Thursday • April 25 • 2024
Vol.XVI • No.XVII
Manchester, N.H.
Neocon Nikki has momentum. Not against Trump, not yet. The Donald’s base continues to back him no matter what. That significant lead is not currently in jeopardy – like that or not. But Haley’s campaign vacuum has been sucking up DeSantis supporters, and it’s killing him.
And yes, that was a deliberate (otherwise generic) reference to see who among her Republican supporters would like to accuse me of misogyny. Please try. Seriously. I’d love ot have that debate.
And for the DeSantis folks – I like Gov Ron a lot more than Necon Nikki. I’d take DeSantis seven days a week and twice on Sunday before letting Haley sit her backside behind the Resolute desk. But the DeSantis campaign has struggled mightily after a quick start. Last March, he was ahead of Trump briefly but then collapsed. A fall that continues as we wind our way toward Iowa’s Caucus and New Hampshire’s primary. A loss of momentum that is beginning to show up in national polls.
I don’t think it’s Ron.
The DeSantis message is the same. His priorities are the same. I’ve seen him in person and watched him speak. DeSantis has a lot of good ideas, and he’s proven that with the majority behind him, he can do good things. But the campaign’s the thing, and it has failed the candidate. A much-needed shake-up was too little too late, and if he can’t or won’t go negative on Haley in the next three weeks, he will likely not survive past Super Tuesday.
For Haley supporters, and this is just my opinion – she is better than a Democrat. She appeals to the not Trump crowd. Haley is a woman, and Democrats don’t want to have to run against that. She has executive experience and international diplomacy experience, and did I mention she’s a woman? Oh, and she’s not old! Haley has a lot that appeals to people who are not paying attention. A horse that could win the big race, and the “anyone but Trump folks” are leaving Gov. Ron and lining up to support her in New Hampshire.
An interesting poll out of New Hampshire [UML Poll Here] [Topline pdf Here] shows something perhaps many expected.
President Donald Trump still dominates the field with 52% and leads in every demographic. Nikki Haley comes in second with 22%, and Ron DeSantis third with 10%. However, if you dig into the demographics of the respondents, what you discover is that Nikki Haley has gained her support from Ron DeSantis’ primary support base.
Previously DeSantis’ main support base was from wealthy, older, white males. DeSantis has now lost this base to Nikki Haley, as her demographic support shows the rich, older, white males, what you might call the country club circuit, have dumped the Florida Governor in favor of the former UN Ambassador.
The rich, older, white males now support Nikki Haley over Ron DeSantis. This explains why Haley’s gains are all DeSantis losses.
A few weeks ago, Haley’s fledgling rise in New Hampshire wasn’t translating nationally, but that has begun to change. RCP shows Haley erasing gaps with DeSantis and surpassing him in places where he had held second behind Trump for most of the year.
It’s not over until it’s over, but DeSantis needs to beat Haley in Iowa and Christie in the Granite State to remain viable. I think Christie is done by or just after Nevada or South Carolina when he will put all of his eggs in Haley’s basket. She’s a hell of a lot more GOPe than Ron, and Christie isn’t likely to campaign for the third-place guy when he was that guy and dropped out.
The post Night Cap: Nikki Haley Picks Ron DeSantis’ Pockets – Walks Away With his NH Primary Base appeared first on Granite Grok.
Thanks to the progressives on both sides of the moat, we now live in an America where a girl can work hard, practice, become a top-tier athlete in her sport, and lose a college scholarship to some middling dude pretending to be a girl. And how is that fair?
If she pretends to be a boy, she can’t compete with girls. If she remains a girl, boys can steal her scholarship opportunities, which, for some young women, might be the only way they land on a more desirable campus. And if she complains, she risks being blacklisted and outcast by people who likely agree but lack the courage to take a stand. And it matters. Washington University has broken the seventh seal by giving a college scholarship for women’s sports to a guy.
Male takes women’s volleyball scholarship at @UW … a soon-to-be Big 10 school
Stealing the already few opportunities for women at the collegiate level. How can he be proud?@UWVolleyball should rescind the scholarship if they really care about women. He can play with the men. pic.twitter.com/Dj7VcDWlW4
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) December 13, 2023
Not to worry. Most, if not all, of the girls competing against this volleyball drag queen had no idea she was a he, and the ‘elites’ writing the rules – much like those for the COVID vaccines – encourage less transparency. (Related: 6 ft 2 in Transwoman Athlete “Stands Out” as She Dominates Biologically Female Opponents.)
Marshi Smith, co-founder of the Independent Council on Women’s Sports, told Reduxx that her organization knows “many of the girls [Drageset]’s playing against do not know that they are competing against a male.”
“There has been no consideration from his family to tell female athletes or coaches the truth,” Smith said. “They have not been transparent, so girls are repeatedly and unknowingly put at a disadvantage and not given the chance to opt out over increased safety risks.”
And there are risks to the girls, young women, the culture, and most importantly, the future of sport for women. What point is there in trying to excel at something when you know that at any point in the arc of your sporting life, some C-Team beta male can put on the same uniform, insist you call him Francis, and to just rob you of not just victory and opportunity but require you to dress and undress in the same locker room.
In none of these instances is your comfort a concern. So, why would you bother?
The post New World Order: Men Are Officially Taking College Sports Scholarships from Women appeared first on Granite Grok.
As younger generations grow older and take on adult responsibilities, they will, at some point, struggle with the cost of housing. This year alone, more than 582,000 people in the United States are without a home, with about three in ten people being part of families with children.
Governments today have implemented various policies recommended by different schools of economic thought, predominantly that of the Keynesians, to address the issue of homelessness.
Despite their efforts, the total number of chronically and nonchronically homeless individuals continues to grow. To reduce these numbers would require a phenomenon that appears enigmatic, but there is no enigma. The solution deals with the most fundamental economic law of Austrolibertarianism and its satisfaction by abstraction: human action. With this foundational lens, the removal of zoning laws is derived to address homelessness in the United States and abroad.
The laws of supply and demand are known by all who have a basic understanding of economics, but what is less known is that they are praxeological laws. Praxeology is the study of the implications logically derived from the action axiom. This foundational axiom posits that “man acts,” and from that statement, all conclusions of praxeology are logically and a priori obtained. Thus, as Ludwig von Mises concludes in his magnum opus, Human Action,
Its cognition is purely formal and general without reference to the material content and the particular features of the actual case. It aims at knowledge valid for all instances in which the conditions exactly correspond to those implied in its assumptions and inferences. Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts.
A priori knowledge and justification are procured without experience, for they are logically derived. Examples include “all bachelors are unmarried” and “two plus two equals four.” The meaning of the word “bachelor,” the state of being unmarried, can be analytically deduced, and an understanding of the addition property and the integer two will result in an answer of four for the equation without having to “experience” it. Moreover, a priori knowledge is a foundation that determines a chain of necessity through deductive claims and noncontradiction. Accordingly, in the case of praxeology, to say man does not act would be contradicted by one doing so (“act” referring to purposeful behavior that employs means to reach a given end). Furthermore, as Murray N. Rothbard writes in his book Economic Controversies, “Since praxeology begins with a true axiom, A, all the propositions that can be deduced from this axiom must also be true. For if A implies B, and A is true, then B must also be true.”
Unlike a hypothesis that must be proven or unproven, a priori statements are true in all possible worlds. Their negation can never be logically valid. It MUST be the case that “there are no square circles” (B) because its negation (“there are square circles”) would violate the law of noncontradiction (A). Similarly, it MUST be the case that if “two plus two equals four” (A) is true, then “four minus two equals two” (B) is true as well.
It is frequently asked, “How can praxeology be applied to the material world if it is only theory?” It is the same with mathematics: by identifying components of abstract models along with their material analogs. This process is called “catallactics,” the application of laws concerning human action to market analysis. The removal of zoning laws to address homelessness is derived from this epistemology.
Praxeology: The Basis for RemovalZoning laws are specific rules and regulations for pieces of land divided into zones by the government or a municipality. They began with the Los Angeles zoning ordinances of 1904 and the New York City zoning resolution of 1916 and were originally motivated by racism, but they are now believed to help the housing industry. The laws dictate allowable uses of land or property inside zoning districts, meaning certain land can only be used for a predetermined reason, like agriculture. This creates an artificial limitation on the total amount of residential buildings that can be constructed in a given area, thereby leading to an issue where price cannot be brought down by supply.
In other words, they eliminate the houses, apartments, etc. that otherwise could have been built. Consequently, houses become so expensive that they become a hassle to afford for those without a lot of money, which tends to be the case for younger generations trying to find their footing, especially those from marginalized ethnic and racial backgrounds without a trust fund.
