Leftists like to say that it is impossible to deport 11 million illegals, despite the fact that people like Stalin were able to ship millions of people to Siberia using 1930s technology. I'm not one to believe that technology has deteriorated to a pre-20th century level in the past 70 years. Well, it turns out you don't have to deport 11 million people, most of them will leave on their own! The non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies looked at the issue and found that “a modest increase in enforcement (such as E-verify or visa tracking)
would cause significant attrition in the illegal population– sending
millions of illegals home on their own at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer.” It happened in Arizona, where 17% of illegals up and left voluntarily in a single year when E-verify was enforced. Try that across the whole of the US and you'll see people flowing across the border in the opposite direction.
Another thing leftists like to say is that it would be impossible to pay for mass deportation, and even if it were implemented the US economy would collapse without cheap labour from illegals picking oranges. Actually, when you run the numbers, the exact opposite is true. Illegals are draining $100 billion from the US economy every year.
Under Donald Trump's plan, if we get rid of the illegals who are a huge drain on the economy, it would be possible to invest that money on things like universal pre-kindergarten throughout the country, a policy I think is totally asinine but leftists love because who doesn't love taking little kids away from their parents and teaching them that fifty genders exist and 2+2=7 if you feel it does?
[T]he government could allocate 60 percent more resources and benefits for returning American soldiers and veterans (increasing the President’s 2016 budget request for the VA from its current $168.8 billion to $268.8 billion)
Alternatively, public schools could have the funds to employ an additional 1.9 million elementary school teachers to help teach young Americans in already-overcrowded schools.
State and local governments could employ 1.6 million more police officers in to reduce crime in gang-besieged neighborhoods.
These savings could the expand the government’s allotment for Emergency Shelter Grants, which provide support for the homeless or victims of domestic violence, by than 400 times its 2014 budget ($250 million).
Everything in the universe has borders. Atoms have borders called electron shells that define chemistry, cells have borders called membranes that regulate concentration of chemicals within the cytoplasm, bodies have borders called skin that keep the organs from falling out and pathogens from getting in, the Earth itself has borders, the crust and the atmosphere keep the deadly environments of the mantle and outer space out so life can exist, the solar system has a border called the heliopause, even galaxies have borders. Why should it be that absolutely everything in the entire universe has borders EXCEPT the United States? And why is it that none of these bleeding heart leftists take these illegals into their own homes to eat their own food, sleep on their own beds, and rape their own children? Because they are heartless evil bastards, that's why. They want other people to suffer so they can feel smug with how generous they are with other people's money and lives. They are sick freaks. Trump 2016!
All the news not mystical or urban enough for page 1
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
Thursday, August 13, 2015
CIA Busted Trafficking Coke
10 August outside El Paso, Texas, seven minutemen watching the US border made a citizen's arrest of two men who were smuggling over 1000 pounds of cocaine. The two men had valid CIA identification and were driving a vehicle registered to the CIA. The FBI, DEA, and US Customs and Border Protection are working together to get to the bottom of this. The CIA denies any involvement in the incident, though they are known to engage in drug trafficking with the Contras in the 1980s and even to this day in Afghanistan.
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Book Review: A Time for War
A Time for War is the second book in the fiction trilogy by radio host Dr. Michael Savage.
This book was a good 50 pages shorter than the first one, which is good, because the first one had at least 50 pages of padding. There was only one sex scene in this book, on page 219 (hardcover), as opposed to the fifteen or more in the first book. That's a wonderful improvement. One very odd thing was that there were only a handful of chapters that were all super long. The last chapter was about 60 pages. They could easily have been broken up without losing anything.
A Time for War takes place exactly one month after Abuse of Power, in September 2011. It stretches credulity more than a little that Islamic terrorists working with MI6 would try to set off a backpack nuke in San Francisco and then one month later the Chinese would try to release a deadly plague in the exact same city. I would think SF would still be under complete lock down one month after a failed nuclear attack. I also find it unbelievable that two billionaire industry magnates would be conspiring to take down the US government one month apart.
Then there is Jack Hatfield, the almost super hero of the books. He's a journalist who reported on the first Gulf War and then lost his job in the early 2000s when a media watchdog group got offended by a remark he made regarding Islamic terrorists. I don't know how much money TV journalists make, or how much they can keep 10 years after being downgraded to working freelance, but this guy has properties all over town, a 40 foot yacht, and a fancy car. Money is no object for him, or any of his friends, the near 70 year old mercenary (said to be "older than God") who can beat the crap out of anyone, carries illegal weapons around with impunity, and flies all over the world to help guerrilla fighters take down drug trafficking rings and tin pot dictators, and the straw hippie trust fund baby who keeps getting beat down intellectually (and sadly dies half way through the book). The aging hippie is a hypocrite (he complains about pollution yet his own boat is a gas guzzler) who gives a few strawman arguments that get shot down, then he goes off to sulk about how leftists today have lost their way, having abandoned free love and egalitarianism in favor of identity politics and social justice warriorism. It was difficult to get through the scenes where he was there because they seemed like cheap shots.
