Posted On: Monday - June 21st 2021 7:40PM MST
In Topics:   US Feral Government  Race/Genetics
(Image off of VDare)
That's Peak Stupidity's feeling after not just hearing about this Juneteenth holiday bill being passed, but additionally by how many votes. I could go on about the cowardice of many of the American people, tempered with the thought that, yes, you often put your status in the neighborhood and even career on the line. However, the disgust in this post if for our supposed representatives and the elite Senators in the Feral Government.
VDare's always on-the-money Washington Watcher II gave us the sad disgusting story of the votes of these cucks in his pre-Juneteenth article GOP (With Brave Exceptions Like Rep. Matt Rosendale) Rolls Over For Anti-White Juneteenth Scam. The voting was sickening: Unanimous yea's, or at least no nays in the Senate and 14 nays in the House.* Though he helped encourage this whole piece of bullshit, Zhou Bai Dien himself didn't have to be a factor. Even the severely math challenged can see that this one would override a veto.
A commenter on the Unz Review argued to me that this was not cowardice but just the normal purposeful destruction of America by these guys. I don't buy it for most of the R's, at least those in the House. They will vote for the destructive wars, the immigration invasion, and the corporate welfare ("invade the world, invite the world, in hoc to the world", in Steve Sailer parlance). They have donors to please, of course. The voters come 2nd or lower. In my mind though, many of these guys are not out for the purposeful cultural destruction that the ctrl-left, of which the D squad is almost completely comprised, is.
These Senators and Reps must know that they have so many constituents seething with hatred for their cowardice, but then, that's not as bad as being called names. No, of course not!
The whole thing disgusted me so much, I didn't feel like even writing about it before. Here are the 14 Congressmen who voted nay:
Andy Biggs (AZ)
Mo Brooks (AL)
Andrew Clyde (GA)
Scott DesJarlais (TN)
Paul Gosar (AZ)
Ronny Jackson (TX)
Doug LaMalfa (CA)
Thomas Massie (KY)
Tom McClintock (CA)
Ralph Norman (SC)
Mike Rogers (AL)
Chip Roy (TX)
Tom Tiffany (WI)
All Red squad - should we congratulate them? What's the point?
* I am not sure how many abstentions there were in each body. That's a cop-out anyway. "Yeah, my alternator broke, and I missed my flight. I missed the vote by THIS MUCH. Yeah, CPAC audience, I had my nay vote in my hand even, yeah, that's the ticket."
No comments - Click here to start thread
Who, what, when, WHERE, why, how
Posted On: Monday - June 21st 2021 3:22PM MST
In Topics:   University  Political Correctness  Curmudgeonry  Media Stupidity
This post turned from a straightforward "look at this shit!" post about more wokeness at a university (well, what else would you expect) into a curmudeonry post. That's a genre, if you will, that Peak Stupidity has laid off of to some degree. (It was one of the most active Topic Keys at the start this blog.)
The blog Campus Reform, linked-to a lot by Glenn Reynolds and the Instapundit gang, does a decent job of documenting stupidity on campus. VDare's James Fulford posted Chapman University Holds Multicultural Segregated Graduations, Including "APIDA"—But None For Whites, Of Course with reference to the C.R. original.
I start reading some news, and I want to know WHERE it happened or is happening. It's one of the 5 "W"s of Journalism* for cryin' out loud! It may just be me, but I can't listen to any story told verbally to me without early on knowing where it happened. I have to interrupt people, even if only for 3 seconds, to find that out. It's a male thing likely, as we need those visuals in our head to think.
Neither the Campus Reform article nor James Fulford's post mentions where this Chapman University is located. It's not as if this place is widely known. Maybe Campus Reform expected readers to know, but I doubt that, and VDare is not all about universities. Each one could have spent 10 seconds lookng this up if they didn't know. I would give them a break on Harvard, or better yet, the University of California - San Diego. (Is that where Grant's tomb is? I still want to find out who's buried there - people keep asking me...)
OK, well, this is not just about these 2 articles, or this would be pretty nit-picky of Peak Stupidity. I see it a lot on-line, The worst perpetrators of this media stupidity are the TV news sites. I try to avoid them simply because most of them have pop-up, flashing crap up the ying-yang, making me wait a couple of minutes before it all settles the hell down. Sometimes, they've got some stories I want to read, mostly local to the station/website, with more and more current details than the big outfits.
I look at the station call sign at the top. Sure a call sign starting with "K" means west of the Mississippi River (I think?), and "W" is for east of it. Well, that doesn't narrow it down much. They show the weather usually, so I can tell that it's not Minot or not Sarasota. That just doesn't cut it. I need to imagine the place before I can understand. I'll look all around the front page, once it settles the hell down, and mostly find nothing. They've got to know there is google/bing/duckduckgo/etc. out there for which people from out of town can find their stories. I end up looking up the station location by call sign!
What's the problem with people? Are there really people who don't care where it happened? "Something happened. Here's who, errr, if he's not black.. Here's what. Here's when. Here why, at least as it fits our narrative. Here's how. Where? You don't need to know that.". I just can't think without a location. Perhaps this is another young-people thing. "What do you mean, where? It happened on the internet, that's where. Duh?!"
PS: Oh, what ABOUT the graduation ceremonies at Chapman College in Orange, California? I may write another post on that.
* What they do now is concentrate way too much on the "why". Every story has an opinion in it. "Man shot by teen in robbery gone wrong: White people must be responsible." Then, the "who" must be hidden much of the time.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Introducing Black Greta
Posted On: Friday - June 18th 2021 7:36PM MST
In Topics:   Humor  Global Climate Stupidity
Thanks go to Adam Smith for either creating this image or finding it for us. I took some liberty and added a name and caption. Of course, black Greta's Mom was a little more creative in the delivery room. She also doesn't annunciate her, errrr, English(?) quite as well as Swedish Greta, especially the Death Metal version.