The laws of supply and demand were briefly mentioned as the epistemological justification of the suggested policy. The axiom that “man acts” informs this law because to every end there are means that must be implemented. These can come in the form of any given market product that is desired according to man’s intrinsic value hierarchy. Simply put, he desires to buy products that will allow him to accomplish his most desired ends first. The law of demand is, at its core, marginal utility applied to catallactics. Rothbard writes, “All action involves the employment of scarce means to attain the most valued ends. Man has the choice of using the scarce means for various alternative ends, and the ends that he chooses are the ones he values most highly. The less urgent wants are those that remain unsatisfied.”
Of equal importance and magnitude is the law of supply, which states that as the price of a good increases, the amount of that good supplied on the market will also increase and vice versa. It is also derived from praxeology because as the potential utility gained from undertaking an action increases, the likelihood of performing it increases also.
These laws in return tell us what happens with the removal of zoning laws. By limiting the total number of residential buildings that can be constructed, sellers and renters can increase their prices exponentially without fear of having no buyers. Ergo, if demand is high (which tends to be the case in the housing industry because shelter is essential) and supply is not allowed to rise, prices will inflate with people still willing to buy.
Ever Hear of Tort Law?There are several counterarguments to nonzoning with the most common being that they promote safety by keeping hazardous activities away from residential and public areas. While this is a valid complaint, there are other ways to do this without feeding a housing crisis—namely, self-regulation via tort law. According to the American Museum of Tort Laws, “Tort law has been called the law of wrongful injuries. It is the law that protects and compensates people who have been injured by the negligence, or recklessness, or intentional acts of wrongdoers.”
An industrialist who chooses to build in residential areas will be liable for any damage incurred by the residents from their activity. Under tort law, it is possible to sue for noise, air, and land pollution, just to name a few. This is the same for unseen effects because it is possible to trace their origins back to an industrialist’s activity. In addition, because there is no state limit to liability, the penalties can be severe. This incentivizes insurance companies to raise their premiums and correctly estimate risks and costs because it is more likely for them to get sued. They are also more inclined to make the developers adopt reasonable safety standards or charge exorbitant premiums because related lawsuits are the largest class of civil litigation. Although this is ex post, meaning the damages have already occurred, developers would want to insure against this liability and operate elsewhere.
It is important to note that other factors do come into play when dealing with homelessness. But as long as man acts (A), affecting supply and demand (B), and A is true, then B must also be true. And if B implies a relationship between zoning laws and homelessness (C), then it must be true as well. Furthermore, the relationship between homelessness and zoning laws is a priori and therefore true in all cases. Thus, we can logically conclude that the downward pressure zoning laws placed on supply limits the accessibility of housing and thereby increases the total number of unsheltered individuals.
ConclusionTo picture a world where people are unable to afford a home is to think of a world with low life expectancy, decreased birth rates, and more unfortunate fates that succeeding generations will be subject to with the continued existence of zoning—a law that hides its perniciousness under the disguise of prosperity.
Taiwo Agbeluyi is a freshman at Divine Savior Holy Angels who loves to learn about Economics and Political Philosophy. She is fascinated by human action and its application. She also likes to apply her analytical skills and creativity to building robots for various challenges and competitions. Taiwo is a curious and ambitious student who strives to make a positive difference in her community and beyond.
Taiwo Agbeluyi | Mises Wire
We heartily encourage reprints and shares of Mises Wire articles. If you wish to reproduce an article in your blog, magazine, radio show, newspaper column, classroom material, textbook, discussion group, website, or any other venue, please do so. The original publication source must be included in an appropriate place.The post Zoning Laws: Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing appeared first on Granite Grok.
Thank you to those who use Gmail and participated in our recent research project. We asked Gmail users who signed up for the Daily Grok if they were getting their emailed newsletter every day. Those who responded were not. Gmail appears to be embargoing our content.
I checked the newsletter plugin send history for the emails provided in each instance. They were being sent every day, but the recipients were not getting them, and they were not in spam. Whitelisting did not help.
I am at a loss for how to proceed. Google doesn’t have to explain itself to me, so all I can do is share what we have found with the world and see if they have the same issue. If you are a center-right new media concern with a newsletter or content that gets emailed, are your Gmail users receiving it?
You’d best ask. I’m sure many are, but then some may not, and I lack the time or resources to pursue this past the following. For those willing to do it, I’d suggest opening a free proton mail account and signing up for the newsletter using that address.
Please.
We rely on increasing traffic to generate ad revenue, above donations, which are many and generous (and we appreciate every dollar) but not enough to cover every expense. Our 2024 budget is not yet fully funded. We can pick at that with increased traffic, which we might get if Google didn’t appear to block access to our newsletter.
We have more than a few folks who only come to the site because of that newsletter. To those folks, please visit the site at least once daily if you are not interested in setting up a separate email to bypass Google’s censorship. We’d appreciate it, and you’d get to read the content you wanted all along.
We will let you know if anything changes about Gmail and our newsletter. If you are a Gmail user getting the newsletter in Gmail, please let us know. Perhaps there’s a “secret handshake” we can share with readers to assist them in resolving the issue.
[Update] A reader has informed me that he used his Hotmail account to subscribe and is not receiving these either. I verified that our application has been sending him the newsletter daily. If I read it correctly, Microsoft owns Hotmail, which is the Windows Outlook mail service with the vestigial @Hotmail extensions for existing users (before 2012). We’ll test this against Outlook and see what happens. As for the reader, he says he is opening a free Protonmail account, and we appreciate that.
The post Is Gmail Blocking Your Email Newsletter, Too!!! [Update] appeared first on Granite Grok.
With all the devastating news about urban crime, drug overdoses, illegal immigration, rampant homelessness, out-of-control budgets, and educational failures, it is encouraging that President Donald Trump has committed his next administration to saving America’s cities.
As Just the News reported, “With the nation’s first primary state as a backdrop, former President Donald Trump took aim Saturday at Democrats’ urban strongholds, vowing to both secure and revitalize blue cities weary from years of violence and economic decay.”
As the outlet reported, President Trump told a crowd in Durham, New Hampshire, “We’re going to rebuild our cities into beacons of hope, safety, and beauty. It will be the greatest investment ever made.”
This is encouraging. All too often, Republicans have neglected our great cities – or been openly hostile toward them because of their Democratic leadership.
Perhaps the most famous example of this was an Oct. 29, 1975 speech in which then-President Gerald Ford explained why he would not help New York City with its fiscal crisis.
The following day, the New York Daily News had a huge page-one headline: “Ford to City: Drop Dead.”
President Ford was philosophically right as a fiscal conservative and federalist, but the political message was devastating for Republicans.
I served with Buffalo Congressman Jack Kemp, who was the most innovative pro-city Republican with whom I have ever worked. Kemp developed a program for enterprise zones to help encourage business development in the poorest parts of cities. Working with civil rights activist Bob Woodson, the two developed a program to allow people in public housing to put in sweat equity and eventually gain ownership of their units. Kemp and Woodson followed Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in trying to create an ownership society.
One of the most striking moments in U.S. House debate history was when an outraged Democrat Congressman Barney Frank, who opposed Kemp’s proposal, argued that under the plan, a poor family in New York City might be able to acquire a property worth $1 million in the New York market. It did not seem to occur to Frank that helping poor people become wealthy was a good idea.
President Trump, a product of Queens and Manhattan, understands that we cannot be a great nation if our great cities decay and die. Consider his own words from a speech about saving America’s cities in Reno, Nevada:
“[W]e’re going to indemnify police officers and law enforcement officials throughout the United States from being destroyed by the radical left for taking strong actions on crime. They’re going to be indemnified… Policemen are forced not to do anything when they want to, and under the threat of losing their pension, their house, and their family, they lose everything, and they’re afraid to move. … We’re not going to let that happen anymore.
“In addition, we will take over our horribly-run Washington, DC – and clean up, renovate, and rebuild our Capitol so that it is no longer a nightmare of murder and crime. You see what’s happening. But rather, will become the most beautiful Capitol anywhere in the world. It’s a mess. It’s a filthy, disgusting mess. Our parks will be cleaned, the tents and graffiti, all of these tents and graffiti, right in the middle of the most beautiful parks in the world. Those tents and graffiti will be removed. Slum areas will be demolished and rebuilt to the highest level of architectural elegance. Washington, DC, will become a symbol of beauty, security, freedom, and strength…
“In addition to our Capitol, we are going to rebuild our cities into beacons of hope, safety, and beauty. Better than they have ever been before. We are going to focus on our cities… It will be the greatest investment ever made in these cities. And we will work closely with Democrat leaders. They are all run by Democrats if you can believe it. But we’ll work closely with the Democrat leaders of all these failing places to make sure that this rebuilding will be a lasting and compassionate one. It’ll be a great rebuilding. Safety will again be restored so that our children can go out with their parents, mother, and father and play in the park without being beat up, molested, or shot. Students will be able to walk to school in peace, criminal rates will plummet, and people will long, just long, to move back to the city again.”
