health care - but then people have to discuss so many touchy subjects that include beliefs about morals, religion, personal, and cultural feelings, and it becomes almost impossible to come to a consensus. Questions about why millions are spent keeping preemies alive who will need lifelong physical and mental support; keeping people alive who are in a vegetative state; the ramifications of not allowing abortions in the US resulting in more babies born with birth defects needing lifelong care; disease research that's squashed by drug companies in order to maintain the need for their products. There's so many issues involved.
The biggest issue is that people way higher up than me are going to decide and all I can do is navigate the system the best way possible for myself and the people I attempt to help so it works best for them. Meanwhile, I write to the politicians and gripe to them about what they should do that's right.
Thank you for thinking I'm intelligent enough to understand what you're writing about. My mom was in CA and we left her there instead of moving her near me in NC because I knew their MediCal system would give her far better care than the Medicare system her when she needed it. It was a difficult decision, which we never needed, but I had studied both, so when their money ran out I'd know what to do. She died three months short of being on MediCal. They have a great system in CA for people who need it and people do gripe about it with no understanding of how amazing it is. My parents didn't even understand. It was sad. But she was able to be at home for 14 years under Medicaid Advantage with Kaiser and a private nurse for 4 hours a day with their longterm insurance. They were so fortunate. She didn't have to be in a facility, and I knew she wouldn't have to be with MediCal either. But God took care of the rest for me. It was time.
I think you mean Generation Capacity. They love to quote huge wind and solat generation capacity. Failing to mention that it actually generates electricity at most 20% of the time.
Not to speak of the huge financial and, in particular, environmental impact.
Wind parks not only cost huge amounts of money & material, and kill a lot of birds.
They disrupt wind and therefore the transport of clouds-, condemning neighbouring areas to desertification, plus they poison the soil of the land, -and some around them-, through the erosion on the highly toxic, non-degradable coating of their helixes, making it unusable for farming.
And then there are the health issues caused by the infrasound they produce, that equally affects humans and animals.
Could I ask a simple question how that works if you've time? I was thinking that apart from stuff that's wasted during transmission, wouldn't the generated electricity have to be consumed somewhere? Not my topic of expertise at all so would appreciate understanding this.
I’m really not the person you might want answering, but…. To manage an electric grid is somewhere between science and black magic. The amount of electricity flowing into the grid must match the demand. They have to balance.
Thank you! This makes sense too - I read other pieces about the problems and expansion needed to the grid to safely handle renewables, so if they produce large amounts of power for a few hours (and I guess maybe it's hard to turn off and on solar panels and wind farms? Unlike gas or coal?) so the grid needs to be able to handle those surges (adding even more costs)
To keep it as simple as possible - you can have all the solar panels in the world, plaster the whole EU in them, and you will GENERATE a trillion billion kW of power.... but for 2 or 3 hours a day, if its sunny. There is no solar panel that works at night, or when its cloudy, or in the shade.
Modern society CONSUMES electricity, so if your brightly lit city at midnight is sucking up a bunch of juice, it has to come from somewhere. The way that the wordplay comes in, for example, is you'll hear "such and such has installed 10GW of solar generation capacity. such and such state has a peak energy consumption of 8GW, proving that renewables are here to stay and are the future" ignoring that the solar generation will match consumption for just those few hours, on those days that it can, and so an identical backup generation system needs to be in place to cover.
Further, when you hear about "negative prices", this is because of overbuilding. More panels compete for a smaller slice of a consumption pie. But then they all go to 0 as soon as the sun goes away.
Finally, the technical challenges of managing a very spiky grid, where different generation sources are coming on and offline abruptly, is a very significant engineering challenge. When renewables are a small % of the grid, this "garbage power (as the Chinese call it)" represents a small amount of your overall; imagine a steady flatline with small "noise" in the form of oscillation from alternate generation. The greater share, the more noise, the more chaos.
If you ask yourself "then why?" Remember, when doing something extremely expensive and wasteful, the inverse is that there are a lot of people selling expensive and wasteful things. Its a boondoggle, and a lot of ppl I deal with esp in the US said the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was like "raining money". It didn't matter if it worked or not
Thank you so much for taking the time to write out your comments, it's really helpful and I understand much better now. No wonder power prices are rising with all that wasteful investment (not to mention the extra grid and battery needs too?)
There is no battery storage at scale. I think the total installed battery capacity amounts to seconds of consumption, as in, 30s out of a year or something. The level of strip mining needed to have enough batteries to be useful would entail environmental destruction that i dont even want to contemlplate. Also consider the simply staggering amount of cabling, transmission lines and other infrastructure. I know a guy who specialises in naval anchoring, he does things like oil rigs and recently offshore wind turbines. They float, and have 6-8 anchor lines which are laid by a specialist vessel. Every single one of those turbines needs this and it's absurdly expensive
The funny thing about Baerbock is that nobody notice her anymore. She arrives in some country, meets some third tier politician, probably promises some German tax money, and flies home again. Probably with some nice gifts proportional to the German tax money she brought.
In Germany, no one talks about anything she does as foreign minister. Sometimes there are some photos of her on the beach, deploring the awful climate change. But even supporters of the Greens wouldn't be able to name anything she has achieved.
She is much like her predessor H.Maas, who had his stint of frequent flyer in chief, and since then vanished without a trace or memory.
this is totally right, how completely she's vanished. and you're about Heiko Maas too, a day or two somebody brought him up in conversation and took me a full minute to remember who the man even was.
They are really similar: both very vain (always expensively clothed), both ok looking (for politicians), both neither very smart nor very stupid (probably IQ 98 or so), both willfully ignorant (and proud of it).
The system selects for those people who are a bit smart, but gave up thinking. This type is very forgetable.
Even the Great Destroyer herself, Dr. Merkel, is almost forgotten by now.
And clearly she wants that, otherwise she could write a book, do the media tour, be on television all the time. But she wants to be forgotten.
Too bad the Haitians couldn’t have eaten HER cat… 🐈… poor kitty… 🔥🔥🔥
Unfortunately, we have a large supply of illegal Haitians in our small town… They say they’re here on a work permit… So why are they hanging around downtown with nothing to do? 😡
Our city Council says that they are not taking federal monies… Yeah, right 🙄
Germany has been indoctrinated to hate Trump. It shows how provincial Germany actually is. Their state controlled TV and radio stations, all lavishly paid by a tax every household has to pay, have been busy issuing misinformation about Trump when he was in power! But since they do it all the time, whether it’s being COVID, immigration or climate change, the normal people are kinda brainwashed when it comes to leftist politics! That’s why the situation in Germany needs to get far worse before any meaningful change will happen
In the USA too…all media has been against Trump since 2015…NINE YEARS of snarky, nasty, negative drivel…with lots of lies repeated for good measure. I turned off the News back in ‘15 when I could not stand the blatant lies.
I am in the UK and increasingly thought the antagonsim to Trump was ridiculous. In 2020 I realised Biden was unfit for president then as his brain was in decline. Where it is now who knows?
You described New Zealand, too. Brainwashed by the globalist, bought-off NZ mainstream media to hate Trump from day one of his presidency. "Everyone knows he's a [liar or cheat or narcissist, etc.]". <= always making the same statement without any evidence or backup or argument. Just repeating it over and over. Kiwis sucked it right up, as they did all the endless propaganda about the "safe and effective" jabs for NZ's "Team of Five Million" as Kiwis "Unite Against Covid".