Jack Hatfield is also unbelievably lucky. He has luck that does not exist, saving the day with one or two seconds to spare every time. He also has unbelievable charm, able to bed any woman half his age on the planet with a few words except his ex-wife who left with a bald 300 pound lawyer Jack walked in on one day. She pays Jack to park her even more expensive car in his private parking garage to gloat. One is left to wonder how Jack is so lucky, how he is basically the biggest hero in the world, having saved tens of millions of lives twice, and yet his career is still ruined because of what some political action group said about him a decade ago. The man saved not only SF twice, he saved the entire global economy, he's friends with big shots in the FBI, and he still can't get a show on TV. I don't buy that.
One final note, in regard to the nature of the plague germs that were going to be released. I don't care if you swallow a million lethal doses of plague, it won't kill you a million times faster. Your blood will not boil and cause your eyes to pop out of your skull. The bacteria still need to attack your cells, which still takes about an hour per cell. The more bacteria there are the more cells they can attack, but they can only kill cells so fast.
A Time for War never raised itself to the level of excitement of Abuse of Power. It seemed like more of the same.
77/100
This book was a good 50 pages shorter than the first one, which is good, because the first one had at least 50 pages of padding. There was only one sex scene in this book, on page 219 (hardcover), as opposed to the fifteen or more in the first book. That's a wonderful improvement. One very odd thing was that there were only a handful of chapters that were all super long. The last chapter was about 60 pages. They could easily have been broken up without losing anything.
A Time for War takes place exactly one month after Abuse of Power, in September 2011. It stretches credulity more than a little that Islamic terrorists working with MI6 would try to set off a backpack nuke in San Francisco and then one month later the Chinese would try to release a deadly plague in the exact same city. I would think SF would still be under complete lock down one month after a failed nuclear attack. I also find it unbelievable that two billionaire industry magnates would be conspiring to take down the US government one month apart.
Then there is Jack Hatfield, the almost super hero of the books. He's a journalist who reported on the first Gulf War and then lost his job in the early 2000s when a media watchdog group got offended by a remark he made regarding Islamic terrorists. I don't know how much money TV journalists make, or how much they can keep 10 years after being downgraded to working freelance, but this guy has properties all over town, a 40 foot yacht, and a fancy car. Money is no object for him, or any of his friends, the near 70 year old mercenary (said to be "older than God") who can beat the crap out of anyone, carries illegal weapons around with impunity, and flies all over the world to help guerrilla fighters take down drug trafficking rings and tin pot dictators, and the straw hippie trust fund baby who keeps getting beat down intellectually (and sadly dies half way through the book). The aging hippie is a hypocrite (he complains about pollution yet his own boat is a gas guzzler) who gives a few strawman arguments that get shot down, then he goes off to sulk about how leftists today have lost their way, having abandoned free love and egalitarianism in favor of identity politics and social justice warriorism. It was difficult to get through the scenes where he was there because they seemed like cheap shots.
Jack Hatfield is also unbelievably lucky. He has luck that does not exist, saving the day with one or two seconds to spare every time. He also has unbelievable charm, able to bed any woman half his age on the planet with a few words except his ex-wife who left with a bald 300 pound lawyer Jack walked in on one day. She pays Jack to park her even more expensive car in his private parking garage to gloat. One is left to wonder how Jack is so lucky, how he is basically the biggest hero in the world, having saved tens of millions of lives twice, and yet his career is still ruined because of what some political action group said about him a decade ago. The man saved not only SF twice, he saved the entire global economy, he's friends with big shots in the FBI, and he still can't get a show on TV. I don't buy that.
One final note, in regard to the nature of the plague germs that were going to be released. I don't care if you swallow a million lethal doses of plague, it won't kill you a million times faster. Your blood will not boil and cause your eyes to pop out of your skull. The bacteria still need to attack your cells, which still takes about an hour per cell. The more bacteria there are the more cells they can attack, but they can only kill cells so fast.
A Time for War never raised itself to the level of excitement of Abuse of Power. It seemed like more of the same.