Just as some background, as usual, the woke SJW, Commie, whatever-you-want-to-call-them crowd is continually calling for more "People of Color"*to be a bigger part in this, that, and the other thing. As is often the case, I read some of this tripe courtesy of observations by Steve Sailer. This one was humorous enough for Mr. Sailer to prompt him to title it That Surprise Merger of the Washington Post and Babylon Bee Is Starting to Show Synergy.
Goodbye Greta, we hardly knew yöu. Hello Greteisha!
* There are other letters in addition to P.O.C. now, but I'm not in the mood to look up what they stand for. Hell, maybe there's W.G. for White Guy in there ... nah, somehow I doubt it.
Orwellian Stupidity out of the man himself
Posted On: Friday - June 18th 2021 7:00AM MST
In Topics:   Orwellian Stupidity  Books
Peak Stupidity uses our topic key Orwellian Stupidity in jest this time. This post is about stupidity of the author George Orwell himself, or really just lack of wisdom (gotta keep with the theme of the blog though, you know...). Normally, the term "Orwellian" is, of course, used to describe practices of Totalitarian governments that were frighteningly described in their final endgame in Orwell's most famous novel, the dystopian Sci-Fi story 1984.
I'm only writing this due to my having read 2 more of the famous author's books, Homage to Catalonia and Animal Farm, lately. The point here is not at all to denigrate George Orwell, as I wouldn't know how to start writing in the manner of a classic author like this.
That's just it, though. George Orwell* is a classic author. From the time I was forced to read many of these guys' (and a few gals') works in high school**, then later on a few of them of my own volition, I was instilled a respect for writers of published books that was perhaps undeserved. Don't get me wrong - I have plenty of respect for the writing abilities of the classic authors. I realize the value of the classic American and English literature as sometimes force-fed to me for my own good.
However, that was not the age of the internet, in which one can self-publish and promote his works on a youtube channel. If there is a published book out by some dude, well, I figured he is a Writer™, PERIOD, and is somebody who knows WTH he is doing. It's taken me a long time to shake that respect and realize that most of these writers are humans with foibles and can be lacking in wisdom like the rest of us.
Exhibit A here is one George Orwell. 1984 is indeed an important work, meant to be a warning about Totalitarianism, but often taken lately as an instruction manual! That was his last book however, written in 1949 when he was 46 years old***. At the time of his writing of Homage to Catalonia, he was only 35 years old. Face it, he was just young and dumb like most of us were, to some degree. In Orwell's case, it wasn't to impress the chicks that he went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War (written about in that book), as he was already married. However, you've got the usual impulsive behavior of a fairly young, and in this case very idealistic, man. "Let's go fight those nasty Fascists! Our side is full of good people, who want to set things right. Never mind the support from the USSR, we're doing the right thing."
Homage to Catalonia was a diary of Mr. Orwell's time on one of the fronts in the war, and then of the turmoil that happened in Barcelona as he and his wife stayed there some months. This turmoil, including plenty of street fighting, arrests, and executions (including of some of Orwell's compatriots on the "Republican" side) was among the different factions that were all supposed to be fighting the fascists. I didn't get the big picture of what this was all about - spillover from the friction/purges/etc. back in the USSR, the big supporter of Orwell's side - until after I wrote my review, and that's because neither did Mr. Orwell himself. He couldn't write about that part, as he didn't know any better, being in the midst of this turmoil and confusion in Barcelona. He could only have seen the big picture after he was back safely in France, then England, and maybe only after some time had gone by.
I'd read multiple times in the past that George Orwell, even though he wrote 1984 had remained a Socialist in ideology. It was hard for me to believe that a guy who saw the evils of Totalitarianism, as described in his last book, couldn't see that Socialism usually leads in that direction. However, I see that by the time of his writing of Animal Farm, at 42 years old, indeed this author had no problem with Socialism itself, only a problem with a bad implementation of Socialism by
What's the whole point here? The point is that, just based on one classic book alone, one shouldn't get the impression that the author is/was some big fountain of wisdom. George Orwell really didn't get it, from what I've read (only the 3 books), until his last work, published the year before his death at 46 y/o. These classic authors are well known for possibly some high-brow entertainment or from their making of profound statements about society and ideology. Much of their lives, though, until they gather some wisdom, they may be as full of shit as the next guy. I got the wrong impression from my English teachers.
* That was the pen name of Englishman Eric Arthur Blair. Wikipedia has a good biography page here.
** I never did tackle that Moby Dick, though it was indeed assigned. Even the Cliff Notes were too long for this guy!
*** George Orwell died young, still 46 years old in January of 1950.
**** He'd finally gotten a clue about what that whole Barcelona mess he'd gotten caught up in was all about.
You will own nothing, and you will be happy
Posted On: Wednesday - June 16th 2021 8:58PM MST
In Topics:   Global Financial Stupidity  Globalists  Economics  The Future  Big-Biz Stupidity
As The Alarmist, one of our frequent Peak Stupidity commenters has explained here, that seems to be the future that the Globalists have planned for us... not them, but just us. Alarmist says, "In 2030, you will own nothing, you will rent what you need, and you will be happy."
Along these lines, comes the deal with the Big Biz financial company BlackRock buying up large numbers of houses in this country. Are they the reason prices are going up rather than just increasing inflation and people's search for assets that won't be destroyed by the FED, as we speculated* in our recent post The current real estate boom as prepping for inflation?