Superb...and insightful on the "small country effect". Canadians have indulged this sort of sanctimonious anti-American grand-standing for decades, long before Trudeau (though it is more pronounced and worse in the Trudeau era). The sad thing is that Canadians stake their moral superiority and identity on the very things that are both morally bankrupt and unworkable, like a state monopoly on communist medical care....which really means no decent medical care within the country. Green energy is another morally bankrupt unworkable idea. Funny that the German foreign office didn't mention the flight of German industry following the rise in electricity prices....something Yuri Bezmenov notes below.
"...which really means no decent medical care within the country."
Yes, there was a video recently of a Canadian middle class man arguing with Trudeau about his 40% tax rate and no doctor. It was classic. Trudeau of course ignored what the man said.
I'm no admirer of Trump, but I will vote for him in order to vote for RFK Jr having some part to play in that administration.
I do wish Trump was not so inarticulate; he often says things that have a kernel of truth but manages to make himself sound stupid. "Injecting bleach" is a prime example.
8 years ago when he was 'inarticulate', it was amazing. Now it's just sad.
8 years ago, he'd say something inarticulate with a kernel of truth, and then the media would all dunk on him, but the kernel of truth would be obvious and the media would unwittingly both amplify his message as well as show themselves to be idiots. "What's happening in Chicago" is a good example of that. Most people had no idea about the stats on https://heyjackass.com/ until Trump mentioned it in passing. Then the media would issue 'fact checks' like "Trump said Chicago is sooooo dangerous but actually _only_ five thousand people got murdered there last weekend" and normal people would say "wait, what the fuck? You think that's a small number?"
But, so, I haven't watched the debate yet, I've only seen clips, and, it ain't good. Now he's just actually coming across as a bumbling idiot. And he's not being funny when he does it.
Trump was overconfident in his ability to wing it. It serves him well at his campaign rallies, but a debate was something else entirely. Some very sharp people have studied Trump's psychology to determine his strengths and weaknesses and planned the debate accordingly. Kamala has NEVER reacted to questions the way she did in the debate. She was too quick, too polished, and too smooth. She knew all the questions in advanced and practiced the responses. Team Trump learned the hard way never to underestimate your opponent, no matter how incompetent they appear.
Articulateness is way overrated. Obama is/was articulate and look where the US is after Obama's third term and pushing for a fourth. I'll take inarticulate (and mean tweets too) with the right policies any day of the week.
BTW, [a] Reuters focus group of 10 undecided voters found that after watching the debate, six were leaning toward voting for Trump, three said they were leaning toward Harris, and one was still undecided.
Articulateness, of course, is not a deciding factor but it sure is nice.
In longform interviews, RFK Jr impresses with his articulateness as well as depth of knowledge end command of facts, as well as reasoning that I find, well, reasonable.
Honestly, my mental model of what happened is that the neocon deep state staged an _almost_ assassination of him, and then the next day pulled him aside and said "and we'll do it again if you don't serve our interests". And so now, he serves their interests.
It makes him a shitty leader who does not serve my interests, but in his position I'd do the same
So what? You weren't entertained. Is that where we are at now? He wasn't entertaining - he didn't entertain me! - so he'll suck as a <political position>? Geez.
I can't believe supposedly intelligent people take the debates so seriously. It's professional wrestling for political nerds.
We already know he'll suck as a politican, he did in 2016. But, as I've said a million times before: it doesn't matter. The presidency is constrained by a million different forces, and the president is largely a figurehead. Almost everything that our society is doing now, it will still be doing in 2028, regardless of who wins the election. We'll still be supporting Israel. We'll still be funding the Ukraine war. We'll still be pushing LGBT stuff on everything. We'll still be clamping down on free speech. Guns will still be restricted. Drugs will still be illegal. Black people will still get unfair gibs. We will still act like an empire. We'll still fuck over Europe. None of that is going to change.
If it would change, we'd be having a very different conversation. But yes, that _is_ where we are at now, because the presidency is _literally_ just an entertainment product. The actual levers of power in this country are invisible and inaccessible to the voting public. They _probably_ always were, but this ship has definitely sailed at least since FDR.
Well, "if" is the magic word here. Trump seems more than unusually determined to lose.
Anyway I always enjoy recalling the clip of those German diplomats at the UN snickering at Trump for something on which he was later proven resoundingly correct.
I watched about ten minutes of the video. I don't if the researchers did this, but I would like to have seen them go to some of the anomalous addresses and see if the named voters actually live there, or get there mail there. Also, is it legal to register to vote at a valid address and then later have your absentee ballot sent to one of the anomalous addresses like a P.O. Box?
Well, below is what the Omega group (using "fractal quantum tech") claims. I hope they can pull it off.
"In 2024, unlike 2020, we can identify fraud literally the day it happens - the day they mail out a ballot to a Walmart - after we warned that registrar in writing not to do so.
Every ballot, mailed to an ineligible address, is immediately flagged and tracked right through November 5 - because that ballot is legally ineligible to be counted.
This time every registrar gets a text, with the link to the list of ineligible addresses they have been warned about - so for the first time they know we see every move.
Unlike 2024, this time we have better technology than the states. We have far better technology than the DNC - and of course better than the GOP.
Unlike 2020, we have sophisticated voter integrity orgs - local ones not the national grifter class - local teams who know the ground, know the law and are already finding addresses by the thousands - where ineligibles are casting ballots via NGOs.
The 2024 election is going to be stolen by the 42 months of padding voter rolls with illegal aliens, migrants and drifters - people who will never show up to vote - but their ballots will arrive, accumulate, be picked up by the Postal Service or NGOs and voted - for Leftists.
This time we have mail carriers who told us how the Postal Service collected undeliverable mail-in ballots and gave them to Leftist NGOs.
This time we have Postal Service workers, who warned us they worked in central processing locations where they collected loose ballots and placed them where Leftist-paid organizations would pick them up. Recycling in a new light.
This time we know - today - the U.S. Postal Service is in on the steal.
So this time - our strategy is to KEEP THOSE BALLOTS TO INELIGIBLE ADDRESSES OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE POSTAL SERVICE.
An ineligible ballot, in a swing state, in the hands of the U.S. Postal Service is a likely vote for Kamala.
Once it is mailed - if we do not stop it first, we track it to see if it is cast.
TRACK EVERY BALLOT, FROM AN INELIGIBLE ADDRESS, FLAG IT AND CHALLENGE IT IMMEDIATELY.
CHALLENGE IT RIGHT UP UNTIL ELECTION DAY - OR A WEEK LATER AS SO MANY BALLOTS WILL BE COUNTED MANY DAYS LATER!
CHALLENGE IT BEFORE it is counted. We have the technology, the people in place and the momentum to get this done.
This is how we, as in you and the rest of us - disrupt the 2024 steal - and there’s nothing the Left can do to stop it.
How did such limited people take over? Baerbock is not an isolated example. She is an exemplar of the Western Liberal. Literally nothing in her head comes from inside her head. She spouts downloaded nonsense that is little more than reheated slogans. Almost none of it makes sense or conforms to reality.
The destruction of energy production is a case in point. How did it get to this? Can they really believe windmills and solar panels will drive Europe forward? I think they do believe this. If so, how did morons like this make it in life?
It's a function of the deep state/bureaucracy. The Soviet Union suffered from this as well. They went from Lenin - charismatic leader of the revolution to Yuri Andropov - walking corpse. The bureaucracy wants politicians it can control, and since the bulk of the managerial class is composed of ever less-capable mid-wits, they need to continuously find politicians with lower and lower capabilities. They dislike and actively block up-and-coming politicians that show too much competence. However, they are terrified of the political leader who is both charismatic and highly capable, because that person can do some real damage to the bureaucracy's power structure.
