When it moves, you regulate, and when it quits moving, you subsidize is the government motto. I'm getting the idea that a lot of government officials are kind of losers in real life and become parasitic on those who actually produce and make life good so they can take credit. They don't want to kill the economy, they want to change it so they get credit.
They probably have no idea what they are doing. they have never done a thing but say yes or no and have no clue. All they do is fill their pockets. A person with a good, steady job and satisfied with that, does not go into politics. I know very little politicians who went in there full of ideals, and if they did, they were sidelined, or demotivated, or overruled by their party.
thats why they stay in office for decades, who else would want them. would you hire an idiot that is full of hubris, unreasonable, petty, lazy, greedy and using other for his/her own gain? methinks not. you could wipe you ass with their cv's.
Boy is this ever the truth! Truly intelligent, decent, moral people want nothing to do with these jobs. Unfortunately, generally it's the lowest denominators of society who are drawn into politics. There aren't any Mr. Smiths in Washington any more, if there ever were.
yes, ad nauseum....a vicious circle of mediocre puppets bobbleheading all day long and pandering to lobbyists. Get a life, grow a pair, tell lobbyists to piss off, make decisions based on the peoples voices and do the work for and of the people, namely all of us. And put our nation and its people first.
Well if you have the choice between 2 crazy old men, that is not really a choice right? And from congress, we can only vote for our state's politicians. All the rest is up to the other states. I wish we could send them all home and start anew. Without support from BigPharma, with a limited time in the government, say no more than 6 years, and if they don't do their job, being able to fire them. I think Australia has a system like that (although they don't seem to fare much better)
I think what we are enduring is the final pustch by the globalist-progressive left to impose their brand of corporatism (a.k.a. fascism) upon the formerly free world.
They have played a long game, taking a century or so to largely eradicate and marginalize enlightenment values and convince truly terrifying numbers of people that top-down coercion and diktat is preferable to the distributed economic and political systems that made them wealthy and free.
The same forces of darkness are upon us and make no mistake, they their goal is to enslave us all.
That's what it has been all about since the beginning of the nation-state in Mesopotamia, and that's what it is all about now.
Let’s subsidize borrowing of ever-greater amounts to attend college then wonder why tuition keeps increasing faster and faster than inflation and why colleges keep hiring more and more vice deans in charge hurt feelings and pandering.
I have to say, I suspect motives more sinister than mere greed and incompetence. Ice Age Farmer's Telegram documents the ongoing dismantling of the supply chain- https://t.me/s/iceagefarmer
Incidentally, this is exactly the history of land use and zoning regulations. We had a market pre-1920s that produced affordable housing everywhere in the US, in the face of a giant surge of European immigration. Yes, some was substandard, but at least people weren't living on the streets like in LA today.
We've gradually added layer upon layer of regulation over 100 years, and now blame the market and developers for ruining cities. Housing and development is one of the most highly-regulated industries in America. Any wonder why it's not working so well anymore?
And the answer from planners and politicians is always one more layer of complexity, one more rule that will "fix" it.
INstead of going abroad and trying to fix unfixable regimes, it might be better to think a little socialist and help your own people first. I think no country should be considered wealthy as long as there are people living in the streets, under bridges, in holes. Lots of dogs have a better life! In Turkey street dogs have rights and you can not mess with them!
In the face of obvious over-reaching regulations that do more harm than good, it's tempting to support governmental laissez-faire. I'm not sure that that's likely to lead to good things. Here's why: if you follow the money, it may be surprising to learn who and what are backing various regulations. The problem isn't the mere IDEA of regulating production and commerce; it's the overall system in which regulation formation takes place. There's a lot of profit to be made by the vested interests on both sides of the aisle who are calling the shots. For instance, some people say that Democrats want no borders because by letting immigrants in, they will eventually have more voters voting for their candidates (which will please their donors). That might be true. What is definitely true, though, is that there are a whole host of corporations who support the Democrat party that have a similar desire for unbridled entry from Mexico. Why? These business interests are desperate to fill jobs that are undesirable with low-wage workers (e.g., meatpacking, poultry, agricultural companies, etc). They have a vested interest in making you think that it's just some loony progressives (who are going to be re-elected in their liberal districts thousands of miles away no matter what) who are promulgating this stuff. They're hiding behind a smokescreen, in other words, but essentially, they're for open borders too!