Via an unz.com commenter, I came across the great video below, from an outfit called "Trader University". I have no idea if that organization is just a scam, but this Matthew Kratter sure seems to have his head screwed on straight with his explanation of what BlackRock is up to. The big point DOES have to do with the FED, in fact, as BlackRock has access to the cheap money, while the rest of us only have access to the fairly cheap money. They can come out ahead over the small-time, hard working landlords.
Besides this unfair finance shenanigans, a big problem with Big-Biz being Big Landlord is the dealing with and uncaring bureaucracy by renters. Oh, and BlackRock doesn't have to live anywhere near these neighborhoods, so Section 8 folks, you are very welcome! That's some bad news for anyone in one of these neighborhoods. The Globalists could give a rat's ass about that. Section 8 is just another Feral Government program that Big Biz such as BlackRock can work in harmony with.
I thought it was worth my time to go through the 10 minutes here. One last thing, and it's the last part of the video: This Mr. Kratter touts Bitcoin at the end to offer a solution out of this Global Financial Stupidity. However, he had nary a word to say about gold and silver. I understand the, well, I don't want to write "value" of bitcoin, but it's usefulness. I just don't see it as a store of value as gold and silver are. Perhaps that's just the new generation gap for ya'.
For one of these young people, I didn't find his voice too soi-boy-like to listen to either.
* Get it, "speculated" as in Real Estate?
National Healthcare: Socialism at its finest - Part 4
Posted On: Tuesday - June 15th 2021 7:57PM MST
In Topics:   Liberty/Libertarianism  Healthcare Stupidity  Socialism/Communism
(Continued from Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.)
Peak Stupidity noted the point of this series in the 1st post, that the changes for the worse in American healthcare have been on the business/economic side, not the scientific/technical side, and these two issues should be kept separate in a discussion of what's wrong. In the 2nd part and the 3rd part, we discussed what Nationalized or Government-run ("single-payer" for the obscuration-euphemism inclined) and the beauty of the old American nearly free-market system, respectively.
This post will be about what to do to change direction from the Socialist road we have gone far down back to something resembling real markets. The quick answer is "nothing". We can't do a u-turn now. I will expound on that just a little.
Socialism is made to be an irreversible process. (The 3rd law of Thermodeolgy?) I don't say that's intentional by all parties. Your Bernies and such perhaps are just so hooked on this ideology that can produce a Utopia (A Utopia, I tells ya!) that it's not necessarily their intention to lock people in. "Look at Sweden. They were a unified society with high altruistic tendencies... etc... " "You'll like our Socialist programs so much, you'll get tired of #LIKING them!" I still say that forcing the responsible to take care of the irresponsible is not the way to go.
Within the government agencies developed to run Socialism, and especially within the higher ups, of course there is an intention to sign up more taxpayer dependents and keep the existing ones. It's job security for those bureaucrats, and it's a way to expand one's fiefdom for the higher officials. Politicians such as the scumbag Lyndon Johnson have admitted that the idea is to create dependencies that will have these "niggers voting Democrat for the next 50 years." It's been 56 and counting, so, you gotta admit, the man was right about that part, his ruination of the nation notwithstanding.
If you get enough Americans dependent on any Socialist program, you've now got that many additional votes for the program than you had when it was voted in (well, by somebody) to begin with. Take Social Security, please. Yeah, that's an old joke, but I'm not counting on seeing any REAL money out of that deal, so if they did take it, it's not gonna surprise me or bankrupt me. Yet, I have friends who are just plain counting on the Social Security Scam, ... errr, Scheme(?)*, when they should have known better and could have saved better. They will not support trashing the whole system.
Well, back to the topic, the Socialist Government Healthcare plans will be the same. The Big-Gov/Big-Biz partnership in control of this huge industry** have created dependencies that make it difficult to back out of these programs, whether intentionally or not. The irreversibility is inherent.
Why even bother to write about "the way it was" and the bureaucracy of Exhibit A, the British NHS then? For one thing, at this point, there is still room outside the system to pay cash for services. One can still be on the hook via his taxes to support the stupidity, yet, work outside the system for better care. One can do that in Britain too, and people do, as we've noted. However, the more government control that is put on the medical field, the more those outside that system may be squashed. It'd be best to still try to stave off more of it.
Secondly, people, especially the young who don't have the imagination or knowledge to understand there's a better way out in the world, ought to be taught otherwise. As with the writing of Ron Paul columns, we need to get to the root of our problems, even if we can't just flip a switch to go back in this society, just for the record. The only way we'll ever see anything like the 1960s American healthcare world again is after a separation or reset.
* See also Part 2.
** The "Statista" site says it is 18% of the GDP, but then GDP is a squirrelly number. It includes those very 11 people out of 50 at that friend's medical practice that do nothing but bill collection. Is that really a product or a service?
Site note and excellent VDare article
Posted On: Monday - June 14th 2021 7:50PM MST
In Topics:   Websites  Pundits  Race/Genetics  alt-right  Books
Site note first:
As you may have noticed over the last month or so, Peak Stupidity has slowed down a bit. We have gone from a feverish 10-12 posts weekly to more like 7 to 10. There are also weekdays in which we have not posted a thing. I apologize to the readers who look forward to a post each evening, (if any ... posts ... or readers that like us so much).
I don't think the'll be any running out of material. Sometimes I've got 5 ideas from suggestions in previous posts backed up and at least as many new ones. It's the summer, and family obligations will be higher. Hopefully, there'll be 5 to 7 posts or so weekly for the next 2 months. There may be more of the shorter ones and more "hey, read this!" types. We're not going dark slowly, though, or anything like that.