Yes, those charismatic and competant political leaders are the people they call "authoritarians" because they can get things done without the bureaucracy. Democracy is now the system of electing weak politicians who will simply defer to the bureaucracy and its "experts".
> Literally nothing in her head comes from inside her head.
Quoted for truth. I know a lot of people like this. They only ever have other people's opinions about things, but they espouse them very fervently.
(I started using that phrase back when "Net Neutrality" was first a big news item. "If you can't describe what a peering agreement is, you don't have an opinion on Net Neutrality. You have *someone else's* opinion on Net Neutrality." It's easily extensible to other contentious subjects.)
I had many arguments about Net Neutrality myself. An early indicator of the type, for me at least. The use of the word "neutral," a positive sounding thing, was the bit they couldn't see beyond. Who doesn't want neutrality? None of them could understand the dangers of the State regulating the internet.
One of the queries I use on the Climate Cultists is "Relative to today, what was the average global temperature during the Eemian Interglacial, and what effect did that have on the environment?"
Last I checked, the western world is still a democracy. So, how did such people take over? I don't know, maybe ask your neighbours why they keep voting for such people.
Or could it be that voting is fake and gay? Not sure if it's legal to suggest that on a German blog
Indeed. But my rant extends to the voters. I know people like Baerbock. They believe their open borders, solar-panelled, gender neutral world is some epic scifi utopian paradise and any resistance to any of it is a sign of backwardness or hard-right sympathy. How did we end up with so many people living in cloud cuckoo land?
That just sounds like "Democracy is fake and gay" with extra steps. After all, either a) democracy is real, and the people explicitly chose for those bureaucrats to occupy the positions they do; or b) "democracy" is not actually responsive to the will of the people, and those bureaucrats do _not_ govern with the will of the people (in other words, democracy is FAG)
I am reminded of the Majipoor Chronicles, by Robert Sheckley. On Majipoor, the visible head of the government is the Coronal -- a celebrity political figure, responsive to the people, holding rallies, proposing grand policies. He has power, but the bulk of the real power is held by the Pontifex, who lives underground in a huge warren of offices, is never seen publicly, and runs the actual bureaucracy. Sheckley addresses the democracy problem by establishing that the Pontifex is always the (presumably seasoned) Coronal of the last cycle. Western democracies have not.
tldr: we should have two parallel political systems, one which is just the entertainment product our system is, and oen that is the actual bureaucratic machinery that runs things. You get one vote, and at each election, you can vote in one race or the other, but not both.
It's mostly tongue-in-cheek but it's good food for thought
Could it be that the bureaucrats operate with a limited responsiveness to the will of the people? Neither has absolute control. The question is: what is the distribution of that control? Lately that distribution has been increasingly favoring the bureaucracy.
Democracy = the government serves the will of the people.
If the bureaucrats have "limited responsiveness" to the will of the people, that's just a fancy way of saying they don't serve it fully. Or in other words, democracy is fake and gay
See Paul Foot's book 'The Vote'. Good coverage of the struggle for democracy here from the English Civil War (~1640-60) onwards. Many of 'the left', including Foot, aren't or weren't tyrants.
This unhelpful and confusing terminology, 'left' vs 'right' has spread worldwide especially since 2020 and obfuscates a debate on individual freedom versus top-down tyranny. Use the correct words. They may be 'authoritarian' vs. 'libertarian'. It depends what exactly you're trying to say
I'm impressed with your minister and her fitness to have walked all over the world. Oh, wait, I guess she was using a solar powered airplane. German ingenuity at work.....What, she used regular jet aircraft! Mon dieu I can't believe the double standard. Thanks for all you work Eugy. Love you here in the USA
regular posting to resume by Monday at the latest, when I will finally be back at a fixed address with a proper office.
Given the possible meanings of "proper", an improper office sounds much more fun. ;)
we could round up a selection of calendars suitable for posting on improper office walls.
<blushing> I'm sure I have no idea of what you are referring to. . .
In my old office, which I shared with what felt like two dozen colleagues (no joke, we hade about one square yard of floor/desk each if all where present), I had a drawing of a man giving a talk, the podium carrying a poster saying "Seminar on freedom of speech", and the man calling out: "You there at the back, shut up!".
Several of my politically red (European red) colleagues complained about it.
Well, my FFFFG complained until an office colleague was forced to remove a very racy poster from his office. That I didn't think over-policing, but I disagreed with her insistence that guys in firehouses etc. should not be permitted to post racy and racier posters and calendars in their locker spaces. My feeling is that if women wish to work in undeniably hyper-masculine environments they should be prepared to deal with (legal, non-contact) horsefoolery [invented but suitable word].
I'm fine with pin-up posters, and if some woman wants to put up a beefcake-poster at her station, no problem with me.
Normal caveats relating to what the job and workplace is of course.
Always liked US Air Force "nose art"; guess that's a thing of the past now.
https://www.airforcetimes.com/veterans/military-history/2024/05/23/explorers-discover-possible-wreckage-of-wwii-ace-richard-bongs-plane/
Happy housewarming!
thank you, Tardigrade. the final move probably still a year away, because of necessary renovations in the new place and various complications with selling the old place, but I hope to have my office moved into the new house in the coming months.
I'm really hoping you write a good one on the border policy reversal; it's nothing and everything at the same time.
Did they not learn from laughing at him when he correctly warned they were too dependent on Russian gas? Whoever runs these social media accounts is taking taxpayer funds to get ratio’d. If only those burns could help fuel the factories instead of deindustrializing Europe back to the Stone Age…
Germany was only too dependent on Russian gas once Biden chose to blow up the pipeline. Until then it was a fair and mutually beneficial free trade relationship. A win-win proposition.
“Until then…..” 😂😂😂 Isn’t that the point?
German deindustrialization and economic recession is the point. Joe Biden did that while Scholz looked on and said nothing. Germany's future has been sold out by the traffic light coalition. 1 million dead Ukrainians all just to save face for weak politicians.
Fair enough. The point I’m making is simply that it worked until it didn’t seems to prove Trump’s point. They were over reliant on Russian energy, for whatever reason. As US president he likely had some insight as to just how risky it was.
Doubtful Trump had any insight that Biden would later blow up the pipeline. Neither did Scholz.
Trump was saying that the U.S. is paying to defend Europe from Russia, so Europe should buy gas from the U.S. rather than Russia. A reasonable transactional argument.
The German gas deal with Russia was good for both countries. Low price and high volume. All countries that don't produce oil and gas are dependent on those that do.
Russian gas still flows through Ukraine to Europe. Despite all of the vitriol and sanctions. Just not through Nordstream.
The power that the U.S. wields over European countries is absurd. But they seem to be willing to do the U.S. bidding rather than pay the high cost for defense. Now that their economy has been trashed, Von der Leyen wants to spend heavily on a united Europe defense. Like all bureaucrats, she is always seeking to expand her government. But she is seeking the worst of both worlds. Much higher costs for defense while remaining under U.S. hegemony.
And no one is threatening to attack Europe. Least of all Russia, who only wants free trade with Europe. So there is really no point for Europe to spend heavily on defense. Except to keep alive the narrative that Russia is a threat to invade Europe. Which has always been a lie. Putin has no reason to threaten the people who would be his best customers.
The arms manufacturers see a lot of point on spending heavily on defense. 10 of top 20 are based in the US.
Probably too powerful US interests like Cargill want yet more land for industrial farming/agribusiness. (Even though people like Joel Salatin have shown that regenerative farming yields more food per hectare.)