77/100
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Moron Crapitalism
Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments, the man who gave away millions of his own money to raise the wages of everyone in his company, is facing trouble. Not because of his policy, but because of something all too common, fratricide. Moron Crapitalists will say Gravity Payments is in trouble because of leftism, but that's patently untrue. Rust Lumbar and Pizzaman Cain didn't actually read the story, they read the headline and jumped on it like a bitch in heat.
What Mr. Price did was not "hurrr leftism!" He owns the fucking business. He gave his own money away. He didn't demand the government increase minimum wage, he cut his own pay to give it to people who worked at his own business. That's capitalism. It's his business, he has the right to do whatever he wants with it. As long as he does not include the government - and he didn't - that's still capitalism.
None of the problems he's facing are from "hurr leftism doesn't work!" His brother, a minority share holder, is suing him, threatening to destroy the company. Now that he gave millions of dollars away he doesn't have the money to pay for legal fees to fight his predatory brother.
Greedy motherfuckers who work for the company quit out of butthurt. They wanted to feel superior to other workers. Other business owners and clients, stopped doing business out of a knee-jerk reaction like all the other people who say "hurrr leftism". His policy to give his own money away did not negatively affect the company, human evil of people who want to feel superior to others is hurting the company.
And it's not even all bad. His business has gotten more clients than ever as a result of his decision. The ONLY problem is the lawsuit. If his brother destroys the company in the critical 18 months before profits pick up then it's over. His brother pounced when the company was at its weakest specifically to destroy it. Had that not happened this might have started a landslide. Other business owners might have had to follow his lead and stop paying themselves a trillion dollars a year by the force of the market correcting itself.
This isn't what the fatass Rust Lumbar or Pizzaman Cain said. "Hurrr leftism!" It's not leftism. He earned that money and he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. If he wants to give it away that's just as much capitalism as if he wants to keep it to build a mansion he never uses or a fleet of cars he keeps in a garage or a trip to africa to murder animals to make his dick bigger. Capitalism is not the same as greed. You can be very generous with the money you earn. Isn't that what people like Lumbar and Glennard Becklestein say? Rich leftists complain about the poor but don't give their own money away, they want the government to raise taxes. Well here is a rich man who doesn't want the government to raise taxes, he got up off his ass and gave his own hard earned money away and Lumbar and Messiah Complex are still bitching about it. You literally can never win with them. They will complain about whatever you do, and call giving golden parachutes to trillionaires who destroy the global economy capitalism. Well I call it crapitalism and it needs to die.
What Mr. Price did was not "hurrr leftism!" He owns the fucking business. He gave his own money away. He didn't demand the government increase minimum wage, he cut his own pay to give it to people who worked at his own business. That's capitalism. It's his business, he has the right to do whatever he wants with it. As long as he does not include the government - and he didn't - that's still capitalism.
None of the problems he's facing are from "hurr leftism doesn't work!" His brother, a minority share holder, is suing him, threatening to destroy the company. Now that he gave millions of dollars away he doesn't have the money to pay for legal fees to fight his predatory brother.
Greedy motherfuckers who work for the company quit out of butthurt. They wanted to feel superior to other workers. Other business owners and clients, stopped doing business out of a knee-jerk reaction like all the other people who say "hurrr leftism". His policy to give his own money away did not negatively affect the company, human evil of people who want to feel superior to others is hurting the company.
And it's not even all bad. His business has gotten more clients than ever as a result of his decision. The ONLY problem is the lawsuit. If his brother destroys the company in the critical 18 months before profits pick up then it's over. His brother pounced when the company was at its weakest specifically to destroy it. Had that not happened this might have started a landslide. Other business owners might have had to follow his lead and stop paying themselves a trillion dollars a year by the force of the market correcting itself.
This isn't what the fatass Rust Lumbar or Pizzaman Cain said. "Hurrr leftism!" It's not leftism. He earned that money and he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it. If he wants to give it away that's just as much capitalism as if he wants to keep it to build a mansion he never uses or a fleet of cars he keeps in a garage or a trip to africa to murder animals to make his dick bigger. Capitalism is not the same as greed. You can be very generous with the money you earn. Isn't that what people like Lumbar and Glennard Becklestein say? Rich leftists complain about the poor but don't give their own money away, they want the government to raise taxes. Well here is a rich man who doesn't want the government to raise taxes, he got up off his ass and gave his own hard earned money away and Lumbar and Messiah Complex are still bitching about it. You literally can never win with them. They will complain about whatever you do, and call giving golden parachutes to trillionaires who destroy the global economy capitalism. Well I call it crapitalism and it needs to die.