Speaking of anything like that, it may be time this summer to do the revamping of the software. That's more of a warning than a promise, just as the changes may be more bugs than features. ;-} That'll take a week or two, if I get started on it.
Great VDare commentary on the new Charles Murray book:
This is Steve Sailer material, all the material in the Charles Murray book Facing Reality: Two Truths about Race in America. However, F. Roger Devlin's* commentary today in VDare is not about Charles Murray's data analysis on black/hispanic/white/"asian" crime rates and intelligence in this new book. He has no problem with that, but he does with Mr. Murray's worry about White people getting tribal.
You'll likely appreciate Charles Murray's FACING REALITY: Ruling Class Must Accept Race Differences—Or Provoke The "Disaster" Of White Identity Politics. Note that Mr. Devlin put "disaster" in quotes, as he thinks it is, or would be, no kind of disaster at all. I agree with Mr. Devlin vs. Mr. Murray.
One powerful reason to suspect our individualism and tendency to de-emphasize race and kinship has deeper roots is the slowness of American whites to adopt racial identity politics for themselves. Murray approves of such reluctance. He may not like minority racial politics, yet his principal fear appears to be that Whites may begin to develop something similar.It gets better from there. I don't use the word often, but I'd say this Mr. Devlin is based.
In other words, he believes the current double standard forbidding Whites (and only Whites) from pursuing their group interests—while permitting or encouraging such behavior in other groups—is a lesser evil than Whites starting to behave like everybody else and fight fire with fire. In his own words: “If Whites adopt identity politics, disaster follows.”
* I didn't recognize this writer's name, and I see this is his first article on VDare this year. He writes infrequently, or is published on VDare infrequently, as I see just 3 or 4 per year.
It's Just a Thought - CCR
Posted On: Saturday - June 12th 2021 9:04PM MST
In Topics:   Music
I woke up the other day with a song playing in my head that had the hypnotic keyboards, as with The Doors' Ray Manzarek's stuff, but it was Creedence, with a lead guitar playing. I can't figure out for sure what that was. CCR didn't use keyboards much until their 6th album, Pendulum, from late 1970. I bought his album, much later of course, expecting the usual CCR guitar dominated sound, but this was different, requiring some time to get used to.
It's Just a Thought may or may not be the song I'd had in my head, but either way, this is a nice one. It's not nearly long enough, as you want in those hypnotic keyboard parts, such as the long fade ending in Supertramp's Child of Vision or The Doors' Riders on the Storm, at only 3 1/2 minutes (maybe long for a CCR song).
I don't know if the lyrics are profound or not, but they sure sound like they are.
Creedence Clearwater Revival was:
John Fogerty – lead vocals, lead guitar, keyboards, harmonica, saxophone
Tom Fogerty – rhythm guitar, backing and lead vocals
Doug Clifford – drums, percussion, backing and occasional lead vocals
Stu Cook – bass guitar, backing and occasional lead vocals, keyboards
Gain a function, lose a function
Posted On: Saturday - June 12th 2021 8:45PM MST
In Topics:   Science  Healthcare Stupidity  Kung Flu Stupidity
OK, that's gain of function. This term sounds like it was made to not mean very much. I am not in the science of virology, so maybe it has more connotations for a virologist, but how about something like "Deadliness upgrade" instead? That's what it is, changing viruses that originally only harm animals into ones that can harm and kill humans. Is "gain of function" purposefully obscure so that the public will not wonder "just why the hell are people doing this?"
Peak Stupidity wondered* back in our post Nicholas Wade on that Wuhan lab and origins of the Kung Flu why this gain-of-function research is being done at all. The author, science writer Nick Wade asked the question too.
The stated purpose, per that article, is to mutate or recombine the virus for reasons of being able to develop a vaccine that could fight such a virus. It's not just that Wuhan lab that does this work, and it's not just on these specific SARS viruses. There are labs that do the same for flu strains. I just don't get it. Why take the risk of handling the newly developed strains that are harmful to humans, just for the chance that they will develop naturally and people will need a vaccine? If it takes lots of work in the lab to make this mutation happen, what's the chances that it will develop naturally and require a vaccine? I don't know - I'll ask a virologist next time I meet one.
It seems the risk of gain-of-function projects outweighs the benefits. Then, when I read about Dr. Anthony Fauci and his putting money into the Wuhan lab for this research in cooperation with the Chinese, I wonder more about some truly evil intent, right under our noses, in plain sight. We do tend to give away technology to the Chinese left and right, but with all the animosity between the countries, would American researchers give away bio-weapons technology? That's what this is. There's no difference between gain-of-function research and bioweapons research other than the names of the labs. If the American and Chinese "authorities" are cooperating on this, who is their common enemy?
Why do you go about taking chances that may result in a real life version of Contagion?
Good stuff from two of our favorites
Posted On: Friday - June 11th 2021 9:55PM MST
In Topics:   Pundits  Global Financial Stupidity  Economics  US Feral Government  Zhou Bai Dien
Peak Stupidity is done writing about books for a little while, and they'll be only one more post on the Nationalized Healthcare topic. Tonight, we'd like to point out two very good posts by two good pundits.
From our favorite literary pundit, as seen on VDare, and I'm sure a thousand other places, there was this post yesterday: "Voting Rights": It’s "Racist" Not To Let Democrats Cheat.