About a year ago I also read that some people in the USA want certain Ukrainian land for some large industrial waste dumps. Why pollute your own country when you can pollute others?
Exactly. Poorest comment of Yuri sofar. Germany wasn't too dependent upon anyone or anything, only too much of a coward, idiot and vasal acting against its own interests whenever the US demands..
Yuri makes a good point. As had Trump. The laughing jackals of the E.U. are still running Europe. The joke is on E.U. citizens.
Austria still gets 98% of its gas from Russia.
Where is the dependency problem?
Russia kept and keeps its side of the contracts.
Your argument is that a leash is acceptable as long as it has slack in it. But that is always determined by the person holding the leash, never the person held by it.
It might be news to you, but no country in Europe bar Norway is not dependent on energy imports. Many people in Germany now prefer the reliable, voluntary and mutually beneficial Russian energy 'leash' over the violently forced, much tighter and much more expensive American one.
With friends like this USA, noone needs enemies.
Unless I make several unflattering assumptions about your character, I can see no sense whatsoever in your analogy. Russia has never behaved like a business with a leash-hold on its customers. The USA on the other hand behaves like a piracy both in selling and acquiring its 'treasure'.
Germany better watch what they say or the US government will blow up the Nordstream pipelines. Oh, never mind, we already did that.
"If Trump wins a second term, these people will go absolutely bananas."
Let's all raise a glass of good German pilsner to these people going bananas ... sooner rather than later!
Please! Don't insult bananas!
Bananas brought down the DDR!
There’s nothing so satisfying as the sound of heads exploding.
Don't forgetthe previous case (2018) of the UN German delegation's open snickering and laughter when Trump called out their energy dependency on Russia in a speech to general assembly.
indeed.
I will never forget that. Jeeeez😂
They also didn't say a word about the huge increase in electricity and home heating costs.
Praying we don’t continue to follow Germany’s path to deindustrialize our nation, why can’t we absorb all sorts of lessons being taught across the pond about how foolhardy and detrimental following the Green Utopia actually is and avoid following in their footsteps? Because all our governments have sold us out for money.
…and our MEDIA will not tell the truth about Europe. We could learn a LOT about what NOT to do, starting with mass illegal immigration. Europe is a hellhole because of that one massive mistake.
heads in the sand here in US. Nope, really they just do not want you to discuss or debate anything. We MUST!! have mass illegal immigration so we can show EU how benevolent and compassionate we are 😏
Because that is the end game. Destruction. Their goal, all of them, is to turn us into their serf workers, and they will dominate us in their global world. This is the dream. Only I don't believe God will allow this to happen.
The US mentions such vulgar things only after it removes all competition.
> This dynamic explains a great part of Trudeau-era Canadian politics,
This dynamic explains essentially _all_ of _all_-era Canadian politics. It's not in any meaningful way unique to Trudeau, its just maybe more visible and blatant in the era of social media.
For my favourite example, one I've probably brought up here before: My dad was a doctor and was pretty involved at a high level in the administrative side of medical politics in Canada. According to him, he as well as most of the doctors in Canada think that the Canadian healthcare system is FUBAR and that moving it towards a more American style system would be both more long term sustainable and lead to better health outcomes for Canadians.
And yet, Canada has "universal" "healthcare", and I would bet a large sum of money that they will never change that system until forced to (eg if it goes bankrupt and generally collapses). Why? Because it's a symbol of being not-Americans.
Anyone being honest with themselves knows that Canada is just America's hat. Nothing Canada does on the world stage is meaningful in the shadow of the US, just on sheer scale alone. Canada can not and will not ever meaningfully defy the US on anything the US cares about. The white house says 'jump' and parliament says "how high?". So a major part of the Canadian psyche is dedicated to these sorts of small, symbolic acts of rebellion against that to make it clear that We're DIfferent.
The healthcare system is one of the most obvious examples. The US system is not great, it has a lot of problems, and if I had the benevolent social planning dictator's magic wand, I would change a bunch of things about it. But as someone who has had experiences with both systems, it is beyond obvious that the US system is better. But Canadians would rather have hundreds of thousands of needless deaths and people suffering, than Be Like America
This one principle explains essentially all of the cultural, and 95% of the political, quirks of Canada (the remaining 5% of the political quirks are explained by 'Quebec' but that's a story for another day). It is not unique to Trudeau, not at all
If Canada really wants to distinguish itself from the US, they should go for a small, efficient government and foster entrepreneurism, i.e., the Hong Kong, Singapore economic model. Instead, they take their cue from a statist, dying Europe.
They keep trying but they literally cannot do it.
For a bunch of reasons but probably the biggest one is that they will _never_ be able to compete on salary with thr US for top tier talent. And because it's so easy for convenience to work in U.S., all the top tier Canadians just do that to make double their salaries.
Canada would need to effectively abolish the North American free trade agreements in order to have any hope of pulling this off, and that's not going to happen.
100% 🎯
> The US system is not great, it has a lot of problems, and if I had the benevolent social planning dictator's magic wand, I would change a bunch of things about it.
Personally, I'd be curious to see what it could do if it was actually a free market...
I wrote an essay about this once in a reddit comment, and never saved it after deleting that account. But I think that a truly free market in health care would be a dramatic improvement, except for one small problem, which is that people are insane.
Here's the thing. In practice, every health care system exists for the same purpose: old people, and chronically ill people, are too expensive to keep alive, but people dying makes us sad, so the healthcare system exists to obscure the massive draining of wealth from productive people who deserve life, to shitty useless people who don't.
My essay, in super short, is that if we split health care into four different things, we would have dramatic improvements in three of them.
1) emergency care. "oh shit I crashed my car and I'm going to die" care. An _actual_ insurance model would work perfectly for that. To put it in perspective, I have $1M supplemental healthcare costs coverage as part of my car insurance, and it costs $30 a month. Emergency care could be that cheap, if we stopped using the healthcare system as a way to hide the fact that we're paying $1M/mo to keep grandpa alive
2) Preventative care. Your routine checkups, recommendations for healthy lifestyle interventions, etc. First off, you could massively scale this up. I'm imagining a clinic where you go in they take your temp/bp/hr/etc, you're in and out in 5 minutes that'll be $20. For that matter, your phone can take most of these measurements these days, so this kind of care is already free. You could also expand this kind of care to include inexpensive lifestyle interventions (like diet or fitness coaching) that prevent costs down the line
3) enhancement care. This is essentially anything that you don't need, but which makes you better. My representative example is adderall. ALmost everyone Iv'e ever met who says they have ADHD, doesn't have ADHD. They just need adderall to do their jobs better. It's kind of fucked that _your_ healthcare premiums go to paying the $500/mo that _I_ use to work at my $200k/yr job. This shit should be full on free market. Regulated for safety but nothing else. I should be able to go to Walgreens and buy adderall over the counter. Hell, you could charge $1000 a month for it, i'd still pay it; it's an investment in my career and more than makes up for the cost. You could even use the extra revenue to subsidize 'deserving' causes
4) Chronic care. This is the problem with every healthcare system: this is extremely expensive for no benefit other than it stops white women from crying. In my ideal system, we'd look at these people, decide what amount of money we're comfortable just giving them as disability payments, and then tell them they're on their own, if they can't afford healthcare, have fun dying.
