What I tell people every election about my choices:
R: OK on fiscal & business, warmongers, suck on civil rights
D: OK on civil rights, bringing awful CA biz environment to rest of US
L: Brave, reasonable soul who has no chance of getting elected in 2-party system
What my choices actually are:
R: fiscal mess, mixed bag on regulation, suck on some civil rights, sometimes warmongers
D: fiscal bigger mess, awful on regulation, suck on other civil rights, sometimes warmongers
L: Weird dude last seen shouting at pigeons in a skate park
Fortunately we are still all unified by continued bipartisan support for our 3rd amendment rights. Though the 2020 version is "we won't quarter troops in your home but we may forcibly quarter you in it for 6 months"
I think about this election & am just exhausted at the thought of four more years of Trump. But I can tell you I am also exhausted by my business experience in California. Literally every month at least one new regulation is passed in CA that substantially affects our business
I have spoken before about what I call the regulation singularity where new regulations come so fast that a business cannot restructure processes and re-train their people fast enough to keep up with new government business mandates. We are very close to that point in CA.
The thought of bringing this regulation approach to the rest of the country is terrifying to me -- The Democrats talk about being for the little guy but it will be impossible for any company without a billion $ in sales and lobbyists in DC to survive in the world they create
Should I vote for the lunatic who coarsens our public spaces, whose in-the-moment responses are often horrifying & who treats certain classes of individuals like shit -- but, whose damage to me personally would likely be less than from the other, more mainstream candidate?
I sat with a group of women the other day who talked of themselves as essentially one issue voters (abortion rights). The interesting thing in my experience about one-issue voters is that they are all for one-issue voting until your one issue is different from theirs
I told them they should'nt try to make me into a one-issue voter, because if they did I might vote for Trump. I find the whole package of Trump to be unsupportable, but if you told me to vote narrowly on my personal short-term interests, I would have a hard time voting for Harris
Anyway, this is all a long way of saying that I am not going to react well to folks who tell me I am throwing away my vote on the libertarian candidate.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In response to Twitter's policy of banning heterodox opinions about the efficacy and relative costs of COVD-19 responses, I have one word to say:
Homeopathy
Homeopathy has got to be one of the dumbest, most ascientific medical theories that exists in the modern world (except perhaps from some shamanistic beliefs of an untouched aboriginal tribe in the Amazon).
Created in 1796, it is just absurd to imagine that diluting an active ingredient to ratios of approximately one molecule in a volume of water the size of an ocean has anpotential healing qualities beyond the placebo effect.
It appears that the tools of panic-exaggeration developed over 20 years in the climate movement have been fully deployed to justify limitless government authority during COVID. Note the map below -- the scale has been chosen to push nearly everything into the most extreme red
To describe us now as almost completely in the worst possibly condition when things are clearly much better in terms of deaths and hospital utilization than 60-90 days ago begs the question of why such an uninformative scale was chosen where everything is always at the max
The reason cannot be scientific -- scientists would never choose a scale where 90+% of the data consistently exceeds the upper bounds. It has to be a political choice, to try to scare people and develop a constituency for authoritarianism.
When it comes to creating fear, one of the media's preferred techniques is to bring attention to tail-of-the-distribution events, even those down to the 6-sigma level, and portray them as somehow characterizing the mean.
I have years of immunity built up to this technique from following the climate debate. I have seen all-too-many occasions when the media extrapolates from a single data point, like a hurricane, into implied trends in mean behavior.
This works on a couple of levels--first, most media consumers cannot differentiate between the frequency of media coverage of a certain event & the underlying frequency of the event itself. Increased coverage of, say, hurricanes creates a perception that hurricanes are increasing
The State of California has created a state-run Roth IRA called CalSavers that all employers must offer to their employees in the state if they do not otherwise have a 401k or similar plan.
It is an opt-out program, meaning that the employee will automatically have 5-8% of their pay deducted and sent to the state for safe-keeping unless they explicitly call or write to the state to opt out.
I'm not going to comment on whether it's a good idea for workers to entrust their savings to an entity that can't stop itself from grabbing everyone's wealth, in part because once I'm an employer in the program it's illegal for me to opine on whether employees should participate
I know zero about the details of Trump's taxes. But it is perfectly possible to use the tax code exactly as Congress intended & pay little or no tax for years on strong cash income. One common reason is reinvesting profits with accelerated depreciation coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/20…
"This is what everyone is calling a "loophole" but I think that is a misnomer. "Loophole" implies people are taking advantage of some drafting error or unanticipated use of an IRS rule. That happens all the time, but our example is not an unanticipated use. "
"In our example we are using IRS rules exactly as Congress intended -- the company is being rewarded by Congress for the investment it made in new equipment with a multi-year tax deferral."
Your late night climate test: Which is the following numbers is closest to the actual current concentration of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere. (many of my readers will get it right, but forward it to friends and most will get it wrong)
Please do not mock those who are very wrong. Years ago Steve Martin had a routine where he suggested how funny it would be to teach your kids to speak wrong. They would show up the first day at school and say "Mumbo dogface in the banana patch?"
Most Americans, including a lot of blue check marks like our new friend @warrenleightTV are like little children purposely taught wrong or islanders struggling for meaning using a cargo cult.