I haven't been keeping up with too much of the Bai Dien administration's and Congress' moves, because I'm not sure I can do a damn thing about them but keep on prepping. Miss Coulter discusses, in her own special style, 3 new bills being introduced to impose on how the States are letting people vote and register to vote. I won't go into the details, as Miss Coulter does a good job. Let's just notice here that this usurpation of States' control of voters and voting is just a continuation of what 4 separate Constitutional Amendments started - they would be Amendment XV, Amendment XIX*, Amendment XXIV and Amendment XXVI. The deal now is that you don't need to pass and have ratified a whole Amendment to the Constitution to usurp power. That's too hard. It's the current era, you know.
Will States EVER fight back against the taking of whatever powers they have left? Probably not until the Feral Gov't is broke, as right now, due to the flow of the money, when the Feds say jump, State officials say "how high, Sir?!" (See # 1 on the list of evils of the income tax in the "Part 3" post on Amendment XIX linked-to below.)
Speaking of the Feral Government being broke, I refer the reader to a short post (his usually are) from blogger Audacious Epigone.
Here's the link to: It's Not Transitory, It's the New Normal, with the "transitory" referring the current higher inflation rate.
Mr. Epigone usually writes posts to discuss data from the General Social Survey and other polls, broken down by sex, race, age, and political leanings. I like his take on things, and I especially like his colors as used in his bar graphs. They don't have the usual intentionally arbitrary color schemes used for political correctness. (Have you read The Legend of Schooldigger?) However, lots of polling data is just plain worthless, as I found out myself from being a respondent this past December. I got tired of the discussions of data that may be meaningless.
When Mr. Epigone writes his occasional finance-themed posts, he is right on the money, IMO. He comes off as a Ron Paulite, and he tries his best to sound the alarm for what's coming. This latest one is only 5 short paragraphs that'll take one minute to read. I urge the Peak Stupidity reader to click on this one.
Enjoy them both. Perhaps "enjoy" is not the right word, as neither writes about anything happy but just the truth.
PS: I haven't commented much at all under Audacious Epigone's posts, because I just don't like a majority of the commenting clientele that much. There are the guys that write under Steve Sailer** too. The other A.E. commenters are OK people too, and not flat-out Commies or total anti-Americans, such as those under many of unz.com's other writers. They just seem naive without an understanding of the root of our problems. Perhaps it's a younger crowd in general.
* See also Part 2 and Part 3.
** That includes our commenter "The Alarmist" under this one. Alarmist, I only didn't mash agree on this one because I think (hope anyway) that Americans will not give up their gold to the US Feral Gov't, just as most didn't during Roosevelt's confiscation attempt.
National Healthcare: Socialism at its finest - Part 3
Posted On: Friday - June 11th 2021 9:34AM MST
In Topics:   Economics  Americans  Healthcare Stupidity  Inflation
(Continued from Part 1 and Part 2.)
In Part 2 of this quick look at the question of Nationalized healthcare, something lots of Americans figure would be just peachy, taking the side of the public defender, Peak Stupidity produced Exhibit A: The British National Health service. It's not like we got in depth on this, but we brought up the problems of government bureaucracy and government control, the latter of which I think is the worst of it, with any government run system of well, anything. It's not just about registering and titling vehicles, though. This is 20% of the economy and a life-and-death issue by definition.
Let's put on our prosecutor's hat now, if His Honor will indulge. (Carrying of cell phones, even for web surfing, no matter how many hours you have to wait for your rolling-through-the-stop-sign charge, is strictly verboten!). We bring up Exhibit B. (Big GASP! from the jurors.) Whaaa? What's that?! I present to you the case of pre-1980s America. The date is arguable, as some would go back to the big Socialism push, medicaid/care included in the mid-1960s.
Our commenter MBlanc46, under Part 2 post, left a comment that stole some of the prosecution's thunder here. He can go back longer than I can, but it's not like lots of us don't have parents who regaled us with stories. Even the young people who can't imagine any such thing, do they talk to their parents, grandparents or friends thereof? Oh, right, "OK boomer", as in "this is not on my phone, so I don't believe a word of it" would be the attitude.
"They made house calls." Yes, I never experienced this, but that is the case. I'm not going to put this one on the advantages of the much-closer-to free market system that was in place. Maybe it was the availability of a 2nd car for the wife, or even a 1st car for some. Perhaps medicine had gotten too advanced to be regularly practiced out of a bag the size of a big toiletry kit.
Compared to the shitshow of today, US Feral Government and State governments were not involved in the medical system to any significant amount prior to medicare/caid). Of course, there were State boards for doctors (nurses too, I guess) and State supported medical schools to give benefit to the State. How much did the government have to do with how Doctor Jones ran his practice, especially the billing part of it? You pay your money to the nice lady on the way out. Maybe you presented an insurance card (more on this). Maybe you were one of those deadbeats, but then that was a problem for any small business. The difference from today is that nobody dictated that you must keep treating the deadbeats and treat what are obviously the new deadbeats as they show up.
OK, that brings up charity and the hospitals, many of which were charity run. Some people simply can't pay their way, and not many of us are OK with letting them die out there on the hospital steps. People, and most especially Americans are very charitable, when the government hasn't usurped that with its own fake charity with their money. (This is a subject for another post.)
There are charity hospitals today, though to a lesser amount. Profit or non-profit, the doctors (rightly) and hospital admins. (not so rightly) make lots of money, the nurses get the going rate, and then there's the issue of the revenue. When it comes down to the complicated bureaucratic system of today, they all must play by the same government-made rules.
Besides the important aspect of consumer choice, the prices for medical care back in the old days reflected the lack of the burden of paying for so many deadbeats, and the decreased costs of employing personnel to figure it all out.* As I wrote in Part 1, the damn system is so complex that this operation of 51 employees that a friend ran had 11 people just in billing. They don't make as much as doctors but probably pretty close to what the office nurses make. Doctors were only 2 or 3 out of the 50, so that means this totally unproductive cost is ~20% of the payroll.