I think this last one is a more reasonable position than it first appears. For one, if we had a real free market, a lot of more common chronic ailments would become much cheaper to treat. Generic insulin, for example, is cheaper than a cell phone, and if a diabetic's life depended on affording insulin they wouldn't be willing to pay the $1000/mo fancy patented new version. A lot more of the costs here are also, frankly, unreasonable to expect. Things that our grandparents' generation just did not have access to, and they were fine with it. Stupidly expensive cancer treatments, eg. And finally, you have no idea how much we spend on care for old people. Something like 1/3rd of all healthcare spending is spent letting 80 year olds live to 85 and, to be blunt, you guys had your time, now you're just parasitizing the next generation. If you want to leave your children with no inheritance, spend your own money trying to stave off the inevitable, but it is beyond fucked that you make the rest of us pay for it.
We are of an accord here. Even -- perhaps particularly -- about Grampa.
Minor quibble: Having purchased all of my various medications with nothing but a "discount card" at a point in my life when I had no insurance, (and this is 2022, so not like, decades ago) I can tell you that generic Adderall is not particularly expensive. $50 / month, not $500. Now, one of the antidepressants I was on at the time, *that* was $500 / month. But again, in the absence of the "zero risk mentality" FDA, that drug wouldn't have cost that much.
When I go to HEB they fill my script with name brand adderall and once you account for what insurance pays, it's approximately that expensive. I'm sure that generics are cheaper in general.
But my point is, the current US insurance system subsidizes my performance-enhancing drugs, and that's kind of ridiculous. They increase the premiums of people who make way less money than me, so that my drugs will be cheaper. In a sensible system, that wouldn't happen!
It may seem worse with him since he revels in displaying his amoral personality and public policies.
It may actually be worse, in a net-impact-on-the-world sense, but trust me, this dynamic has been in play the whole time.
Hell, CanCon quotas are a perfect example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_content. Canadians are so afraid of US cultural dominance that they have a law that says that all media broadcasting channels must have a minimum threshold of Canadian-created content. They're so insecure about the US that they don't even try to compete with them culturally, they just pass a law that says they win
Same with Cda's military. I spent 28 yrs as an officer in the Cdn Airforce, and can attest to that penis envy. Whether with NORAD, NATO, the UN, or at our flagship embassy in Washington, I was part of the follow-behind troop bringing up the American rear. Even so, it was enough to massage the fragile egos of our generals, and that's all that counted. (Well said, Eidein!)
Did you have fat generals like our own fat General Milley?
A few years ago i met a guy here in Texas. He was previously a Leiutennant(?) (He commanded a platoon) in the Canadian army. When Covid happened, his platoon got orders to prepare a plan to implement internal security checkpoints, and he quit the army because of how horrendous that was.
To hear him say it, the Canadian military is a joke now
The Canadian Military makes F-Troop look like US Navy (trained) Seals. Which are pure, overrated crap in turn when compared to Russian Special Forces.
Famously fulfilled by SCTV!
But without it, would we ever have enjoyed "The Great White North?"
Of course! I know those guys!
"And yet, Canada has "universal" "healthcare", and I would bet a large sum of money that they will never change that system until forced to (eg if it goes bankrupt and generally collapses). Why? Because it's a symbol of being not-Americans."
More basic than that. It's really no different in principle than the US Social Security system. A pure Ponzi scheme, it will inevitably collapse someday, despite all the spit and baling wire Congress can apply. But once an entitlement is in place, it will never be repealed. It's why Obama Democrats made outrageous bribes to opponents to get Obamacare passed. Entitlements are forever.
And yet, most Americans have been propagandized into believing we should have healthcare just like Canada's and the UK's because the one in the US is the worst in the world. They understand so little of your system and its drawbacks that they don't appreciate what we do have here. I know that if Harris is elected within 4 years there will be universal healthcare here, basically Medicare/Medicaid for all and our healthcare will be substandard except for the elites who will be able to buy their healthcare from private doctors. They were hoping to do this if Hillary Clinton won in 2016, but Harris has made this a point in her campaign. Some of the effects of Obama Care (the Affordable Care Act) have already caused a serious decline in the quality of our healthcare, as have the last 4 years of massive immigrants who have been given free care through Medicaid. It's a system that is already failing.
> And yet, most Americans have been propagandized into believing we should have healthcare just like Canada's and the UK's because the one in the US is the worst in the world
This is hilarious to me. I've told this story before as well, but will repeat it
My first girlfriend, in California, was chronically ill and on California's medicare-for-poor-people system. She would _constantly_ complain about how her healthcare sucked and how she wished we had the Canadian system. And yet, in EVERY measureable way, the healthcare she got as a poor person on welfare, was higher quality than the healthcare that ALL Canadians (in Manitoba, anyway) get.
It's especially hilarious because the people who are most vehemently supportive of a Canadian-style healthcare system are bougie liberals with cushy white collar jobs and _very good_ health insurance. They do not realize that if they got their way, their personal healthcare quality would fall dramatically. Have fun waiting six months to see a specialist. And oh, you don't like your doctor? Too bad, you don't get to choose, you get the one that's available
The Canadian system does have some benefits. For one, nobody is going bankrupt with healthcare costs. I'm skeptical that that's as big a problem in the US as people say it is, but it's still a problem and it's not a problem in Canada. For all it's flaws, the system is also pretty good at emergency care. You'll wait six months for a specialist under normal circumstance, but if you need one right now or you'll die, you will get one right now.
Finally, the Canadian healthcare system is very good at controlling costs. Part of why the US healthcare system is so expensive is because everyone is willing to pay it. Nobody, ever, is willing to make the conscious decision to accept a lower quality of care to save money. In the Canadian system, the government forces that on everyone which, while it is terrible in a bunch of ways, it does in fact control costs pretty well
> I know that if Harris is elected within 4 years there will be universal healthcare here, basically Medicare/Medicaid for all and our healthcare will be substandard except for the elites who will be able to buy their healthcare from private doctors
If you can buy your healthcare from private doctors, then you don't have universal healthcare. In Canada, that's _illegal_
> Some of the effects of Obama Care (the Affordable Care Act) have already caused a serious decline in the quality of our healthcare
Everything the Republicans said would happen, has happened, healthcare and health insurance is like 5x as expensive as 15 years ago, and nobody noticed or cared.
For what it's worth, _yet another_ story I've told before. My dad was high ranking in the Canadian healthcare system's administrative bureaucracy and he's convinced that within ten years the entire system will collapse because we can't afford it. Perhaps Americans will think twice about 'universal' 'healthcare' when canadians are dying left and right because they can't get any of it
Americans don't know how bad the situation in Canada is unless they personally know Canadians. I have some friends there and was so bothered when one relayed to me the time she was waiting to get appointments with specialists after her GP suggested she may have cancer. I knew it would take time but was stunned at how long getting tests, seeing specialists, having tests read, getting appointments for treatment, et.al., was. I offered to help her come here but she declined.
I've been aware for a long time of how detrimental universal care is for everyone. There's no perfect answer once people decide that healthcare is a "right". As someone who is in your fourth group of people needing care - a white woman who cries with chronic medical issues - I've cost the system a bunch, but not as much as my mom who had an accident at the age of 71 resulting in her being a quadriplegic who lived for another 14 years; or my mother in law who developed dementia around the same age and lived to be 91, both costing the healthcare system a buttload. I do think, however, that overall we had some valuable contributions during those periods of time.
What's difficult is that we've grown from country's that started with doctors who could make house calls and do basic care in exchange for a pig or a couple of chickens to hospitals where people have highly specialized treatments costing millions of dollars that must be paid for with actual money. What we haven't figured out is how everyone is going to do is pay. A small town doctor not getting a chicken could afford to let it slide; a hospital not getting paid tens of thousand of dollars doesn't have that luxury.