Regulation doesn't equal the devil. (Well, sometimes it does, but it's not absolute). The best regulations are those which take into account perspectives from multiple sides of an issue. There are instances of this happening. Foresters, logging companies, and environmentalists can come together (and have in some cases) on issues that lead to intelligent policies and regs.
Large interests, including corporations, public sector unions, NGOs, politicians who represent the donor class (rich entities that fund their campaigns), and interest groups from every stripe run the show in DC and most state capitols. The system of governance we currently have -- the one that doesn't seem to be aligned with the best aspirations of the Declaration or the Constitution -- does not closely represent the interest of the vast majority of citizens. Should we just trash it, along with all of their often corrupt regulations? It's not an illogical option, but we need to replace it with something better.
A void of governance may be a libertarian's dream, but it's la-la land. Jeffersonian Democracy may be a wonderful idea, but in an interconnected, highly urbanized world, the possibility is as ephemeral as the smoke from a cannabis pipe.
Let's not let the establishment paint those who decry the regulatory environment we are suffering into a reactionary corner. It's better to be eternally revolutionary and diligent. We need to overthrow the creeping forces of stagnation and corruption that are inevitable with highly bureaucratized institutions. It's right to rebel against corrupt practices (in Congress and the statehouses) that have led to narrowly tailored regulations (that benefit the needs of the few over the needs of the people), but if we attempt simply cut governance and regulations at the knees with some weak-ass "4-year and done" rebellion, the fat cats will ultimately rise up and they will establish a new order, so restrictive that it will make the present one look like a libertarian paradise.
I support that concept. Upholding all of the rights of all citizens should be a baseline practice (even though that's definitely not the case in today's climate of outcome-based decision-making). To be truthful, we've not done a good job at protecting the rights of all classes. Worse, our government is focused on upholding the preferences of a small group of fortunate citizens. The outsize influence of the wealthy and the well established-- hijacked as many of them may be by the virtue-signaling, dim-witted ideas that soothe their narcissistic temperaments-- is getting in the way of the government you crave.
"highly bureaucratized institutions" - Internally, regulators do what they were hired to do - regulate. But those institutions inevitably grow larger (Parkinson's Law) thus need to find more things to regulate. Eventually inertia takes over and the benefit/harm ratio no longer maters. We are there.
Seem to be common among "highly bureaucratized institutions". Shuffling the deck chairs seems to fail - Homeland Security anybody? Trump's notion of remove 3 for every new 1 might be a path forward. But elimination of entire organizations may be the only answer with an effort to contract it all outside. After the graft subsides, recreate with new staff.
It’s hard to disagree with the diagnosis or the sentiment that seems to underlie your proposed solution. However, controlling for mission creep and inherited institutional corruption that occurs when you re-hire former members during the reconstitution phase — or the altitudinal dive that occurs when, in attempting to avoid inherited corruption, one hires inexperienced pilots while the bureaucratic airplane is in flight (think Iraq and the shunning of former Baathists when filling governmental posts)— are not to be left for chance. Post WWII W. Germany and Japan might offer guidance but I don’t know enough about either experiment to recommend a similar approach. In any event, a lot of thought needs to be given to the reconstitution or rebuilding after the elimination of bureaucratic structures. As you point out, Homeland Security has been a shit show.
Quite agree. The hope is that the contracted work last long enough to 'expire' many functionaires. While many ex-gov people will be picked up by the contractor, the marginal ones will be discovered and move on in life. Recalling Iraq and Bremmer's idiocy discharging anybody who knew how to turn the valves.
Couple Points, apropos the lesson... One, the losers that impose these regulations and the mouth-breathers who support them have no idea what a Mobius Loop is. Stop using big words. Two, blame-shifting should be an Olympic sport. Maybe when society gets more woke!