I've got a few numbers, and I'll give one of mine and Mr. Blanc's . A friend found a bill from his Mom for the hospital charges for his birth in the mid-1960s: $300 or $350, it was one or the other. For us 10 years ago: $3,500 in advance, if everything went smoothly, doctor and epidural shot not included. That's a factor of 10 in 45 years. This site gives me a 7x increase to be expected, but you all know what Peak Stupidity thinks of the official inflation numbers, especially as of the last decade (not a factor in this calculation). That's not too bad, surprisingly, but then, I don't know if I can determine, or my friend can, whether that price in the mid-1960s was for all charges. For us we'd be talking over 10 grand, but then that includes ultrasounds (see Part 1 with a discussion of the changes in medical science/tech vs. the business end).
Mr. Blanc's example was a $2 bill for a doctor visit for him Mom in the early 1950s. I suppose if you know the guy well, and it's not your first visit, you could get away with $75 now, cash on the barrel head. That's a factor of 35 (I like round numbers, to fit with my lack of faith in the accuracy of the inflation numbers), but that same inflation (cpi) site would get me a factor of over 10, using 1950 - 2021. Hmmm. I would guess we are paying more in "real" dollars in general. Yes, we get new treatments that wouldn't have been possible in 1950, but then, again, see Part 1.
What I especially miss about lack of government involvement in the old system that worked for America is this: We couldn't have had a Kung Flu PanicFest, IMO. Sure, the Lyin' Press was a thing, and there were only 3 channels (OK, 4 if you count that "learning channel") of TV that could set the narrative. I don't think Feral Gov't officials were quite as corrupt, self-serving, and non-caring about Americans. The big difference is the medical system. Without government controlling the business end of healthcare to the degree it does now, what could it do? Send posters? Yes, send posters. Yes, see I have no problem with a Center for Disease Control that compiles data and issues warnings. Back in the day before the web, your Doc might get some info sent to medical establishments all around with warnings and advice about the new flu or what-have-you. Based on his judgement your Doc could heed it and even put up the poster in the waiting room, or say "bullshit" and throw it in the trash. Then there's that middle ground of just keeping in mind they signs to look for in his patients. Big incentives could not be given to insurance companies (via eliminated co-pays and deductibles), because the Feral Government was not in bed with them yet.
That brings up insurance. When trying to explain the better way of the past (in America, at least) in a few acrimonious comment exchanges I'd have on unz.com threads, I'd always run into this: "What if I'm in a serious car wreck?!" for a young person or "What if I get cancer that costs a million dollars to treat?!" Hey, I never said insurance was not a valid business model. If the insurance company can figure rates the RIGHT way, without dictates about pre-existing conditions, forced payments for transgender surgery, etc., prices can still be pretty damn low for a young person or even reasonable for someone older with no existing serious problems. "Do the math!", as they say, and believe me, there's a whole field for that, consisting of people called actuaries.
The big difference between actual simple insurance plans vs. what people call "insurance" today, is that today's plans are healthcare plans, not insurance plans. One doesn't get oil changes, brake jobs, and bodywork for his car paid for by insurance, as opposed to check-ups, unnecessary visits to the doctor for stupid shit, and well transgender surgery. I have gotten simple catastrophic health care insurance before, and it was not too bad in price. If I had stepped on a nail though, well, it didn't cover squat, and it wasn't supposed to.
In fact, when I was in a wreck myself, it was (very thankfully!) not too big a deal, and I paid my own money. However, when the doctor mentioned a CAT scan, "just in case", I asked the price. "$1,200? Nah, I'll be OK. Thanks."
The problem with economics of healthcare now is that the incentive for irresponsibility is built into the system. People know that some government agency or insurance company (as in, the rest of us) will cover them anyway, no matter if they don't worry about insurance. This lack of responsibility is very hard to reverse. That will be the subject of the final post on this.
* This is why I HATE paying someone to do my taxes and never have so far. It irks me to have to pay more money just to get through the system that I hate to begin with!
Animal Farm: Some allegories are more equal than others
Posted On: Wednesday - June 9th 2021 4:31PM MST
In Topics:   Books  Socialism/Communism
This post is not supposed to be a book review [though we'll see how that pans out - Ed]. From commenter MBlanc46's recommendation I read this short George Orwell novel that most of you probably read in high school. (I'm not sure how I skipped it.) It'd be presumptuous to review one of the classics. Peak Stupidity is presumptuous enough to do so nevertheless, but, no, we won't bore the reader with a review*.
This was to be about the evolution of the thoughts of writers that are seen as the classic authors, but that'll be another post, as I just want to write about Mr. Orwell's state of intellectual development at the time of his writing Animal Farm. I know he was a fairly prolific writer in his short period only 15 years (mid-1930s till 1984 in 1949) of writing books, but I'm thinking just of 3 books here. They would be Homage to Catalonia - reviewed by PS here - Animal Farm, and 1984. He wrote Animal Farm at the 70% point in this writing career, so I would assume he'd have had his ideological act together by this time.
I have long heard the expression "four legs good, two legs bad, and especially "some animals are more equal than others" from the book. It is an allegory, using the running of a farm by the animals to demonstrate an ideological point. What is that point?
I should have known better, as Mr. Orwell was said to be a Socialist to the end. From the reading of 1984 the only book I'd read from him until recently, I could not discern that, as it is a warning about absolute Totalitarianism. To me, a warning about Communism/Socialism goes right along with that.