The difficult discussions about not doing life-saving treatments on elderly dementia patients, or not paying for the latest expensive dementia drugs for them because their efficacy doesn't warrant the cost are ones I'm very familiar with having had a dementia caregiver's support group.
These are things that need to be talked about. It affects many parts of health care - but then people have to discuss so many touchy subjects that include beliefs about morals, religion, personal, and cultural feelings, and it becomes almost impossible to come to a consensus. Questions about why millions are spent keeping preemies alive who will need lifelong physical and mental support; keeping people alive who are in a vegetative state; the ramifications of not allowing abortions in the US resulting in more babies born with birth defects needing lifelong care; disease research that's squashed by drug companies in order to maintain the need for their products. There's so many issues involved.
The biggest issue is that people way higher up than me are going to decide and all I can do is navigate the system the best way possible for myself and the people I attempt to help so it works best for them. Meanwhile, I write to the politicians and gripe to them about what they should do that's right.
Thank you for thinking I'm intelligent enough to understand what you're writing about. My mom was in CA and we left her there instead of moving her near me in NC because I knew their MediCal system would give her far better care than the Medicare system her when she needed it. It was a difficult decision, which we never needed, but I had studied both, so when their money ran out I'd know what to do. She died three months short of being on MediCal. They have a great system in CA for people who need it and people do gripe about it with no understanding of how amazing it is. My parents didn't even understand. It was sad. But she was able to be at home for 14 years under Medicaid Advantage with Kaiser and a private nurse for 4 hours a day with their longterm insurance. They were so fortunate. She didn't have to be in a facility, and I knew she wouldn't have to be with MediCal either. But God took care of the rest for me. It was time.
As a matter of point, I feel it important to point out the difference between energy generation and energy consumption
The greenies love to quote generation. But consumption is what matters
Especially, perhaps, the efficiency of said consumption.
I think you mean Generation Capacity. They love to quote huge wind and solat generation capacity. Failing to mention that it actually generates electricity at most 20% of the time.
Not to speak of the huge financial and, in particular, environmental impact.
Wind parks not only cost huge amounts of money & material, and kill a lot of birds.
They disrupt wind and therefore the transport of clouds-, condemning neighbouring areas to desertification, plus they poison the soil of the land, -and some around them-, through the erosion on the highly toxic, non-degradable coating of their helixes, making it unusable for farming.
And then there are the health issues caused by the infrasound they produce, that equally affects humans and animals.
Could I ask a simple question how that works if you've time? I was thinking that apart from stuff that's wasted during transmission, wouldn't the generated electricity have to be consumed somewhere? Not my topic of expertise at all so would appreciate understanding this.
I’m really not the person you might want answering, but…. To manage an electric grid is somewhere between science and black magic. The amount of electricity flowing into the grid must match the demand. They have to balance.
Thank you! This makes sense too - I read other pieces about the problems and expansion needed to the grid to safely handle renewables, so if they produce large amounts of power for a few hours (and I guess maybe it's hard to turn off and on solar panels and wind farms? Unlike gas or coal?) so the grid needs to be able to handle those surges (adding even more costs)
To keep it as simple as possible - you can have all the solar panels in the world, plaster the whole EU in them, and you will GENERATE a trillion billion kW of power.... but for 2 or 3 hours a day, if its sunny. There is no solar panel that works at night, or when its cloudy, or in the shade.
Modern society CONSUMES electricity, so if your brightly lit city at midnight is sucking up a bunch of juice, it has to come from somewhere. The way that the wordplay comes in, for example, is you'll hear "such and such has installed 10GW of solar generation capacity. such and such state has a peak energy consumption of 8GW, proving that renewables are here to stay and are the future" ignoring that the solar generation will match consumption for just those few hours, on those days that it can, and so an identical backup generation system needs to be in place to cover.
Further, when you hear about "negative prices", this is because of overbuilding. More panels compete for a smaller slice of a consumption pie. But then they all go to 0 as soon as the sun goes away.
Finally, the technical challenges of managing a very spiky grid, where different generation sources are coming on and offline abruptly, is a very significant engineering challenge. When renewables are a small % of the grid, this "garbage power (as the Chinese call it)" represents a small amount of your overall; imagine a steady flatline with small "noise" in the form of oscillation from alternate generation. The greater share, the more noise, the more chaos.
If you ask yourself "then why?" Remember, when doing something extremely expensive and wasteful, the inverse is that there are a lot of people selling expensive and wasteful things. Its a boondoggle, and a lot of ppl I deal with esp in the US said the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was like "raining money". It didn't matter if it worked or not
Thank you so much for taking the time to write out your comments, it's really helpful and I understand much better now. No wonder power prices are rising with all that wasteful investment (not to mention the extra grid and battery needs too?)
There is no battery storage at scale. I think the total installed battery capacity amounts to seconds of consumption, as in, 30s out of a year or something. The level of strip mining needed to have enough batteries to be useful would entail environmental destruction that i dont even want to contemlplate. Also consider the simply staggering amount of cabling, transmission lines and other infrastructure. I know a guy who specialises in naval anchoring, he does things like oil rigs and recently offshore wind turbines. They float, and have 6-8 anchor lines which are laid by a specialist vessel. Every single one of those turbines needs this and it's absurdly expensive
The funny thing about Baerbock is that nobody notice her anymore. She arrives in some country, meets some third tier politician, probably promises some German tax money, and flies home again. Probably with some nice gifts proportional to the German tax money she brought.
In Germany, no one talks about anything she does as foreign minister. Sometimes there are some photos of her on the beach, deploring the awful climate change. But even supporters of the Greens wouldn't be able to name anything she has achieved.
She is much like her predessor H.Maas, who had his stint of frequent flyer in chief, and since then vanished without a trace or memory.
this is totally right, how completely she's vanished. and you're about Heiko Maas too, a day or two somebody brought him up in conversation and took me a full minute to remember who the man even was.
They are really similar: both very vain (always expensively clothed), both ok looking (for politicians), both neither very smart nor very stupid (probably IQ 98 or so), both willfully ignorant (and proud of it).
The system selects for those people who are a bit smart, but gave up thinking. This type is very forgetable.
Even the Great Destroyer herself, Dr. Merkel, is almost forgotten by now.
And clearly she wants that, otherwise she could write a book, do the media tour, be on television all the time. But she wants to be forgotten.
Anal Lena Bareback! What's in a name?
E.U. elites are in a classic abusive relationship with Trump. They despise him, yet crave him.
Merkel was the ultimate, barren “cat lady”, misleading the GE people towards annihilation.
How’s that working?
For the love of all that's rational and good, can we please just stop electing "Karen" and other Girl Boss wannabes to public office?
Everywhere please! We have a major problem with those here in Australia too. They’re absolute idiots.
So I gather.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/anne-urquhart-australian-politician?utm_source=publication-search
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2021/09/15/kerry-chant/
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2021/11/26/baldmichael-down-under-annastacia-palaszczuk/
AMEN
Too bad the Haitians couldn’t have eaten HER cat… 🐈… poor kitty… 🔥🔥🔥
Unfortunately, we have a large supply of illegal Haitians in our small town… They say they’re here on a work permit… So why are they hanging around downtown with nothing to do? 😡
Our city Council says that they are not taking federal monies… Yeah, right 🙄
This is an example of how it is paid for (Aurora, Colorado):
https://christopherrufo.com/p/chaos-in-aurora
Germany has been indoctrinated to hate Trump. It shows how provincial Germany actually is. Their state controlled TV and radio stations, all lavishly paid by a tax every household has to pay, have been busy issuing misinformation about Trump when he was in power! But since they do it all the time, whether it’s being COVID, immigration or climate change, the normal people are kinda brainwashed when it comes to leftist politics! That’s why the situation in Germany needs to get far worse before any meaningful change will happen
They hated Reagan too. Always on the wrong side. Always.