Additionally, when politicians create an organization to regulate, monitor, and enforce they sometimes succeed in things such as reducing pollution to X%, but then the legion of people they hired to regulate, monitor and enforce have nothing more to do, so they then regulate to 0.5X and then to 0.125X and then to and then to 0.0001X ... and so the infinity loop continues for, well, forever and ever and ... until we all disappear into our own tiny bellybuttons with a nearly inaudible "bloop."
I also read this. It uses the Russian nesting doll metaphor to describe how major corporations are financially related to investment groups and which ones. However, I've been thinking of these arrangements as being incestuous relationships. I believe learning that Blackrock and Vanguard are not just the largest nesting dolls in the world, but that Blackrock's largest shareholder IS actually Vanguard reinforces the concept of incestuous business relationships.
Goosetherumfoodle - I'm only half through that video. It's long enough (and complex enough) that it taxes my aging and deteriorating attention span. To some extent, I fully expected the interlacing and pyramiding of ownerships (that realization tends to come with age anyway), but I honestly had no idea of the magnitude of some of the players.
The big question left to me is: "Okay, Now, how do we unravel what looks like a hopeless, SNAFU, morass?" I'm not at all sure it can be. Do you think that it will become so complex that it unravels itself? Massive collateral damage!
I need to drop the video near its midpoint but will try to finish it later. Thanks for the link!
My big takeaways were Vanguard, Blackrock and the Spartacus letter. They own corporations that we buy from everyday: Mars, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, etc. They have their insidious fingers wrapping around our necks to choke us. It is complex as this took years to form, plan, perfect and wage war. Unraveling will take great courage and sacrifice, so much so that I do not believe the average American will take on what would have to be done. I would. There is too much to lose and I, on my deathbed, do not wish to know I was a coward or left a half life of a future ahead for my children. We see the Aussies falling...what country is next....and like dominoes they fall. It would take almost every adult citizen to fight and root out those causing this. And this would involve things good and moral citizens probably could not or would choose not to do, the ugly stuff. So, at the end of the day, lay yourself and your children down at the altar of absolute evil and corruption(even more insidious than we can fathom), giving up every freedom you have known, or fight to the death. Everyone in the world, pick a side.
I've always loved science fiction, especially writers such as Robert Heinlein. We need to colonize new planets so we can leave this stuff behind and start over at the "living off the land" stage.
Mira, I strongly suspect some sort of distraction will be needed, and that right soon, to keep the proles in line. Too many incompetent and corrupt people making too many truly idiotic and disastrous ideologically driven actions that yield ever-expanding blowback and "unintended" consequences. I'm certain our special services can cook up something to keep this slow-motion train wreck covered over. For a little while.
When it moves, you regulate, and when it quits moving, you subsidize is the government motto. I'm getting the idea that a lot of government officials are kind of losers in real life and become parasitic on those who actually produce and make life good so they can take credit. They don't want to kill the economy, they want to change it so they get credit.
They probably have no idea what they are doing. they have never done a thing but say yes or no and have no clue. All they do is fill their pockets. A person with a good, steady job and satisfied with that, does not go into politics. I know very little politicians who went in there full of ideals, and if they did, they were sidelined, or demotivated, or overruled by their party.
thats why they stay in office for decades, who else would want them. would you hire an idiot that is full of hubris, unreasonable, petty, lazy, greedy and using other for his/her own gain? methinks not. you could wipe you ass with their cv's.
What I find incomprehensible is how people can possibly keep supporting and voting for these corrupt sociopathic parasites.
It is like some sort of hive-mind Stockholm Syndrome that repeats with every quadrennial clown show.
Because anyone with the brains to actually do the job, doesn't want the job!! So we vote for the smartest idiot who does want the job.
It reminds me of the scene in Gladiator where Maximus is asked by Marcus Aurelius after he informs him of his intent to pass him with his powers:
MA: Do you accept this great honor that I have bestowed upon you?
M: With all my heart, no.
MA: That is why it must be you!
Boy is this ever the truth! Truly intelligent, decent, moral people want nothing to do with these jobs. Unfortunately, generally it's the lowest denominators of society who are drawn into politics. There aren't any Mr. Smiths in Washington any more, if there ever were.