After getting about 1/2 way into the story of the Animal Farm, I realized that the allegory was not what I'd thought for years it was. Mr. Orwell tells a story of how an attempt at Socialism can go bad. He has nothing against the system at all. He wrote this allegory to disparage the problems that he saw with the Soviet Communism that had effected him directly during his time in Spain, fighting for the Commie side in the civil war. It is a pretty specific to the events that unfolded there. In a blog comment** someone noted that the story of the two top pigs, Napoleon and Snowball, was written to be about Lenin and Trotsky. There is the influence of the outside world, the need to always have an enemy to unite the people, well, the animals, the use of literal attack dogs by the Dear Leader, and the historical revisionism and un-personing, such as the USSR was known to practice. (It worked nicely on animals with short memories.)
That's a good, but very specific allegory. I have no problem with anyone writing satirically about the old USSR. Orwell wrote this one at the very beginning of the Cold War, a nice help for those trying to expose the lies of the Communists.
This was not the allegory I had expected, however. It seems everything on Animal Farm would have worked out OK, per Mr. Orwell, had the bad animals not ruined things. (This is very much as he thought the military could run just fine with no chain of command, but equal footing for everyone, in Homage to Catalonia.)
Nah, I'd have rather read a story in which the hardworking horse Boxer finally got fed up with putting in more effort for no reward, as other animals, especially the damn cat, were wanking off. There should have been a page or two about the weekly animal meetings in which the many chickens and their numerous chicks, born to the least-productive egg-laying hens and given the vote at 18 weeks, outvote the dogs, pigs, horses, and sheep, giving themselves large rations. Then, at a subsequent weekly meeting, Muriel the goat, pissed off about the unfairness of it all, goes ahead and eats all copies of the ballots, causing a riot that results in the construction of an animal penitentiary, something they all thought was in their past.
Perhaps, I'm a little harsh on the author. He did, after all, have the pigs decide that their leadership work was worth more pay and better accommodations. That was a big part of the story, of course, but I'm not sure George Orwell actually got it. That's bound to happen because some animals and some people simply ARE better than others, and we can't all be equal. Did he get that?
I don't know, and it sounds presumptuous [yes, it is, VERY! - Ed], but maybe I coulda' written a better Animal Farm. OK, if not me, Ron Paul, how 'bout?
* I'll at least write this again though, as I did for his last book: For all that's decent, and I'm talking to YOU, C. M. Woodhouse, YOU! DO! NOT! GIVE! AWAY! THE! STORY! IN THE INTRODUCTION!, assholes. (Same goes for the preface, but Russell Baker got this.) I know this is a classic that I should have read already, but I haven't, OK? Maybe this is an Orwellian thing.
** On unz.com I guess. I'd thought for sure one of our readers mentioned this, but I can't find that comment for the life of me.
Chaos under Heaven - Epilogue stupidity
Posted On: Wednesday - June 9th 2021 5:57AM MST
In Topics:   Elections '16 - '20  Trump  China  Media Stupidity  Books
Media lefties are gonna be media lefties, I suppose, even if they do have interesting things to report on Trump v Xi in Chaos under Heaven. In our 2nd post about that book, Chaos under Covid, I mentioned some that I'd write about something in that book's Epilogue I didn't agree with. Well, the book has got to go back to the 'brary, so I'll just write about the one thing that pissed me off the most in Josh Rogin's description of China and Election '20.
Regarding the election, the author seems to be completely on Joe Biden's side even as he admits that the CCP wished for a Biden win, so they could deal with a more predictable American President. This excerpt is from the bottom of page 290, in which the author discusses the alleged damning Hunter Biden material from a computer hard drive found in a shop in Delaware:
The Hunter Biden material was Bannon and Giuliani's "October suprise" -- their attempt to introduce new information to the presidential contest that would tip the scales toward Trump, as they believed that FBI director James Comey's revelation about Anthony Weiner's laptop (and its hard drive containing Hillary Clinton's emails) had done in the run-up to the 2016 election. But this latest laptop gambit ended up falling flat because most of the mainstream media refused to cover it, still feeling burned after being used as a tool of Russian email hacking and dumping during the 2016 election cycle.Oh, where to start with this stupidity, where to start? The media refuses to cover things when they don't go along with their agenda. The Lyin' Press was shocked that Donald Trump won the '16 election, and they didn't want anything like that to happen again. Trump was supposed to lose, so therefore the Hunter Biden story was not covered. In fact the
The media "got burned" by the Russia, Russia, Russia!! story? Seriously? The Lyin' Press kept this story on for 3 out of the 4 years of the Trump Presidency, only stopping to spend more time
What a stupid attempt at deflecting the reader from the agenda of the Lyin' Press by writer Josh Rogin. Oh, the media felt burned from getting suckered to run 3 years of "the Russians did it", so they didn't want to be "wrong again" by covering the Hunter Biden/Chinese honey-pot story. Yeah, sure that's the ticket. Just expose yourself as a ctrl-left Lyin' Press hack back there in the Epilogue. That way, it's too late for the reader to return the book to the store. This one goes back to the library today. It's overdue anyway.
It's a mystery ...
Posted On: Tuesday - June 8th 2021 4:16PM MST
In Topics:   Immigration Stupidity  Media Stupidity
... why people in a nation wouldn't want to give it away completely.
I was looking for some image or another a month or so ago and found this Newsweek* story headline. It makes you just shake your head. Do they really think we all will just fall for their nonsense? "Uhhh, yeah, good question. Why ARE we afraid to be overwhelmed and replaced by a different people? Perhaps Dr. Robert Hartley up in Chicago has a support group for my problem."