In the USA too…all media has been against Trump since 2015…NINE YEARS of snarky, nasty, negative drivel…with lots of lies repeated for good measure. I turned off the News back in ‘15 when I could not stand the blatant lies.
I am in the UK and increasingly thought the antagonsim to Trump was ridiculous. In 2020 I realised Biden was unfit for president then as his brain was in decline. Where it is now who knows?
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/brainspotting-some-memes?utm_source=publication-search
Uh...I think the Germans have a history of being brainwashed.
I think they are heavily dissuaded from fighting the Powers that Be.
You described New Zealand, too. Brainwashed by the globalist, bought-off NZ mainstream media to hate Trump from day one of his presidency. "Everyone knows he's a [liar or cheat or narcissist, etc.]". <= always making the same statement without any evidence or backup or argument. Just repeating it over and over. Kiwis sucked it right up, as they did all the endless propaganda about the "safe and effective" jabs for NZ's "Team of Five Million" as Kiwis "Unite Against Covid".
And next they die…😢
U.K. too
Superb...and insightful on the "small country effect". Canadians have indulged this sort of sanctimonious anti-American grand-standing for decades, long before Trudeau (though it is more pronounced and worse in the Trudeau era). The sad thing is that Canadians stake their moral superiority and identity on the very things that are both morally bankrupt and unworkable, like a state monopoly on communist medical care....which really means no decent medical care within the country. Green energy is another morally bankrupt unworkable idea. Funny that the German foreign office didn't mention the flight of German industry following the rise in electricity prices....something Yuri Bezmenov notes below.
"...which really means no decent medical care within the country."
Yes, there was a video recently of a Canadian middle class man arguing with Trudeau about his 40% tax rate and no doctor. It was classic. Trudeau of course ignored what the man said.
Looking forward to the bananas.
I'm no admirer of Trump, but I will vote for him in order to vote for RFK Jr having some part to play in that administration.
I do wish Trump was not so inarticulate; he often says things that have a kernel of truth but manages to make himself sound stupid. "Injecting bleach" is a prime example.
8 years ago when he was 'inarticulate', it was amazing. Now it's just sad.
8 years ago, he'd say something inarticulate with a kernel of truth, and then the media would all dunk on him, but the kernel of truth would be obvious and the media would unwittingly both amplify his message as well as show themselves to be idiots. "What's happening in Chicago" is a good example of that. Most people had no idea about the stats on https://heyjackass.com/ until Trump mentioned it in passing. Then the media would issue 'fact checks' like "Trump said Chicago is sooooo dangerous but actually _only_ five thousand people got murdered there last weekend" and normal people would say "wait, what the fuck? You think that's a small number?"
But, so, I haven't watched the debate yet, I've only seen clips, and, it ain't good. Now he's just actually coming across as a bumbling idiot. And he's not being funny when he does it.
Trump was overconfident in his ability to wing it. It serves him well at his campaign rallies, but a debate was something else entirely. Some very sharp people have studied Trump's psychology to determine his strengths and weaknesses and planned the debate accordingly. Kamala has NEVER reacted to questions the way she did in the debate. She was too quick, too polished, and too smooth. She knew all the questions in advanced and practiced the responses. Team Trump learned the hard way never to underestimate your opponent, no matter how incompetent they appear.
I disagree. Trump is right about energy, and Trump is right about illegal immigration.
Articulateness is way overrated. Obama is/was articulate and look where the US is after Obama's third term and pushing for a fourth. I'll take inarticulate (and mean tweets too) with the right policies any day of the week.
BTW, [a] Reuters focus group of 10 undecided voters found that after watching the debate, six were leaning toward voting for Trump, three said they were leaning toward Harris, and one was still undecided.
https://twitchy.com/dougp/2024/09/11/ouch-harris-dodged-are-people-better-off-than-4-years-ago-question-but-this-pa-voter-didnt-n2400808
Obama, the smooth talking snake oil salesman.
I will nowperform some word magic on the name 'Barack Hussein Obama'. Abracadabra! Eh voila!
'I am a cobra bush snake'
Don't you just love it when anagrams work out so well? :)
Articulateness, of course, is not a deciding factor but it sure is nice.
In longform interviews, RFK Jr impresses with his articulateness as well as depth of knowledge end command of facts, as well as reasoning that I find, well, reasonable.
do your brain a favor and skip it.
he is a deranged babbling buffoon, she is perhaps the emptiest fakest shallowest politician to ever grace the national stage, which is saying a lot.
just rent "Idiocracy" instead, at least it's supposed to be funny.
He is a deranged babbling buffoon BILLIONAIRE. You forgot a "B".
Disagree. Start reading the backlash on social media. His ‘nuggets’ once again, are true.
I didn't say they weren't true. I said he came across as much dumber and much less funny than 8 years ago
Maybe getting shot does something to your sense of humor.
Probably did.
Honestly, my mental model of what happened is that the neocon deep state staged an _almost_ assassination of him, and then the next day pulled him aside and said "and we'll do it again if you don't serve our interests". And so now, he serves their interests.
It makes him a shitty leader who does not serve my interests, but in his position I'd do the same
Appetizing, but physically impossible. Such a precise near miss could not possibly have been achieved with the piece-of-crap weapon employed.
So what? You weren't entertained. Is that where we are at now? He wasn't entertaining - he didn't entertain me! - so he'll suck as a <political position>? Geez.
I can't believe supposedly intelligent people take the debates so seriously. It's professional wrestling for political nerds.
I didn't even watch the debate bro.
We already know he'll suck as a politican, he did in 2016. But, as I've said a million times before: it doesn't matter. The presidency is constrained by a million different forces, and the president is largely a figurehead. Almost everything that our society is doing now, it will still be doing in 2028, regardless of who wins the election. We'll still be supporting Israel. We'll still be funding the Ukraine war. We'll still be pushing LGBT stuff on everything. We'll still be clamping down on free speech. Guns will still be restricted. Drugs will still be illegal. Black people will still get unfair gibs. We will still act like an empire. We'll still fuck over Europe. None of that is going to change.
If it would change, we'd be having a very different conversation. But yes, that _is_ where we are at now, because the presidency is _literally_ just an entertainment product. The actual levers of power in this country are invisible and inaccessible to the voting public. They _probably_ always were, but this ship has definitely sailed at least since FDR.
Well, "if" is the magic word here. Trump seems more than unusually determined to lose.
Anyway I always enjoy recalling the clip of those German diplomats at the UN snickering at Trump for something on which he was later proven resoundingly correct.
Trump Landslide coming
Recall how the 2020 election was stolen. That hasn't been fixed.
"Trump is going to lose Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania - because he cannot stop mail-in ballots from strip malls, Walmarts and gas stations."
https://omega4america.substack.com/p/trump-swamped-by-ballots-from-walmarts
I watched about ten minutes of the video. I don't if the researchers did this, but I would like to have seen them go to some of the anomalous addresses and see if the named voters actually live there, or get there mail there. Also, is it legal to register to vote at a valid address and then later have your absentee ballot sent to one of the anomalous addresses like a P.O. Box?
Well, below is what the Omega group (using "fractal quantum tech") claims. I hope they can pull it off.