The fact that President Trump explicitly included working closely with Democrat leaders is a good step toward making the second Trump administration more bipartisan – but still deeply committed to reform.
This was an encouraging speech for our future and a real commitment to save America’s citizens. It is a good step toward bringing Americans together and healing some of the partisan divisions.
Those who are committed to union incompetence, leftwing extremism, and keeping power will fight against a program to save America’s cities. Most Americans, however, will be excited by the vision of a safe, prosperous, and forward-looking urban future.
I expect the American people will win.
Newt Gingrich | RealClear Wire
The post President Trump’s Plan to Save America’s Cities appeared first on Granite Grok.
It’s now obvious, since our awakening to Fake News, that truth has been a stranger, an unknown that few recognize and few are willing to consider. This is the intended result of at least three generations of media preaching and academic lecturing against its ageless reliability.
This agenda has revised history and today’s events into their slanted versions, and it was a must since truth is inherently woven throughout our American Founding.
This coming election has the establishment doing flips in order to protect its authority and territory from Donald Trump’s publicly pledged threats, which in turn makes him a must target since he represents “the last man standing.”
This means he has the financial resources, love of country, personal knowledge, and stamina to challenge the status quo. Who is left that could cope with what Trump has dealt with? And this blends over into many of his former Presidential associates who are being legally harassed with the aim of incurring financial ruin. The message is clear, and it’s meant to be!
So, anything goes. Already, we’ve watched as lie after lie mounts without any public or judicial pushback. This is publicly insulting when the term “insurrection” is cast like confetti upon Trump and all those patriotic hostages from January 6th! As a result, America’s silence incriminates all of the silent, both citizens and public officials, but particularly the latter, who have sworn an oath to defend and uphold our Constitution.
Trump’s messaging is not only truthful but after his first four Presidential years, his campaign promises and word messaging have been both validated by action and with the public’s noticing of its truth. That last item, words of truth, reminds me of one of Mom’s sayings, “The truth hurts.” Trump’s bluntness originally offended, but in the end, he was only speaking the truth, what needed saying since it’s been absent for too long!
Once in office, the media ramped up accounts of his gruff and brutish style. Actually, it did seem gruff since again, the “brutal truth” had been buried for so long! It’s true; his talk is not of the career-minded and glib-talking politician, but that’s his appeal, which is reviving our American pulse.
Trump was more than successful in his prior years, so he need not follow the career politician’s urgency for voter appeal. Therefore, he was free to condemn America’s ongoing immigration issue, which sent alarms throughout the establishment. His 2016 republican opponents were shocked at the mere mention of this issue.
In reality, both political parties are content as cheap labor pleases one while building the voter base for the other. Not so with Trump’s 2016 messaging; his concern was for representing the “forgotten” American and for bettering the country that he loves! So yes, his bluntness was shocking, even gruff, but it had a beneficial purpose, and it was long overdue!
Remember when charges of “fake news” first started? Voters then began to notice and compare what was reported versus what they actually witnessed, especially when tuning into the latest Trump rally! As a result, his words again gained validation along with a positive recognition of their truth.
That “fake” moniker preceded another media truism: fake news is “the enemy of the people.” Immediately, the media grabbed onto it as the crazy rhetoric of a power-hungry dictator. However, as time passed, the stream of false reporting continued, which in itself validated his follow-up media blast.
His defiant march to “the Church of the Presidents” after its 2020 fire prompted the media’s ridicule when, in front of the church, he held the Bible up high. Contrary to press accounts, many were pleased and gratified with finally having a President who proudly exhibited his faith in public rather than referring to our Creator by saying, “You know, the thing.”
In his recent rally in Durham, New Hampshire, his words were blunt but necessary and well received. Trump’s messaging gruffly stated, in part, that Biden is the “worst, most incompetent, and most corrupt President in the history of our Country.” At this point of Biden’s term, who’s to argue?
It’s time that Americans shed their sensitive frailties for the preservation of our nation. Blunt and/or gruff language is often the most reliable and necessary backbone of leadership. Yes, truth is often hurtful, but it’s our most formidable and protective weapon against this evil, and thanks to a gruff-speaking leader, we are now fortunate to have this chance to welcome its return from those dark shadows!
The post Truth Can Be Hurtful But It Is Our Most Potent Weapon Against Evil appeared first on Granite Grok.
Tucker Carlson, who recently announced his own new media network, has been making the podcast rounds, talking to hosts of a variety of different ideological backgrounds.
An interview a few weeks ago with Dave Smith had a moment that went viral when both men proclaimed Bill Buckley as a great villain of the 20th Century. (Murray Rothbard would agree.) Recently a new clip with Glenn Greenwald made the social media rounds with Carlson claiming that “libertarian economics is a scam perpetrated by the beneficiaries of the economic system.”
Understandably, this quote made Carlson an immediate target for libertarians who frequently celebrate his takes on foreign policy but often cringe when he ventures into economic commentary. While the reaction to defend the label of “libertarian” is both understandable and important, particularly at a time where progressive-financed economic centers are seeking to launder economic interventionism as a “rightwing” cause, the reality is that Carlson’s critiques are not entirely invalid.
While the most prominent libertarian of our era, Ron Paul, and many accomplished libertarian economists, many of whom are affiliated with the Mises Institute, have stayed committed to a rigorous defense of free markets, the unfortunate reality is many of the organizations that are most active in political policy have often failed to do so. For those who have spent most of their time in Washington, most of their experience with self-proclaimed libertarian policymakers will be at cocktail parties at the Cato Institute, AEI, or one of the many Koch-funded outlets.
If one gives Carlson the grace to understand his underlying concern, his larger criticism of alleged defenders of “free markets” becomes more palatable.
Though libertarians rightfully scoff at the notion that libertarian values have ever held any strong grip on DC policymakers, it is true that “economic liberalism” has become the default label of almost all economic policy think tanks. Particularly in a post-Cold War world, the idea of any serious person in Washington describing themselves as anything but an advocate for “capitalism” was alien prior to the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders in 2016. Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden both have proudly described themselves as “capitalists.”
While any definition of “capitalism” that can be claimed by any modern Democrat, or even the overwhelming majority of Republicans, could not at all be confused as “libertarian,” there has long been a class of “libertarian economist” who has maintained a general skepticism of direct government intervention while ignoring, or at sometimes cheering, one of the greatest drains on American prosperity: monetary policy.
The most obvious example is Milton Friedman. While numerous critiques of Friedman and his monetarist followers can be found by Austrian economists, one specific example of this blind spot is particularly worth noting: his advocacy of quantitative easing. Though Friedman passed in 2006, years before the Fed’s response to the financial crisis sparked by former Objectivist Alan Greenspan’s housing bubble, he explicitly advocated for Japan’s central bank to use money printing to buy government bonds as a way out of a financial crisis in the late 1990s. While Friedman would often voice skepticism of the wisdom of policymakers and central bankers, the unfortunate reality is that his economic views often helped provide useful intellectual cover to help justify new aggressive uses of their power. Ben Bernanke, a student of Friedman, brought this playbook to the Federal Reserve, making extensive use of Friedman’s recommendations.
It would be unfair to suggest that all Beltway “libertarian” economists actively advocate Bernanke’s moves. Given the gradual specialization of economics as a discipline, the reality is that many of the economists entrenched at various beltway organizations likely thought little about the larger consequences of the Fed. The problem, however, is that being blind to the broader economic distortions created by artificially-low interest rates, monetary inflation, and the ballooning of the Fed’s balance sheets makes it difficult to recognize the challenges they have created for Americans.
This has been on full display in recent years with the growing politicization of big business. Whether it is in the form of DEI and ESG requirements from large firms, the willingness to cooperate with the state for matters of censorship of Big Tech platforms, the weaponization of private employment as a means for policy enforcement over covid, the reflexive nature of “libertarians” to come to the defense of big business has created undeniable tension with a broader respect for individual liberty. As Carlson told Greenwald, “I think a smarter way to assess an economic system is by its results.”