This "nations of immigrants" thing is repeated over and over. The VDare folks, along with Ann Coulter and her greater visibility, have debunked this time after time. The original Americans were SETTLERS. They built the country, rather than immigrating to one. There were dozens of millions of immigrants who came in the big wave from the 1880s through the early 1920s, with lots of hardworking decent people among them, but they weren't NECESSARY to the existence and flourishing of the United States.
Now we've had overwhelming numbers coming. Even if this WERE a nation of immigrants, wouldn't this nation still have had enough of the massive mid-1960s to present influx after a while? You come somewhere because it's better than the place you came from. Why do you want it overwhelmed with people from foreign places that you didn't see as a good place to live, such as, well the one you left even? An old EAGLES song comes to mind:
"You call some place paradise. I don't know why ...
you call some place paradise and kiss it goodbye ..."
* Yeah, it's not extinct. Who knew?
National Healthcare: Socialism at its finest - Part 2
Posted On: Tuesday - June 8th 2021 11:12AM MST
In Topics:   Healthcare Stupidity  Socialism/Communism
(Continued from Part 1.)
In Part 1 of these words of warning about government controlled healthcare, Peak Stupidity first made clear that the improvements in the science and technology must be looked at separately from the changes in the healthcare business end. This post is about the deleterious effects of a lack of any free market and free choice on the customer. For his important area of life, being a customer means being a patient, being someone with some possible problem he may be worried about, or just being someone who wants to STAY healthy and not have to deal with most of it.
As I wrote last time, young Americans in particular, even so-called Conservatives, seem to not see any problem with Big Gov running this whole business. One wonders how much time they've ever spent at any Feral Government offices. I try to avoid that myself, but when I do go, I keep my eyes open and extrapolate what I see to the multi-million employee Fed Gov in general. Perhaps one could go down to the Highway Department to find fix a title on a car, and see bureaucracy and "customer care" by those who don't really answer to the customer in action. That's local or State government, but it only gets worse at the higher levels.
It's not as if "Single-Payer" (a nice euphemism of obscuration there), errr, Nationalized Healthcare is a new bright idea. We've had examples all over the world to observe. The "NHS" in the image above is the British National Health Service. I have never been to England, but I've been to, well, my car mechanic's shop, and this is a guy who has experience with the Canadian "free" healthcare, and no, the shop is not in Arizona ... He doesn't say it's a particularly bad experience going to the Doc's for regular check-ups and that. He's from a particularly white part of Canada though. When it comes to serious problems or work, the care is rationed. Those who really need something done can go to private physicians or to the States. I would like to hear from commenter "The Alarmist" who may have a good
The reason Americans hesitate to go to the doctor for "wellness" visits, aka, regular check-ups, is because our whole system is so distorted, money-wise, by this point, that prices are much higher than they need be, and higher than they WOULD be, in a free market. I had something I wanted to go to a specialist on, but the whole rigmarole of having to go to my "regular doctor" and get a referral turns me off, as I don't have any such regular doctor. Were I able to call this specialist, get a price, and just go the hell in there, I might have.
The "single-payer" proponents will tell you "Well, I can put up with some bureaucracy*, because now it's not for profit, and it'll be FAIR!" Yeah. I just read Animal Farm (more about that coming), and it's pretty old news that, though all patients are equal, some will end up more equal than others. (Those will be the ones getting private care out of the system.) That aside, even in a country full of trusting unified people, as in 1970s Sweden, the problem is that there is no incentive for the medical staff to excel. All care gets dragged down to a fair, but equal, level.
Also, there is no reason medical care should be "fair". I should be able to get more, better, and even quicker treatment by paying more money. I did that one time. I paid cash and got in the front of the line for something. I mean CASH cash, as in a stack of twenties, and I don't feel at all bad about getting put in front. I will say, that I was advantaged in having a doctor who a trusted friend had referred me to. This doctor trusted me not to make any thing about it, so the cash truly paid him well for his time.**
The fact that people go outside the system in Canada and Britain for better care does not say so much good about that system. There's on more important reason that National Healthcare is a BAD thing. That is the government's ability to control us with it.
Do you want to visit a doctor and see a nurse of your, let's say "persuasion" rather than some recent immigrant you can't relate to? Do you want the old-fashioned White man, or an Oriental or Jewish doctor you have general trust in, even before you know him well?
Not only is it the case that within a government-run healthcare establishment that you can't just go picking and choosing the personnel, but you're going to get in trouble even asking to. Were you to make that mistake, or maybe even just post something on the internet about it, you may not get the best care in the future. When you have no choices, you are subject to the whims of the government establishment, and this establishment is extremely hostile to our kind right now.
Nah, I'd rather make decisions on who I want to treat me on my own. I'd rather not have the government intrusion that goes along with any program run by it.*** I'll get into whether a free market in healthcare can actually work next post.
PS: I realize this anti-Socialism stuff may not be the favorite of the readers here, as we cover very different flavors of stupidity that are not so ideological posts. I've got to finish what I've started here though.
* Yes, I do know there's plenty of bureaucracy here, but that's because the government is already involved to a large degree, in concert with Big Biz insurance.
** Though it did save him a bundle, of course, the lack of taxes charged and paid was not really the biggest benefit for both of us. I just think there was no way this Doctor could have put a payment on his books so easily without all of it being in the same fund that pays for the illegal alien deadbeats and such.
*** Let's not forget your political views being used for political aims by this government-run industry. Did you tell them "yes, I own a gun or two"? You may end up being treated for something you are pretty sure you don't have, such as schizophrenia. At least in America right now, I can tell the office to "take this form and shove it up your ass." Actually, I have, minus the "up your ass" part. I can go elsewhere.