"In 2024, unlike 2020, we can identify fraud literally the day it happens - the day they mail out a ballot to a Walmart - after we warned that registrar in writing not to do so.
Every ballot, mailed to an ineligible address, is immediately flagged and tracked right through November 5 - because that ballot is legally ineligible to be counted.
This time every registrar gets a text, with the link to the list of ineligible addresses they have been warned about - so for the first time they know we see every move.
Unlike 2024, this time we have better technology than the states. We have far better technology than the DNC - and of course better than the GOP.
Unlike 2020, we have sophisticated voter integrity orgs - local ones not the national grifter class - local teams who know the ground, know the law and are already finding addresses by the thousands - where ineligibles are casting ballots via NGOs.
The 2024 election is going to be stolen by the 42 months of padding voter rolls with illegal aliens, migrants and drifters - people who will never show up to vote - but their ballots will arrive, accumulate, be picked up by the Postal Service or NGOs and voted - for Leftists.
This time we have mail carriers who told us how the Postal Service collected undeliverable mail-in ballots and gave them to Leftist NGOs.
This time we have Postal Service workers, who warned us they worked in central processing locations where they collected loose ballots and placed them where Leftist-paid organizations would pick them up. Recycling in a new light.
This time we know - today - the U.S. Postal Service is in on the steal.
So this time - our strategy is to KEEP THOSE BALLOTS TO INELIGIBLE ADDRESSES OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE POSTAL SERVICE.
An ineligible ballot, in a swing state, in the hands of the U.S. Postal Service is a likely vote for Kamala.
Once it is mailed - if we do not stop it first, we track it to see if it is cast.
TRACK EVERY BALLOT, FROM AN INELIGIBLE ADDRESS, FLAG IT AND CHALLENGE IT IMMEDIATELY.
CHALLENGE IT RIGHT UP UNTIL ELECTION DAY - OR A WEEK LATER AS SO MANY BALLOTS WILL BE COUNTED MANY DAYS LATER!
CHALLENGE IT BEFORE it is counted. We have the technology, the people in place and the momentum to get this done.
This is how we, as in you and the rest of us - disrupt the 2024 steal - and there’s nothing the Left can do to stop it.
We disenfranchise NOBODY."
Excerpted from: https://omega4america.substack.com/p/can-american-elections-be-saved
It's nice to be optimistic.
How did such limited people take over? Baerbock is not an isolated example. She is an exemplar of the Western Liberal. Literally nothing in her head comes from inside her head. She spouts downloaded nonsense that is little more than reheated slogans. Almost none of it makes sense or conforms to reality.
The destruction of energy production is a case in point. How did it get to this? Can they really believe windmills and solar panels will drive Europe forward? I think they do believe this. If so, how did morons like this make it in life?
What is going on?
It's a function of the deep state/bureaucracy. The Soviet Union suffered from this as well. They went from Lenin - charismatic leader of the revolution to Yuri Andropov - walking corpse. The bureaucracy wants politicians it can control, and since the bulk of the managerial class is composed of ever less-capable mid-wits, they need to continuously find politicians with lower and lower capabilities. They dislike and actively block up-and-coming politicians that show too much competence. However, they are terrified of the political leader who is both charismatic and highly capable, because that person can do some real damage to the bureaucracy's power structure.
I suspect you are right. The tail wagging the dog. She is a clown, but in the Anglosphere we have plenty of examples of incompetents like her.
Yes, because somehow, the bureaucratic system in the West selects for them.
Yes, a good analysis. What a farce. Although an increasingly dangerous one.
Yes, those charismatic and competant political leaders are the people they call "authoritarians" because they can get things done without the bureaucracy. Democracy is now the system of electing weak politicians who will simply defer to the bureaucracy and its "experts".
> Literally nothing in her head comes from inside her head.
Quoted for truth. I know a lot of people like this. They only ever have other people's opinions about things, but they espouse them very fervently.
(I started using that phrase back when "Net Neutrality" was first a big news item. "If you can't describe what a peering agreement is, you don't have an opinion on Net Neutrality. You have *someone else's* opinion on Net Neutrality." It's easily extensible to other contentious subjects.)
I had many arguments about Net Neutrality myself. An early indicator of the type, for me at least. The use of the word "neutral," a positive sounding thing, was the bit they couldn't see beyond. Who doesn't want neutrality? None of them could understand the dangers of the State regulating the internet.
Total clown show.
One of the queries I use on the Climate Cultists is "Relative to today, what was the average global temperature during the Eemian Interglacial, and what effect did that have on the environment?"
Last I checked, the western world is still a democracy. So, how did such people take over? I don't know, maybe ask your neighbours why they keep voting for such people.
Or could it be that voting is fake and gay? Not sure if it's legal to suggest that on a German blog
Indeed. But my rant extends to the voters. I know people like Baerbock. They believe their open borders, solar-panelled, gender neutral world is some epic scifi utopian paradise and any resistance to any of it is a sign of backwardness or hard-right sympathy. How did we end up with so many people living in cloud cuckoo land?
The left's capture of the educational system.
Nobody smacked any sense into them
Tell them that they have to ask the ballot box for consent, otherwise slipping their vote in, is equal to raping democracy.
But the bureaucracy is not a democracy. And the deep state is not a democracy. Here you have your answer.
That just sounds like "Democracy is fake and gay" with extra steps. After all, either a) democracy is real, and the people explicitly chose for those bureaucrats to occupy the positions they do; or b) "democracy" is not actually responsive to the will of the people, and those bureaucrats do _not_ govern with the will of the people (in other words, democracy is FAG)
I am reminded of the Majipoor Chronicles, by Robert Sheckley. On Majipoor, the visible head of the government is the Coronal -- a celebrity political figure, responsive to the people, holding rallies, proposing grand policies. He has power, but the bulk of the real power is held by the Pontifex, who lives underground in a huge warren of offices, is never seen publicly, and runs the actual bureaucracy. Sheckley addresses the democracy problem by establishing that the Pontifex is always the (presumably seasoned) Coronal of the last cycle. Western democracies have not.
Reminds me of an essay by David Chapman, one of the most under-appreciated thinkers of our era.
https://meaningness.com/virtue-court
tldr: we should have two parallel political systems, one which is just the entertainment product our system is, and oen that is the actual bureaucratic machinery that runs things. You get one vote, and at each election, you can vote in one race or the other, but not both.
It's mostly tongue-in-cheek but it's good food for thought
Could it be that the bureaucrats operate with a limited responsiveness to the will of the people? Neither has absolute control. The question is: what is the distribution of that control? Lately that distribution has been increasingly favoring the bureaucracy.
Democracy = the government serves the will of the people.
If the bureaucrats have "limited responsiveness" to the will of the people, that's just a fancy way of saying they don't serve it fully. Or in other words, democracy is fake and gay
See Paul Foot's book 'The Vote'. Good coverage of the struggle for democracy here from the English Civil War (~1640-60) onwards. Many of 'the left', including Foot, aren't or weren't tyrants.
This unhelpful and confusing terminology, 'left' vs 'right' has spread worldwide especially since 2020 and obfuscates a debate on individual freedom versus top-down tyranny. Use the correct words. They may be 'authoritarian' vs. 'libertarian'. It depends what exactly you're trying to say
I'm impressed with your minister and her fitness to have walked all over the world. Oh, wait, I guess she was using a solar powered airplane. German ingenuity at work.....What, she used regular jet aircraft! Mon dieu I can't believe the double standard. Thanks for all you work Eugy. Love you here in the USA