Any libertarian economic thinking that results in a defense of the covid-regime, no matter how nuance is applied, is deserving of scorn by anyone who cares about the liberty for their families.
Similarly, the indifference of too many libertarian policy wonks towards monetary policies has led them to ignore many of the issues that concern individuals like Carlson. Reflexively defending the rights of increasingly activist big business ignores the role that Fed policy has played in corporate consolidation, effectively providing a subsidy to corporate America. While advocating tax cuts on those economic actors that have benefitted from the post-2008 Fed is certainly defensibly libertarian, the flip side is that their success has vastly outperformed the large percentage of Americans who have not benefited from this age of financialization.
One of Carlson’s go-to examples illustrating the failures of the modern American economy is the growth of dollar stores. While some libertarians may dismiss Carlson’s critiques of the “ugliness” of dollar stores, the reality is that the dollar store boom did coincide with the post-2008 economy. As wages for American workers stagnated while inflationary pressures continued, dollar stores came to “reign supreme” in retail. As Austrian economists have noted, one of the secondary consequences of the fiat money system has been the pressure it applies to middle and low-income consumers to make lower-quality substitutions in their spending habits. From 2008 to 2020, dollar stores saw an 89.7 percent increase in their grocery business.
It would, of course, be mistaken to place monetary policy as the sole reason for the success of Carlson’s hated dollar stores. From personal experience, their smaller nature can make them more convenient for simple purchases than larger outlets and perhaps for some they serve a purpose closer to a suburban convenience store rather than a dehumanizing symbol of neoliberal conquest. Still, Carlson’s concern about what their growth means for average Americans is not without merit as an illustration of how Washington policymakers are ripping Americans off.
The real problem with Carlson’s economic views is not his willingness to be overly broad with the label “libertarian,” but the trap of embracing a form of economic denialism due to his understandable disillusionment of our failed economic expert class. While Carlson may find attempts to clarify the best labels to apply to the modern economic system as “boring conversations,” valid critiques of what exists now should not result in dismissing capitalism’s virtues.
Further, it is noteworthy that modern economic nationalists who delight in cheering on Carlson’s attacks on libertarians as a way of promoting their own interventionist dreams are just as blind as the worst “libertarian economist” on the real cancer of our economic system. As I noted earlier this year, American Compass, one of the institutions that has benefited from progressive deep pockets, managed to create an entire policy document without any meaningful reference to the “Federal Reserve” or “monetary policy,” even though it has a chapter dedicated to “financialization.” Carlson, to his credit, has shown more interest in that topic.
This is precisely why Austrian economists have an important role in the current world. While the economic ideas of Milton Friedman have some culpability in the creation of the global economic mess in which we find ourselves, Austrian economic theories bear no responsibility. While too many libertarians cheered on alleged policy victories such as “Reaganomics” or NAFTA, libertarians like Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell joined with paleoconservatives in their concerns for the consequences these policies would have for the economy as a whole.
Tho Bishop is Editorial and Content Manager for the Mises Institute, and can assist with questions from the press. Prior to working for the Mises Institute, he served as Deputy Communications Director for the House Financial Services Committee. His articles have been featured in The Federalist, the Daily Caller, Business Insider, The Washington Times, and The Rush Limbaugh Show.
Tho Bishop | Mises Wire
We heartily encourage reprints and shares of Mises Wire articles. If you wish to reproduce an article in your blog, magazine, radio show, newspaper column, classroom material, textbook, discussion group, website, or any other venue, please do so. The original publication source must be included in an appropriate place.The post Tucker Carlson is Not Entirely Wrong About “Libertarian Economics” appeared first on Granite Grok.
It feels like Electric Vehicle buyers get about as much information as COVID vaccine recipients, which is not much. Like the side effects of ownership. Loss of value, high insurance costs, pricey repairs for minor accident damage, loss of range in the cold of winter.
It’s not pretty.
Cold temperatures dramatically reduce an electric car’s range.
The colder it is, the more a car’s range will suffer.
18 popular EV models analyzed lost an average of ~30% of their range in freezing conditions.https://t.co/giOJfui1ps pic.twitter.com/i0dKvGty3j
— Brian Gitt (@BrianGitt) December 17, 2023
The cold affects fuel and combustion vehicles, but not anything like this, and when you need more fuel, it takes a few minutes, and off you go. EVs, even at superchargers, take from 15-30 minutes to many hours, depending on how much of your money you invested in the vehicle purchase by the look of it.
Add to this the odds – increased during winter – of long delays on highways surrounded by idling vehicles with no chargers in sight.
If you want an EV, there’s a lot to think about, not the least of which is that the emissions aren’t reduced; they are just offshored. You are not helping the planet, you are just feeding a false narrative. And you are welcome to it if you are spending your money, but that’s not how it is. From components to finished products, the government has meddled in the marketplace with other people’s money.
Add to this the increased pressure on the grid, which can or will drive up rates for everyone, and we’re all paying for this monumental mistake. So why not help your neighbors afford to heat their homes and just buy a conventional vehicle? You won’t regret it. It’ll last longer, be cheaper to fix, and get repaired faster, and when you get low on charge (fuel), there’s no shortage of places to “fill up.”
The post Are You “De-Ranged” Enough to Drive an EV in the Winter? appeared first on Granite Grok.
The CDC’s new model for public schools will be called community schools. In this model, public schools will offer mental health and medical services to students. This has already begun with the infusion of the Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS), which is SEL-Social and Emotional Learning.
What does this mean for students in a public school? They are now subjected to pseudo-psychology instead of learning how to read and write.
As schools begin shifting to this model, we are already finding serious problems:
1) Two young NH children were vaccinated this year even though their parents sent strict instructions that they did not want their children to receive the vaccine.
2) A parent in Maine was surprised to find out that his daughter was given a bag of Zoloft pills at the School-Based Health Clinics without his knowledge or consent. (SBHC) The side effects of Zoloft include suicidal thoughts. After addressing this with school administrators and withdrawing his daughter from the school, he was visited by Child Protective Services. Eventually cleared by CPS, many now question if this was retaliation.
3) Michael King from the Massachusetts Family Institute reported that a 16-year-old girl was implanted with a birth control device in her arm without her parent’s knowledge or consent. The implant required the girl to undergo a medical procedure in order to place the implant in her arm. This was done at the SBHC.
4) Students in New Hampshire who’ve visited their school counselor have had their personal mental health information shared with vendors hired to report to the federal government on the MTSS-B.
If all of this wasn’t bad enough, now we have NH Republican Senators proposing legislation that allows school districts to contract with a healthcare provider, health system, or community partner to establish a school-based health center for the purpose of providing services to students beyond the scope of school nursing services. Since when is it the goal of Republicans in the Senate to set up the CDC’s School Based Health Clinics?
This proposed legislation does include a provision that requires parental consent, but this does not guarantee parents will be notified or have to consent. It is possible they will ask parents to sign a blanket permission slip at the beginning of the school year without realizing that they are handing their children over for treatment they would not approve of. Parents are required to sign a lot of paperwork at the beginning of the school year. Some may believe that this would simply allow their children to be seen if they are running a fever or for a stomach ache.
According to the SBHC in Maine, they do not need parental consent to treat a child because they receive funding from the federal government.
How far can this go? In East Stroudsburg, PA, 6th-grade girls were forced to undergo a gynecological exam without their parents’ knowledge or consent. Some people are willing to go that far, believing parents should have no part in these medical decisions for their children.
Since hospitals struggle to keep hospitals staffed, does it make sense to pull staff from these medical facilities? Schools already provide nursing services to their students. Can you imagine requiring more of these medical professionals to staff these SBHCs?
There is no respect for parental authority by those who promote the CDC’s Community Schools. While this legislation includes parental consent, even with consent, mistakes have already happened in New Hampshire. When you remove parents from their children when receiving medical care, you can expect more of that.
It is shocking to see these sponsors on SB343: SPONSORS: Sen. Innis, Dist 7; Sen. Gray, Dist 6; Sen. Carson, Dist 14; Sen. Murphy, Dist 16; Rep. Wolf, Merr. 7 It is important that you act now.
Contact the Republicans in The New Hampshire Senate and demand that they kill Senate Bill 343. If you can, MAKE a PHONE CALL!
Call these Senators AND send them an email asking them to KILL SB343.
We do NOT want the CDC model in our public schools.