That is the best definition of a politician I have read
yes, ad nauseum....a vicious circle of mediocre puppets bobbleheading all day long and pandering to lobbyists. Get a life, grow a pair, tell lobbyists to piss off, make decisions based on the peoples voices and do the work for and of the people, namely all of us. And put our nation and its people first.
Well if you have the choice between 2 crazy old men, that is not really a choice right? And from congress, we can only vote for our state's politicians. All the rest is up to the other states. I wish we could send them all home and start anew. Without support from BigPharma, with a limited time in the government, say no more than 6 years, and if they don't do their job, being able to fire them. I think Australia has a system like that (although they don't seem to fare much better)
No we have the exact same idiots here.
I think what we are enduring is the final pustch by the globalist-progressive left to impose their brand of corporatism (a.k.a. fascism) upon the formerly free world.
They have played a long game, taking a century or so to largely eradicate and marginalize enlightenment values and convince truly terrifying numbers of people that top-down coercion and diktat is preferable to the distributed economic and political systems that made them wealthy and free.
The same forces of darkness are upon us and make no mistake, they their goal is to enslave us all.
That's what it has been all about since the beginning of the nation-state in Mesopotamia, and that's what it is all about now.
We must prevail.
The MSM seems to love hiring them! But then, they're kinda two sides of the same coin.
exactly, two peas in a pod....numbnuts squared.
Had not read your comment yet LOL. Hits the nail on the head.
Next admin needs a Bad Cat cabinet post. With teeth.
And claws!
Yes!
Let’s subsidize borrowing of ever-greater amounts to attend college then wonder why tuition keeps increasing faster and faster than inflation and why colleges keep hiring more and more vice deans in charge hurt feelings and pandering.
Yup you do speak the truth.
Damn, John P., ain't that the truth? Recovering community college instructor here, and you speak the truth!
Politicians were quick to jam that "OFF" button on the economy, but they are too stupid to realize there's no "ON" button.
It's the Great Reset button. They know perfectly well what they're doing.
I have to say, I suspect motives more sinister than mere greed and incompetence. Ice Age Farmer's Telegram documents the ongoing dismantling of the supply chain- https://t.me/s/iceagefarmer
Incidentally, this is exactly the history of land use and zoning regulations. We had a market pre-1920s that produced affordable housing everywhere in the US, in the face of a giant surge of European immigration. Yes, some was substandard, but at least people weren't living on the streets like in LA today.
We've gradually added layer upon layer of regulation over 100 years, and now blame the market and developers for ruining cities. Housing and development is one of the most highly-regulated industries in America. Any wonder why it's not working so well anymore?
And the answer from planners and politicians is always one more layer of complexity, one more rule that will "fix" it.
INstead of going abroad and trying to fix unfixable regimes, it might be better to think a little socialist and help your own people first. I think no country should be considered wealthy as long as there are people living in the streets, under bridges, in holes. Lots of dogs have a better life! In Turkey street dogs have rights and you can not mess with them!
In the face of obvious over-reaching regulations that do more harm than good, it's tempting to support governmental laissez-faire. I'm not sure that that's likely to lead to good things. Here's why: if you follow the money, it may be surprising to learn who and what are backing various regulations. The problem isn't the mere IDEA of regulating production and commerce; it's the overall system in which regulation formation takes place. There's a lot of profit to be made by the vested interests on both sides of the aisle who are calling the shots. For instance, some people say that Democrats want no borders because by letting immigrants in, they will eventually have more voters voting for their candidates (which will please their donors). That might be true. What is definitely true, though, is that there are a whole host of corporations who support the Democrat party that have a similar desire for unbridled entry from Mexico. Why? These business interests are desperate to fill jobs that are undesirable with low-wage workers (e.g., meatpacking, poultry, agricultural companies, etc). They have a vested interest in making you think that it's just some loony progressives (who are going to be re-elected in their liberal districts thousands of miles away no matter what) who are promulgating this stuff. They're hiding behind a smokescreen, in other words, but essentially, they're for open borders too!