Saturday, August 1, 2015
The Vineyard Workers in Real Life
Company raises wages of all it's employees. Some workers quit out of envy or spite or just plain mean-spiritedness to when they first started, so out of butthurt they quit. They were still going to be paid more but they were butthurt about new workers not having to suffer like they had to so they quit. This is what I was talking about with the schools.
Does he not have the right to do what he wants with his own company, or are the seasoned workers envious of his generosity?
When Dan Price, founder and CEO of the Seattle-based credit card payment processing firm Gravity Payments, announced he was raising the company's minimum salary to $70,000 a year, he was met with overwhelming enthusiasm.
"Everyone start[ed] screaming and cheering and just going crazy," Price told Business Insider shortly after he broke the news in April.
One employee told him the raise would allow him to fly his mom out from Puerto Rico to visit him in Seattle. Another said the raise would make it possible for him to raise a family with his wife. Overnight, Price became something of a folk hero — a small-business owner taking income inequality into his own hands.
But in the weeks since then, it's become clear that not everyone is equally pleased. Among the critics? Some of Price's own employees.
The New York Times reports that two of the company's "most valued" members have left the company, "spurred in part by their view that it was unfair to double the pay of some new hires while the longest-serving staff members got small or no raises."
No one is losing any money. No one is not getting a raise. The only "problem" is that new employees are getting a bigger raise percentage wise than the older employees. People who have been there for many years are still making more money. Hard workers will still make more and still get bigger raises in the future, and slackers will get the boot. It's just this one time the bottom is being raised, and the people at the top are envious. They don't want new people getting more than they used to back when they were new, despite making more now. It's a sin, plain and simple.
How does this policy change hurt the people who quit? Only their pride. They are not hurt financially. They are still getting raises. They are still making more money than new people, they just don't get the ego boost of thinking they're so much better than the new people. I wouldn't care one bit. If I was working at a company for 20 years and I started out making $30,000 and worked my way up to $90,000 and now, 20 years later, I saw that new people were making $70,000 instead of $30,000 I wouldn't foam at the mouth and quit because they didn't have to start out as bad as I did. I wouldn't care one bit. I would still be making more than when I started. I'm not competing with them. I don't have to compare myself to them, only to myself. My situation improved. So what if the situation of everyone else improved? Am I doing better than I was? Of course. So what's the problem? Pride is the problem. Pride is the fountainhead of all sin. It is the greatest evil of this world.
Does he not have the right to do what he wants with his own company, or are the seasoned workers envious of his generosity?
When Dan Price, founder and CEO of the Seattle-based credit card payment processing firm Gravity Payments, announced he was raising the company's minimum salary to $70,000 a year, he was met with overwhelming enthusiasm.
"Everyone start[ed] screaming and cheering and just going crazy," Price told Business Insider shortly after he broke the news in April.
One employee told him the raise would allow him to fly his mom out from Puerto Rico to visit him in Seattle. Another said the raise would make it possible for him to raise a family with his wife. Overnight, Price became something of a folk hero — a small-business owner taking income inequality into his own hands.
But in the weeks since then, it's become clear that not everyone is equally pleased. Among the critics? Some of Price's own employees.
The New York Times reports that two of the company's "most valued" members have left the company, "spurred in part by their view that it was unfair to double the pay of some new hires while the longest-serving staff members got small or no raises."
No one is losing any money. No one is not getting a raise. The only "problem" is that new employees are getting a bigger raise percentage wise than the older employees. People who have been there for many years are still making more money. Hard workers will still make more and still get bigger raises in the future, and slackers will get the boot. It's just this one time the bottom is being raised, and the people at the top are envious. They don't want new people getting more than they used to back when they were new, despite making more now. It's a sin, plain and simple.
How does this policy change hurt the people who quit? Only their pride. They are not hurt financially. They are still getting raises. They are still making more money than new people, they just don't get the ego boost of thinking they're so much better than the new people. I wouldn't care one bit. If I was working at a company for 20 years and I started out making $30,000 and worked my way up to $90,000 and now, 20 years later, I saw that new people were making $70,000 instead of $30,000 I wouldn't foam at the mouth and quit because they didn't have to start out as bad as I did. I wouldn't care one bit. I would still be making more than when I started. I'm not competing with them. I don't have to compare myself to them, only to myself. My situation improved. So what if the situation of everyone else improved? Am I doing better than I was? Of course. So what's the problem? Pride is the problem. Pride is the fountainhead of all sin. It is the greatest evil of this world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)