Carrie.Gendreau@leg.state.nh.us
Timothy.Lang@leg.state.nh.us
Jeb.Bradley@leg.state.nh.us
James.Gray@leg.state.nh.us
Daniel.Innis@leg.state.nh.us
Ruth.Ward@leg.state.nh.us
Denise.Ricciardi@leg.state.nh.us
Kevin.Avard@leg.state.nh.us
Sharon.Carson@leg.state.nh.us
Keith.Murphy@leg.state.nh.us
Howard.Pearl@leg.state.nh.us
Regina.Birdsell@leg.state.nh.us
Daryl.Abbas@leg.state.nh.us
William.Gannon@leg.state.nh.us
The post NH’s Most Dangerous Bill This Year Comes from Republicans in the Senate appeared first on Granite Grok.
Globalists and, closer to home, the Bidenistas have turned the bullish!t up to eleven in an effort to break the world. They are itchin’ for a fight, like an angry drunk poking you in the chest until you get mad enough to take a swing.
But what if they fall down and pass out before things get that far? Victims of their own excess.
The green machine (at least in America) has been printing record-setting sums of fiat money, handing it out like candy at a parade. Piles of it have gone to feed their other green machine: the climate cult—lots of prop-ups, handouts, gimmes. Use the allure of free or easy money (it is neither) to force the Climate agenda down everyone’s throat, but they’ve run into a problem. The printing press prop-ups have created inflation and generational debt, which impacts the cost of everything.
You can only steal so much from so many – most of them not yet born – before the thing falls down. And I get that this is the point. Cloward Piven. Collapse everything. But the Climate scam wasn’t supposed to go so soon.
Falling DownOne of the big green jewels in the UK’s “end functional modernity” crown can’t COP a break. It has announced its impending insolvency.
AMTE had a long history in developing lithium cells, making some of the first examples in the 1990s. Recently, AMTE said it tested cells that can be charged fully in six minutes in a breakthrough for charging technology.
However, it has been making a loss. It did not get the firm orders it needed from carmakers and other potential customers, or a patient investor that could fuel an expansion in production.
AMTE’s fate mirrors that of Britishvolt, another would-be independent UK gigafactory.
Britishvolt was the brainchild of former investment banker Orral Nadjari, who saw the looming demand for batteries from carmakers in the UK and a gap in the market for an independent producer, planning a £3.8bn factory in Blyth, Northumberland.
But it ran out of funding after borrowing became more expensive.
As reported earlier, automakers are spending less time promoting EVs because there’s no way to make money back, let alone profit, in the current economy, even with fiat money handouts. As such, many are dialing back EV builds, which has a ripple effect in the other propped-up divisions necessary to reach the climate utopia. They can’t afford to operate as is, either.
Take Phoenix Solar. A solar company based in one of the sunniest places in the US. It has filed for bankruptcy.
The Nov. 9 WARN filing contained a letter from Erus CEO Abraham Sabbagh to Erus Energy employees, which was obtained by Phoenix Business Journal on Dec. 8. The letter stated that the company was ceasing operations and laying off workers on Nov. 3, citing challenging conditions in the residential solar industry including elevated interest rates, utility permitting delays and lower installation rates.
“Over the past six months, the company has pursued a number of restructuring initiatives while also actively pursuing a sale, but those efforts have not been successful despite best efforts,” Sabbagh wrote. “It has become clear after discussions with the company’s secured lender and a prospective purchaser that a sale as a going concern is impossible.”
Not even China wanted to buy it? That’s got to be concerning to the Leftopians. Meanwhile, the legal community, bouncing about brokenly in the sidecar of this rickety-energy-transition, has also failed to provide judicial support for their nonsense. A court in Oregon just tossed the State’s illegal Climate Protection Program.
The court’s decision focused on a clear disclosure requirements of the statute – the failure of the Environmental Quality Commission to meet disclosure requirements. This focus on procedural integrity is crucial. It ensures that any significant regulatory changes, especially those impacting major industries and the economy, are made transparently and with due diligence. The court rightly prioritized the rule of law over the substance of the program itself, much to the chagrin of the end justifies the means activists. …
The court rightly noted that “substantial compliance” is not sufficient. Actual compliance with statutory requirements is non-negotiable, especially when it comes to regulations that have far-reaching implications for industries and consumers alike.
Also, from the left Coast,
The PCFFA, under the representation of Sher Edling, filed a lawsuit alleging catastrophic impacts of climate change on their crab fishing grounds. However, when the legal battle was moved to federal court, the association abruptly dropped the case. This raises questions about the actual substance and intent behind such lawsuits. Was this lawsuit genuinely seeking justice, or was it another example of using the legal system for publicity and political posturing?
We’d agree that it was the latter, and that seems to be the case. Flooding the zone with headline-grabbing lawsuits attracts the wandering internet mind long enough to make an impression upon which no one is expected to follow up. In the case of the PCFFA case, the tactic should have been blatantly obvious.
The internal discord within the PCFFA and skepticism about the lawsuit’s validity were evident from the outset. Some members of the association themselves pointed out the irony of suing fossil fuel companies while relying on their products for their fishing operations.
“How do we run our engines without oil? How do we fish without oil? Electricity? I’m a small vessel. I’m only 68 tons and my God, I don’t know how that would work.’” (emphasis added)
How indeed. Boats and planes share the battery size and weight problem (as would heavy equipment). To get even moderate amounts or range, you need a capacity that makes float or flite improbable, if not impossible. Lithium packs in vehicles represent a significant increase in total weight whose impact on infrastructure is missing from most if not all, total carbon footprint calculations for EVs.
Are we giving up seafood, ocean, and airline freight, not to mention cruises and passenger air? Yes. If you read the New Green Deal, that’s precisely true. Only an elite few would retain access to transportation above the technological level of a bicycle, which is a sacrifice no one outside the first world is stupid enough to consider.
If you don’t understand why, take 7 minutes to watch the video at the end of this post. It not only doesn’t work, isn’t affordable, and doesn’t green the planet – “It”being any or all of their supposed solutions – the people doing the most emitting without whose sacrifice this exercise is pointless – aren’t going to play along. Neither, it seems, are an increasing number of Westerners (even those who have tried), as the cost of a government-forced energy transition is undermined by the reality of the shoddy and irresponsible economic policy required to force it into being.
I’m sure they’ll keep going. The goal is to break everything. But it has not been a good few months for the Climate Cult.
Merry Christmas to us. For now.
The post The Climate Cult’s Horrible, Terrible, Past Few Weeks appeared first on Granite Grok.
Those of us who love this country still believe we can survive this downward spiral started by Obama and consummated by Biden. These two men and their Leftist Party of Doom have done their best to destroy America as we knew it.
They disguised their plan by giving it a fancy name: Fundamentally change America. Change they did, as they tried to take America driven by an unbridled group of visionaries and turn it into a dependent populace who rely on the government for basic sustenance. It was popular at the beginning. A charismatic Black President and adoring media sold the message, and young people bought into the hype. Born of the movement was the Radical Left and the Squad.
Their plan had two weaknesses. The strategy of negativity had no legs. America was not ready to be a land of failure and desperation. They chose the wrong messenger. The team led by the aging bungling Joe Biden and the totally feckless, Black Kamala Harris could not relay the Progressive message, and the failure of the most incompetent, diverse Administration ever put together proved that the New America was doomed to failure. 2023 will be remembered as the year America woke up and saved itself.
The biggest obstacle for the Left is Donald Trump. Trump is too powerful and resilient to fall regardless of what the Left uses in their attempt to put him down. Trump has an ego and arrogance about him that fuels his enemies, but he also has the will and bravado of a warrior that stimulates his followers. He enrages his believers and gives them the impetus to fight back against the efforts of the Left. With every punch and kick he absorbs, his popularity and ratings grow. The Left is creating the monster that will take them down and unleash a Conservative fury that will rebuild this country and set it on a course to a new and exciting future.
As I read this article, it seems like the ramblings of a foolish idealist. But as a passionate observer, I scribed over 1200 articles about America’s politics. I witnessed the futility and emptiness of the Democrat bench and the rising of a new, brilliant, and driven Republican team. The fall of Kevin McCarthy may have been just what the Party needed. Though the process was ugly, the outcome may have been just the cornerstone to support the New Conservative Republican machine that will be the engine of the resurrected America. Mike Johnson, the quiet man from Louisiana, was an unlikely but timely choice to replace McCarthy and lead the Right.