Regulation doesn't equal the devil. (Well, sometimes it does, but it's not absolute). The best regulations are those which take into account perspectives from multiple sides of an issue. There are instances of this happening. Foresters, logging companies, and environmentalists can come together (and have in some cases) on issues that lead to intelligent policies and regs.
Large interests, including corporations, public sector unions, NGOs, politicians who represent the donor class (rich entities that fund their campaigns), and interest groups from every stripe run the show in DC and most state capitols. The system of governance we currently have -- the one that doesn't seem to be aligned with the best aspirations of the Declaration or the Constitution -- does not closely represent the interest of the vast majority of citizens. Should we just trash it, along with all of their often corrupt regulations? It's not an illogical option, but we need to replace it with something better.
A void of governance may be a libertarian's dream, but it's la-la land. Jeffersonian Democracy may be a wonderful idea, but in an interconnected, highly urbanized world, the possibility is as ephemeral as the smoke from a cannabis pipe.
Let's not let the establishment paint those who decry the regulatory environment we are suffering into a reactionary corner. It's better to be eternally revolutionary and diligent. We need to overthrow the creeping forces of stagnation and corruption that are inevitable with highly bureaucratized institutions. It's right to rebel against corrupt practices (in Congress and the statehouses) that have led to narrowly tailored regulations (that benefit the needs of the few over the needs of the people), but if we attempt simply cut governance and regulations at the knees with some weak-ass "4-year and done" rebellion, the fat cats will ultimately rise up and they will establish a new order, so restrictive that it will make the present one look like a libertarian paradise.
A void of governance may be a libertarian's dream, but it's la-la land.
-----------
No, our dream is a government that actually does what it is supposed to -- uphold all the rights of all the citizens - full stop.
I support that concept. Upholding all of the rights of all citizens should be a baseline practice (even though that's definitely not the case in today's climate of outcome-based decision-making). To be truthful, we've not done a good job at protecting the rights of all classes. Worse, our government is focused on upholding the preferences of a small group of fortunate citizens. The outsize influence of the wealthy and the well established-- hijacked as many of them may be by the virtue-signaling, dim-witted ideas that soothe their narcissistic temperaments-- is getting in the way of the government you crave.
"highly bureaucratized institutions" - Internally, regulators do what they were hired to do - regulate. But those institutions inevitably grow larger (Parkinson's Law) thus need to find more things to regulate. Eventually inertia takes over and the benefit/harm ratio no longer maters. We are there.
Seem to be common among "highly bureaucratized institutions". Shuffling the deck chairs seems to fail - Homeland Security anybody? Trump's notion of remove 3 for every new 1 might be a path forward. But elimination of entire organizations may be the only answer with an effort to contract it all outside. After the graft subsides, recreate with new staff.
It’s hard to disagree with the diagnosis or the sentiment that seems to underlie your proposed solution. However, controlling for mission creep and inherited institutional corruption that occurs when you re-hire former members during the reconstitution phase — or the altitudinal dive that occurs when, in attempting to avoid inherited corruption, one hires inexperienced pilots while the bureaucratic airplane is in flight (think Iraq and the shunning of former Baathists when filling governmental posts)— are not to be left for chance. Post WWII W. Germany and Japan might offer guidance but I don’t know enough about either experiment to recommend a similar approach. In any event, a lot of thought needs to be given to the reconstitution or rebuilding after the elimination of bureaucratic structures. As you point out, Homeland Security has been a shit show.
Quite agree. The hope is that the contracted work last long enough to 'expire' many functionaires. While many ex-gov people will be picked up by the contractor, the marginal ones will be discovered and move on in life. Recalling Iraq and Bremmer's idiocy discharging anybody who knew how to turn the valves.
I’ll say it again: Regressivism ruins everything it touches.
Couple Points, apropos the lesson... One, the losers that impose these regulations and the mouth-breathers who support them have no idea what a Mobius Loop is. Stop using big words. Two, blame-shifting should be an Olympic sport. Maybe when society gets more woke!
