In honor of an invented fake-Holiday (Earth Day/Week), my office celebrated voluntary meatless Monday. I'm not sure what one has to do with the other.... what I'm sure of is that celebrating a Holiday invented by watermelon's (green on the outside, red on the inside), loons and kooks, to celebrate peace and balance by taking away people's choices (to get meat), is something so hypocritical, and so the new normal in California.
While I don't really care what causes people support (even stupid ones), I do like people to be informed the on the stupid causes they support, and who is behind them. Detractors of Earth Day claiming it's an green wrapping around Marxist agendas, while the proponents claim, "No. It's all moderate folks just trying to protect our planet and peace". When you research the history of Earth Day, it becomes obvious which side is informed, and which isn't.
If there's ever a stupid cause, Starbucks will be there. It plays well to their base... most rational people roll their eye's and move on. The latest was an Social Justice Warrior named Holly, call the cops on two guys for loitering. Because they were black, #BoycottStarbucks went viral and they got accused of unconscious bias, before anyone bothered to investigate or explore why the cops were called. Holly was thrown under the bus, the CEO apologized and decided to shut down every store for a day for indoctrination training, and everyone did the right overreactions to the movement. The only thing sacrificed was any truth, skepticism or investigation.
After every mass shooting (especially School shootings), there's the hue and cry, "this happened again, we have to do something!" They usually don’t say what, and the few who do, usually aren't very informed on the topic. So let's tear it down and look at what we should do, and should not do, and what people are asking for. And understand why were are likely to stay divided between gun controllers and those with a clue.
Microstamping is a form of gun-control. California figures if you can't outlaw something, you can still put impossible regulations on it to illegally achieve the same ends: enter micro-stamping.
The idea is as follows: put little engravings of serial numbers on the tip of the firing pin, so that every time the gun fires a round, the casing has a little serial number stamped on it for the police to trace to the source. Sounds great, but only proves Gun Controllers aren't very bright.
The problems are: (1) the technology doesn't exist (2) if it did exist, it's easy to defeat (3) most guns aren't used by their owner, don't eject casings, and were pre-law -- so this can't do anything for crime, but it's a heavy cost/annoyance to gun owners for something that can't get positive results. It's laws like this that prove to the clueful that gun legislators can't be trusted.
Facebook is 3 things: bad interface, bad management, and biased policies. I want a social network that gives me control of what I see and share -- both to my friends and to advertisers. I realize they need to make a buck, and my information is their product, but the point is you can still give users the illusions of control. But Zuckerberg seems to have falling into the egocentric pit that many young billionaires do, they think because they timed things well, and worked hard, and got lucky that they're smarter than everyone else. This makes them arrogant, less mature, and slower to grow than the average human: Dunning-Kruger, inflated by being surrounded by yes-men.
Brady Campaign to prevent Gun Violence is another FakeNews organization that exists to invent false numbers to dupe the gullible rubes. A cursory look at their numbers, and they fall apart -- they aren't based on subjective murder rates, gun ownership rates, or anything that would lead to the conclusions they draw: it's about whether they like the gun policies -- then cooking the numbers to invent a correlation that doesn't exist.
Californians (who supported this), lost their right to ever complain about state overreach again. California arrogantly tried to proclaim that federal immigration law, doesn't apply to them -- and anyone in the state that complies with the federal law, will be victimized by the government of the state.
In 2010 the Obama Administration was violating immigration law, the Constitution, and the oath of office, by ignoring or being lax on immigration. So Arizona passed a law that said they should enforce federal law (that the Obama administration wouldn't), called SB-1070. Democrats and Californian's lost their nut... how dare a state enforce federal law, they said. They called it racist, sexist, xenophovic and homophobic, along with other words they obviously don't know the meaning of.... only California had the same law on their books.
After warnings to the police (by her father), and police questioning her the day before the shooting, Nasim Aghdam became the 39-year-old YouTube Shooter. About 4% of mass shooters are female. The Police reported this as domestic incident, but it appears that she was angry about YouTube's willingness to attack people's lives (revenue streams) based on politics. That doesn't make her less a nut-job for shooting up the place... but it does go to show if you keep fucking with people, then you're trolling for crazies.
There's a name for Trickle Down Economics... it's called economics.
No rational economist will argue against the idea that if you cut someone's taxes, that they have more money. And that resulting increase in earnings will either be actively invested, saved (passively invested), or spent. And if they do any of those, that money is passed through into the economy: in other words, it trickles out (and down). Period. End.
Now there can be intelligent debates on what helps the economy more: cutting or spending, cutting at the top or the bottom. But liars (polemics, fools and the media), will perverts that debate on what helps more, into some fraud that cutting taxes at the top "doesn't work at all".
Bored on a Saturday, wife is flying, why not get a hot dog and catch a flick? Did I mention it was a bad flick? It wasn't supposed to be, but it worked out that way. Rotten Tomatoes gave it an 97/87, so I figured something fresh and interesting, in the suspense/thriller/horror genre. Yeah, not-so-much.
While it was reasonable acted, shot, and so on... the premise of the dumbest people alive, kind of ruined it for me. There's no way to kvetch on this one without spoilers, so if that matters to you, stop here.
The Girl with Seven Names: A North Korean Defector’s Story
The Girl with Seven Names: A North Korean Defector’s Story, is a really good book about a spoiled girl (with 2 more names than I have), from North Korea, who selfishly and irresponsibly escapes from North Korea, and gets astonishingly lucky in the whole process. Then creates a better life for herself, convinces her family to leave, and burns down any opportunity for them to stay or go back to the oppressive regime.
While it is a bit of a narcissists tale of suffering, we were all narcissists at her age. And despite her being brash (not thinking ahead) and suffering consequences for her recklessness (including to those around her), it is still wonderfully eye opening to see North Korea, Korean culture, and the world through the eyes of a teenage girl, who slowly learns how lucky she has been (though the bigger hardships of those around her). And where would the world be, if there were at least some silly/brash kids risking everything to have a better life?
DirecTV gave me a free 4K movies to watch and home (with limited choices), and this was one of them. My wife said her Aunt thought this was one of the best books, "she'd ever read". So we tried it. It was overpriced. A rom-com survival film, with not a shred of comedy or believability, pounding every cliché into the ground with awkward acting and dialog, which left me bored and feeling like I'd survived something harrowing, by making it to the syrupy abrupt ending.