Saturday Night Live parodied Elise Stefanik’s questioning of the three female presidents of Harvard, Penn, and MIT, but Stefanik may have the last laugh. The YouTube video of her dress down of these three elites has more hits than any other video of Congress. Yes, she embarrassed the three, but better still, she exposed them. These three Woke women proved to be Racist, antisemitic charlatans who were more interested in DEI than excellence. The Penn president has resigned, the Harvard head is under fire, and can the MIT leader be far behind? Stefanik embodies the new Republicans. They are young, intelligent, brave, and driven. They are patriots who love this country and are ready to fight to bring her back. It is exciting to watch and rewarding to see the results of their efforts. They may seem slow to react, but they operate with methodical precision, which is in stark contrast to their irrational counterparts on the other side of the aisle. Whether it is Biden, Newsom, or Hochul in 2024, the end of the Obama Transformation is near.
The post Is the the End of the Obama Transformation Near? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Wake up to the dangers of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Section 702 is up for congressional reauthorization before the end of the year. Congress must stand up for the Fourth Amendment and stop the FBI and NSA violations of personal rights to privacy by passing Senator Rand Pauls bill S.3372 to abolish FISA.
Question our weak and suspect Congress that jeopardizes these inherent rights to protection from federal abuse. Ask: was this unconstitutional Orwellian Act propagated and sold to Congress and the American electorate as a true effort to monitor foreign agents as its name implied? Or was it a serious criminal intent to betray the constitutional protection of the 4th Amendment and authorize federal abuse of power?
Whatever the intent, the fact remains the criminal purpose resulted in taking away the blessing of security that our people have because of the Fourth Amendment. FISA infringes this Amendment’s protection, crucial to liberty, that, in essence, demands” … the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant.”
The JBS.ORG, Federal Legislation Alert — why we need to pass the “Stop FISA Reauthorization —- Support The Fourth Amendment Restoration & Protection Act,” (S.3372) introduced by Senator Rand Paul, gives us a small sample of what life would be like without the Fourth Amendment:
“FISA was purportedly enacted to help protect against terrorist attacks, but it is rampantly being used by the government — including the FBI and NSA — to spy on American citizens in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. For example, in 2021 alone, the FBI ran about 3 million “U.S. person queries” using Section 702. Tellingly, FBI Director Christopher Wray is vocally opposing any requirements to obtain a warrant.”
Friends of Liberty at the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), established in 2007, tell us that federal Surveillance bosses practice a shameful brand of patriotism with these violations of the people’s right to be secure: “Significant privacy and civil liberties risks also include the scope of permissible targeting, NSA’s new approach to upstream collection, a new sensitive collection technique that presented novel and significant legal issues approved by the FISC (Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court) 2022,…” Furthermore, it is well known that FISC’s overseeing of requests for warrants lacks transparency and constitutional due-process protection, and they fail to hold federal agencies accountable.
Help stop the federal surveillance of private citizens and prevent attacks on political opponents by the current administration. If President Trump’s rights can be violated, who is next? The power of “We the People” must speak. Educate yourself by going to JBS.ORG. source, The John Birch Society, having stood the test of time, is the most powerful weapon to counteract this imminent tyranny. Join us and tell Congress you cherish your inherent right that your home is your castle and demand they cosponsor S.3372.
The post Night Cap: Sen. Rand Paul Wants To Abolish FISA appeared first on Granite Grok.
Maybe ask yourself this question … what wouldn’t people who support an obviously absurd court decision obviously intended to prevent Trump from being elected POTUS a third time do to prevent Trump from being elected POTUS a third time? The obvious answer … NOTHING. Of course, they would like us to keep believing that presidential elections are exercises in democracy and our votes matter, BUT if necessary they will go full Lenin on us.
The actual insurrection was the soft-insurrection that began even before Trump was elected in 2016 and culminated in the rigged election of 2020. In case you have forgotten, maybe you should review a succinct (albeit only partial) summation from Sean Davis:
They tried to prevent Trump’s election in 2016 with illegal spying and the bogus Steele dossier. They used a lawless FBI operation to cripple his presidency. They impeached him twice. They accused his Supreme Court nominee of running a secret gang rape cartel. They shut down the country over a flu, then lied about its origin, illegally changed ballot laws, burned American cities to the ground, stole the 2020 election, and then imprisoned anyone who protested it. Now they’re trying to put Trump in prison, and if that fails, they’ll throw him off the ballot. You can fill in the blanks on what they’ll consider if neither of those options work.
This is such a massive cope from people on the right still operating under the insane assumption that the Left won’t do *everything* possible to prevent Trump from becoming president and assuming the powers of the office.
They tried to prevent Trump’s election in 2016 with… https://t.co/F5RUKyxVvV
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) December 20, 2023
If you think this all ends after an appeal to the United States Supreme Court … YOU ARE DELUSIONAL. It won’t end unless and until Republicans actually fight back and Republicans will NOT do that because far too many of their “leaders” support the Left’s objective of preventing Trump from becoming President. An example of actually fighting back:
DeSantis and the Florida legislature should throw Biden off the ballot for having engaged in rebellion/insurrection by dissolving the Southern border and abetting invasion of the U.S., and by using his corrupt DOJ/FBI shock troops to shred the law and Constitution and terrorize…
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) December 20, 2023
But, as we already know, that is not going to happen. DeSantis and Haley and Christie all intend to participate in totally rigged, banana-republic Colorado primary.
Yet most Republicans continue to pretend that the 2024 election is going to be an actual election. Pathetic, totally pathetic.
The post Colorado: Y’all Still So Can’t Connect The Dots … appeared first on Granite Grok.
This is from a conversation in the comments below one of Steve’s recent posts. It seems relevant to a lot of what’s happening just now, so I thought I’d post it separately.
Where [many people] see lots of different problems, I see only a couple that underlie all the others.
The first — not to sound like a broken record or anything — is confusing consent with majority rule, acting as if those are the same when, in fact, they are nearly opposites.
The second is confusing form with function.
Legislatures pass laws, and eventually, people start to think that as long as the legislature follows certain formalities (introduce a bill, hold hearings, vote, send to the executive for signature), then whatever they enact must be a valid law.
Judges issue opinions, and eventually, people start to think that as long as the judges follow certain formalities, then whatever they want to rule on must be a valid precedent, i.e., ‘the law.’
Regulators issue regulations, police issue ‘lawful orders’, presidents and governors issue ‘executive orders’, and all of these are considered to have ‘the force of law’. And so on.
People seem to have completely given up the idea that if government officials try to exercise a power that their written constitutions — their job descriptions — do not delegate to them or clearly prohibit them from having, then what they say or do isn’t binding on anyone.
Imagine how different things would be if people were willing to look at laws, regulations, orders, and judicial opinions coming from government officials and say:
Look, we can read our constitutions as well as you can, and what you’re trying to do is so clearly outside of the legitimate scope of what you can do that we’re just going to ignore it. And if you try to force the issue, you’ll meet with armed resistance.
I think this is exactly what the Second Amendment means by ‘the security of a free State.’
The post The Security of a Free State appeared first on Granite Grok.
An ongoing kerfuffle over alleged Saudi water withdrawals from Arizona to grow alfalfa highlights the complexity of competition for increasingly scarce – and thus valuable – water for crops and residential uses.
Revelations about gargantuan volumes of water withdrawn at little cost by a Saudi company to grow hay for export have sparked a passionate dispute that extends outside America’s third-driest state to California and other water-pressed jurisdictions.
Water for Saudi ArabiaThe Saudi connection stems from a company named Fondomonte, which reputedly has been withdrawing unlimited amounts of water from lands it leases for merely $25 per acre: The value of the water extracted far exceeds the rent paid. Fondomonte is allegedly growing alfalfa year-round on its 3,500 Arizona acres to ship off to other countries – like China. Outcries of foul play have resulted in an ongoing effort to limit or ban foreign nationals from owning Arizona water rights or to retroactively impose monetary assessments for the water withdrawn.
The issues of water friction will lead to yet more lines drawn in the Arizona sand. Water rights there are big business, as the state endures a crippling, decades-long megadrought that pits farmers and ranchers against newly arriving residents who seek to limit water usage and development. This in turn drives up the cost of housing, water rights, and farmland, creating a vicious cycle that further escalates prices and speculation.
Water Wars BrewingIssues over water also exacerbate growing cultural tensions. Brad Fain, a multi-generation Arizona farmer and rancher, observes that newcomers “…see farmers as unsophisticated and maybe greedy. They don’t understand our culture, or the complexity of our business.” This urban-rural division grows more intense as Californians and New Yorkers flee high taxes and COVID chaos for sunny climes and retirement. Fain sees the pressures on both sides and is sympathetic.