When the Mobius Strip becomes boring, try a Klein Bottle! (Folks, just look it up on the Internet)
Just when I thought my Friday was over. Excellent suggestion.
Absolutely correct, el gato!
Additionally, when politicians create an organization to regulate, monitor, and enforce they sometimes succeed in things such as reducing pollution to X%, but then the legion of people they hired to regulate, monitor and enforce have nothing more to do, so they then regulate to 0.5X and then to 0.125X and then to and then to 0.0001X ... and so the infinity loop continues for, well, forever and ever and ... until we all disappear into our own tiny bellybuttons with a nearly inaudible "bloop."
Love this accurate description.
my naval is off limits. meanwhile, they can disappear into their own anuses where they would be perfectly comfortable bc they emulate them everyday.
I especially like "cap container stacks at two and then fine carriers when they can't unload their containers quickly enough."
Though, in Long Beach's defense, they finally raised the cap to 4. Temporarily.
Isn’t that Zuckerberg’s new logo?
😽😹
PLEASE READ THIS FROM DR. MERCOLA RE: WHO OWNS THE WORLD AND THEIR PLAN
IT SITES THE SPARTACUS LETTER-THIS IS EVIL BEYOND. PLEASE WATCH AND READ
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/10/29/blackrock-vanguard-own-the-world.aspx
I also read this. It uses the Russian nesting doll metaphor to describe how major corporations are financially related to investment groups and which ones. However, I've been thinking of these arrangements as being incestuous relationships. I believe learning that Blackrock and Vanguard are not just the largest nesting dolls in the world, but that Blackrock's largest shareholder IS actually Vanguard reinforces the concept of incestuous business relationships.
these forces are just bad news, nothing good can from this. either we as world citizens stand up and really fight or we lay down and die.
Goosetherumfoodle - I'm only half through that video. It's long enough (and complex enough) that it taxes my aging and deteriorating attention span. To some extent, I fully expected the interlacing and pyramiding of ownerships (that realization tends to come with age anyway), but I honestly had no idea of the magnitude of some of the players.
The big question left to me is: "Okay, Now, how do we unravel what looks like a hopeless, SNAFU, morass?" I'm not at all sure it can be. Do you think that it will become so complex that it unravels itself? Massive collateral damage!
I need to drop the video near its midpoint but will try to finish it later. Thanks for the link!
My big takeaways were Vanguard, Blackrock and the Spartacus letter. They own corporations that we buy from everyday: Mars, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, etc. They have their insidious fingers wrapping around our necks to choke us. It is complex as this took years to form, plan, perfect and wage war. Unraveling will take great courage and sacrifice, so much so that I do not believe the average American will take on what would have to be done. I would. There is too much to lose and I, on my deathbed, do not wish to know I was a coward or left a half life of a future ahead for my children. We see the Aussies falling...what country is next....and like dominoes they fall. It would take almost every adult citizen to fight and root out those causing this. And this would involve things good and moral citizens probably could not or would choose not to do, the ugly stuff. So, at the end of the day, lay yourself and your children down at the altar of absolute evil and corruption(even more insidious than we can fathom), giving up every freedom you have known, or fight to the death. Everyone in the world, pick a side.
I've always loved science fiction, especially writers such as Robert Heinlein. We need to colonize new planets so we can leave this stuff behind and start over at the "living off the land" stage.
If only....
May God help us.
I pray for this daily. At this point a miracle is needed so very much.
I am so ashamed that we have these scum in office.
Not much we can do about it. If you have a choice between dumb and dumber, greedy and greedier, who shall we vote for?
CALL FOR A COUP.
Mira, I strongly suspect some sort of distraction will be needed, and that right soon, to keep the proles in line. Too many incompetent and corrupt people making too many truly idiotic and disastrous ideologically driven actions that yield ever-expanding blowback and "unintended" consequences. I'm certain our special services can cook up something to keep this slow-motion train wreck covered over. For a little while.
Economy's Catch-22, making your flying insane, committing you to keep flying the plane, AKA, Kamikaze Economy.
Well silly, don't you know that energy produces simply need to open the valve a bit more to get more flow therefore solving the energy crunch.