Arizona is extracting water faster than aquifers and rivers can replenish their flow. Arizona’s key policy dispute arises over whether all growth should be halted or managed to extract the wealth and policies necessary to implement yet more water efficiencies. Agricultural producers have been watching water use as part of their bottom line for decades, investing in modern irrigation technologies and more regenerative practices to reduce their drawdowns while staying in business.
Mr. Fain points out an interesting opportunity to balance these competing uses: Employ taxes on development to invest in “closed loop” residential water systems that reclaim and recycle residential water usage. Private drilled wells for housing may not be as amenable to such practices as public water systems. Most residential water can be processed and reused, with the exception of swimming pools, lawn watering, and landscaping. Suburban residents seek to restrict new development, sparking cries of elitism. They want to keep their lawns and water them, too.
Arizona’s EffortsThe battle lines were drawn four decades ago, when Arizona’s 1980 Groundwater Management Act created “extinguishment credits” to incentivize farms to sell or convert their water rights for development uses. This shifted resources away from water-intensive food production to water-absorbing residential growth. Farming and ranching have steadily declined, but precious water has been sucked up by the suburban sprawl. Rancher and developer Brad Fain “Tools were put in place to augment our water. We have to be very careful with our water.”
Regardless of climate change, anthropogenic water drawdowns have increased the strain on US aquifers and rivers. The coming water wars pit neighbor against neighbor. Brad Fain is sympathetic: “Where are these people to go? They come from all over the world to America seeking hope, and retire to warm climates from up north seeking their lifelong dream. We must build more hospitals and businesses, and we have a nursing shortage and insufficient housing to meet this surging demand. We can conserve more water while supporting reasonable and smarter development.”
Uniting for SolutionsThese pressures are hardly unique to Arizona. As the BBC reported in 2014, California was shipping hay to China during a severe drought there, impacting not only water supplies but the viability of American farms:
In the dried-up fields of California’s Central Valley, [some] farmers … are selling their cattle. Others have to choose which crops get the scarce irrigation water and which will wither. … The farmers are making hay while the year-round sun shines, and they are exporting cattle-feed to China. … Japan, Korea and the United Arab Emirates all buy Californian hay. The price is now so high that many local dairy farmers and cattle ranchers can’t afford the cost when the rains fail and their usual supplies are insufficient.
California produces roughly half of all American produce. The water troubles in the American West extend far beyond the borders of Arizona and foretells of a wider conflict for precious resources yet to come. Better water management and conservation are necessary from all sides, whether rich or poor, urban or suburban, black or white, red or blue. In a time of rancorous, divisive “identity politics,” all Americans must identify threats of thirst and starvation as common enemies against which we must forge a united policy response.
Note: I discuss America’s growing water crisis at length in my book, Small Farm Republic. Solar panels, EV cars, and synthetic meats do nothing to conserve water or rebuild soils. Cows do this while sequestering carbon dioxide.
John Klar is an Attorney, farmer, and author. Mostly farmer… And Regular Contributor to GraniteGrok and VermontGrok.
The post Night Cap: Saudi Water Battle in Arizona appeared first on Granite Grok.
It’s rumored that some Republican-controlled state governments are considering prohibiting Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot in their states. Of course, Democrats are crying foul: ‘He isn’t an insurrectionist!’
And yet, both candidates have been convicted of insurrection exactly the same number of times: Zero.
Apparently, Democrats have proved that you don’t really need a reason to keep someone off a ballot if you have the political will and the numbers to make it happen. (Related: Thanks to Colorado, NH Republicans Can Sweep Every Federal Race in 2024.)
Just like they proved that you don’t really need a reason to impeach a president, if you have the political will and the numbers to make it happen.
I love what RFK Jr. said about the situation in Colorado. Paraphrasing, if this were happening in another country, we’d be saying: That’s not a real election.
With each week that passes, our chances of having a ‘real election’ seem to decrease significantly. This could be a good thing if it helps us move, as a country, beyond the farce that majority rule has made of what was supposed to be government by consent.
The post Reason? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Reason appeared first on Granite Grok.
Since writing the first article, Are Convenience Stores Violating Your Privacy, I have been gathering more information and find the Driver License Scanning issue to be quite the bottomless rabbit hole.
Here are some key takeaways:
As noted above, the NH Attorney General’s office isn’t all that interested or concerned. A John R. Davis responded to my RSA 91-A request as follows:
“I am an Assistant Attorney General in the Consumer Protection & Antitrust Bureau (“Bureau”) of the New Hampshire Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General. I am responding on behalf of the Bureau to your 12/04/2023 email to Ms. Jessica Raymond, of the Bureau, which email is attached below.
For your information, I believe that the Bureau previously, timely responded to your right-to-know request. I believe that the Bureau provided all documents that the Bureau had to provide under the applicable statute. Furthermore, I believe that the Bureau, both in referring you to the Department of Safety (“DoS”) and closing your complaint, acted properly.
Relative to your most recent email below, please be advised of the following:”
I asked the AG the following questions.
Before closing the case, did you confirm the following:
The only documentation provided to me was our email exchange and my written complaint. There was no indication that any investigation or equipment testing was or would be done. Should there? Let’s look at the law.
From TITLE XXI Chapter 263 – Drivers’ Licenses
263:12 Prohibitions. –
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person to:
X. Knowingly scan, record, retain, or store, in any electronic form or format, personal information, as defined in RSA 260:14, obtained from any license, unless authorized by the department. Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit a person from transferring, in non-electronic form or format, personal information contained on the face of a license to another person, provided that the consent of the license holder is obtained if the transfer is not to a law enforcement agency. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person selling alcohol or tobacco who uses due diligence in checking identification to prevent unauthorized sales and purchases of alcohol and tobacco shall not be held responsible for the acceptance of fraudulent identification. Where due diligence is exercised on the part of the seller, the unauthorized purchaser shall be liable for any penalty or fine resulting from the unauthorized sale.
There is no legal reason or legal exception that justifies Macy’s, a convenience store, or LHS Poll Pad Training in Manchester to gather this data in this way. Scanning your driver’s license in New Hampshire is illegal, with these exceptions (emphasis added).
This paragraph shall not prohibit the scanning, recording, retaining, or storing of such information in electronic form collected with the license holder’s consent as part of a sale of merchandise to a pawnbroker, scrap metal dealer, or other secondhand dealer, and submission of such information to law enforcement databases for the sole purpose of identifying sellers of stolen merchandise. The pawnbroker, scrap metal dealer, or secondhand dealer shall not retain the scanned information in electronic form transmitted to a law enforcement database, unless required by local regulation, and shall not furnish the information to anyone except a law enforcement officer. The pawnbroker, scrap metal dealer, or secondhand dealer may maintain in a log or other document the name and address of the person whose license was scanned along with a description of the items the individual sold, pawned, or purchased, and shall allow such log or document to be examined by a law enforcement official upon request.
Absent new information, these businesses are committing misdemeanor offenses every time they scan the barcode on the back of your driver’s license, regardless of your having given consent.
But the State Attorney General either doesn’t have the time to provide the legal exception that allows it or to investigate and prosecute violations if that’s what they are.
Are they too busy working on another frivolous case against James O’Keefe?
The post Are Driver’s Licenses Being Scanned Illegally in New Hampshire? appeared first on Granite Grok.
To all those who are sending in memes, thank you! Keep them coming please, as it helps me gather weaponry to fight the Left. Understand that I do get a fair number of repeats, and some that don’t “grab” me as well. However, please do share this post, and if you share an individual meme, consider mentioning you saw it on the Grok!
Speaking of, from this week, Monday Edition and Wednesday Edition.
*** Warning, a few possibly off-color ones, in case tender eyes are about ***
Note: I will be taking the day off on December 25th – Christmas. OK, I grumble about it, but my (non-Jewish) wife loves it and so do the kids. And speaking of Christmas, here’s a piece I wrote about my being a Jew in a Christian country:
Merry Christmas! | Forward in Christ Magazine
So consider this slickly-worded WEF presentation. Just marvel at how noble and high-sounding a clampdown on the information flow can seem:
https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/wef-cencorship-video.mp4
>>>>>=====<<<<<
MHO, if the US / NATO go to a hot war with Russia directly, it will turn nuclear. No question. And I have ZERO doubts that Putin has plans for that. While I’m certainly no expert, in many senses the Russian mentality – that I’ve come to know at least – is very simple: “If we’re going down we’ll take you down with us”.
Who the living F voted for this POS to have such control over what we can or can’t do?
>>>>>=====<<<<<
PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA – PSA
Any of the above sound familiar? No, wait… any of the above NOT sound familiar? Take a look at the tearing down of statues. This is part of Mao’s “Four Olds” strategy, sweeping away the last vestiges of the old Republic.
How soon before they get tired of statues and just come straight for anyone to the Right of Stalin? I’m betting within a year…
People who fled Communist China are sounding the alarm. People who fled Communist Cuba are as well, as are people who fled Communist Venezuela. They’ve seen this before. And despite this living testimony from countless people who have seen their countries fall, most people are TWENTY-NINERS as to the possibility that bad things could happen here. (A Telegram friend is lamenting their seeming role as a Cassandra – making correct prophecies and attempting to warn people about multiple things, only to be completely ignored if not derided. I know the feeling.)
Hence my term, “Twenty-Niners”. People who cannot grasp that anything that could radically change the situation in which they live are actual possibilities, and completely dismiss concerns that others present even when backed by evidence.
They have Stability Privilege. And reality’s going to come knocking… hard.
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Ouch. Where’s Fang Fang when you need her?
Just wait until all those fighting age men are married to all the arms and ammo purchased by Barackus. What, you thought the forest service and agriculture departments, etc., really needed all that weaponry? The Left may be missionaries, and insane to boot – but they’re shrewd and cunning…
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Merry Christmas to those who celebrate!
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Pick of the Post:
>>>>>=====<<<<<
Palate Cleansers:
—
—
—
>>>>>=====<<<<<
And don’t forget… come back Monday for another edition. Same Meme Time. Same Meme channel.
Please do consider buying me a coffee.
Buy Me a Coffee
>>>>>=====<<<<<
The post Friday Meme Overflow-Overflow appeared first on Granite Grok.
Londonderry Times publisher Deb Paul stood before a judge on Wednesday to receive her punishment. The crime was failing to include the ‘magic words’ identifying blatantly political ads as…political ads. The judgment hath arrived.
Deb has until early January to pay a $620.00 fine, according to InDepth NH, (124.00 per violation).
Prosecutors charged Paul, 64, with six Class A misdemeanors which carry up to a year in jail and $2,000 in fines for the ads she ran in the Londonderry Times and Nutfield News, though Steckowych found her not guilty on one count after November’s bench trial.
Paul did not respond to a request for comment.
According to prosecutors, Paul repeatedly broke the law when publishing ads for local political candidates and warrant articles in the Londonderry Times and the Nutfield News in the run up to the March 2022 municipal elections. The Nutfield News has since ceased publication.
As per previous reporting, we find this excessive, given the lack of clarity in the statute. A problem the legislature needs to address. We also made a promise.
Regardless of what punishment the judge decides is fair, and we think a warning will do, the free press and independent media are more important to the liberty of the nation, the state, and the town of Londonderry than the “magic words.” We feel obligated to rise in support of Deb Paul and her newspaper. To share more of its content with our audience who, and this may not come as a surprise, agree that the town has become a stink-hole of political insiders. A swamp of its own that needs draining.
We intend to keep it.
Investigative material directed at Londonderry’s intractable swamp can look forward to finding a second home here, along with some of our poking and prodding. We know a few folks in Londonderry who wouldn’t mind if that town got a bit more exposure, but if you live in or nearby (Derry’s a bit of a cesspit as well), we hope you’ll send us your inside scoops.
If we get enough material regularly, perhaps we will feature it in Derry/Londonderry MicroGrok. Not to compete for local market share but to use our reach to get more eyeballs looking in that direction. Remember, local stories matter because the nonsense you see in one town is often in many, and until it gets pointed out, folks might not think to look for it in their town.
If you want to be a local hero, make a point of turning yourself into Ed Naile. He left us a few years ago, but he had a very respectable reputation before he passed. If Ed walked into a meeting in any town, people in the know knew to be worried about why he was there. Even if he never said a word.
New Hampshire could use a few more like that who then take their observations to the new media. We can’t cover everything, and we can’t print everything. Some of the work folks do at the local level might not translate to this medium, but a lot of it does, and we’re willing to see what you have to share.
And so is Deb Paul at the Londonderry Times. Don’t be afraid to reach out and support your local muckrakers.
Update: The actual total fine may be different than what was reported by InDepthNH. Deb Paul had suggested to me that she was waiting to hear form the Judge. I will update this post when we have clarification.
The post A $620.00 Fine? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Paula had her day in court this afternoon and I thought a summary of observation would be of interest. Many witnesses were in court this morning in Concord as plaintiffs against Chris Ager, which I’m sure someone else will report on as I wasn’t there.
Tom Murray was out of town and, therefore, unfortunately unavailable, but the show went on.
First, I will point out that Judge Temple did not get this one. We got Judge English, who Temple told us yesterday upon adjournment of Laurie Ortolano’s case, would be filling in for the absent Judge Colburn. English was patient, friendly, and pleasant, but I thought a little research was in order, not that it necessarily predicted the outcome. According to Marylyn Todd’s Nosey Neighbor App, which uses 2020 voter data, English is a Democrat, and she was appointed by the Damn Emperor on 6/29/22. She had a hearing at the executive council on Nurse Terese’s milestone birthday, 7/6/22, and an email has been sent to their secretary, Meagan, to ask who voted for her and who didn’t. We will use that info accordingly at primary time.
Attorney Bolton and Clerk Healey were there at the enemy table for the City. Paula had constitutional scholar Daniel Richard at hers to serve as an “assistant.” Attendees in support of Paula included Lynn Diane Briggs, Wayne Saya, Dan LaPointe, Joan Donahue, Lily Tang Williams, Donna Judge, Niko, former Alderman Teeboom, Alderman-elect Chis Thibodeau, Al Brandano, and yours truly. The enemy camp fans included Ms. Gloria, Sonia Prince, and late arrivals Mr. & Mrs. Newman.
I sat in the front row and was later told that Mrs. Newman, seated in the back, took a lot of notes. I did not speak to them, nor was I even interested in a Seinfeld-style “hello, Newman” greeting.
Before going any further, I will share the link to my previous piece on the case. My article outlines the four complaints against the City. In short, it wasn’t about proving that fraud occurred. Rather, it’s about the procedure not being followed.
Paula made her opening statement, which Attorney Bolton made many objections to that were procedural in nature, but Judge English kindly redirected Paula as needed. Like myself, or Laurie Ortolano, Paula is not a lawyer, and this judge pointed out that it is not uncommon for plaintiffs to represent themselves. As expected of nonlawyers, there were some “holes,” so to speak, in the presentation, and Daniel Richard did an excellent job “spackling” them when he was on the witness stand.
Paula took to the stand first, followed by Daniel Richard, who recognized windows of opportunity to elaborate on things and even make reference to his pro se Supreme Court case, which can be found here.
Other witnesses called by Paula were Lynn Diane Briggs, Wayne Saya and Al Brandano. All of them did an excellent job responding to Paula’s questions, which often included excellent inviting words like “can you describe what you saw…”
Attorney Bolton’s only witness was Clerk Healey and their dialogue was mostly predictable, but as Altschiller would say to the rest of the senate regarding a bill banning woke investments, “the CRUX of the matter,” was that the school board is “styled” autonomously from the city itself with regard to all its operations and there are only two exceptions. Paula explained, both as a school incumbent and as a former alderman, that those exceptions are that the city controls the budget and there’s a joint (JSSB) committee that oversees the construction of new schools. I believe that Alderman Dowd is the chair of that body.
Let me take a quick sidestep to point out that the school board is a common portal in which tyrants develop their political resumes. Mrs. Newman, my two time opponent, is a former member, and my most recent opponent, Alderman Dowd is the former chair. School elections matter. Now back to the case.
All four complaints in Paula’s petition were ultimately acknowledged, some in greater detail than others; procedure not followed, chain of custody for ballot storage breached, equal protection clause violated, and incorrect handling/processing of absentee ballots. Near the end, a lot of verbal dispute was about the school board’s separate status from city hall as its own entity. Attorney Bolton started thumbing through some book while Paula was speaking and it reminded me of Annie Kuster (another lawyer worse than Lionel Hutz) seen on TV dressed in white and reading her pocket constitution during Trump’s speech that Queen Nancy ripped up moments later.
When it was his turn to speak, he started citing several local litigations that occurred in the 50s, 60s and early 70s. Then he cited a recent federal court case of a disenfranchised blind woman. I was later told that when counsel starts digging for cases from several decades ago, it’s a sign of desperation. Attorney Bolton has until December 29 to submit his final statement and Judge English knows the swearing in is to take place in a matter of days later, so we won’t be waiting long for her ruling.
The post Paula Johnson vs. City of Nashua (The Sequel) appeared first on Granite Grok.