.... before you provoke or start one.
Let's take the Hezbollah detonating pagers and, it appears, now HTs as well. People are trying to run a scare-op that the batteries exploded due to some firmware change. No. First most pagers run on a single AA battery because they're very low power as they do not transmit (the reason Hezbollah went to them in the first place; its very easy to "find" someone who is transmitting all the time, such as a cellphone.) Those were clearly detonations, not fires, and thus the devices were tampered with.
Want my bet on how? A "front company" that the other side (Mossad, basically) set up managed to bait Hezbollah on their orders with an "unbelievably good" price. You know the old adage about something that's too good to be true? It was; the front company bought the devices, put the explosives in them and then sold them at an intentional loss to Hezbollah. I'll bet any amount of money you care to lose that's how it happened and every one of them went to the intended target.
There are plenty of people who are saying this is a "war crime" or similar. Sorry but there's no such thing in this sort of context as I've pointed out before. These devices were explicitly coded for an encrypted network used only by Hezbollah and thus useless in the secondary market or by others. In other words there is an extremely high probability, near 100%, that only a Hezbollah person would have them since they'd be the only people for whom they would work and further, since they were remote triggered with a message only if on that encrypted network would they explode. That they might be living with others who are family members or similar elicits nothing more than a shrug from me.
To those who argue that the political, non-fighting parts of a "government" are immune that's bullshit folks. Oh you can take whatever position you want but you're wrong and I don't care if you like it or not. Take the US: We have a "civilian command and control" structure up to the President as CiC. Therefore the President, who is subject to being removed by impeachment through Congress, which in turn means the people because we elect Congress and they serve at our pleasure, is an actual combatant in any military action this nation takes -- it is he or she who issues actual operational orders and both that person and the entirety of Congress and all persons who are employed in support of either, directly and indirectly, are legitimate military targets if and when we engage in any military act.
Indeed the same can be reasonably construed even against civilians because without tax money and the civilian infrastructure, including the flow of money, no war can be prosecuted at all. That's right folks -- you, I, and everyone else are legitimate targets if there is a war because but for our contributions there is no war since all wars require material and money. You don't really think Rosie was a riveter for other than the purpose of prosecuting a war, do you? Well if she was riveting to prosecute a war then Rosie is a legitimate target for the other side.
Oh and spare me the high-minded bullshit about America in this regard. Do recall we put a cruise missile through Gaddafi's office window -- and can we talk about Saddam? He was hanged, was he not? Well then why would you not expect Biden and Harris -- along with the entire State Department cadre in support of that crap over there to hang if Ukraine loses? The only reason they won't is the inability of the other side to reach said people and do it. How sure are you they can't reach them -- and, since you generated the tax revenue that funded that war and thus are the reason it occurred, how sure might you be that they cannot reach you? May I remind you that it is much easier to reach you or I than it is to reach the President?
Again -- if you don't like wars don't start one and don't let your activity be the reason one can be funded and continued either.
Speaking of wars those can be rather "un"-civil too. Indeed war is the end result of reason in the context of politics that fails to find acceptance and one or both sides decide to continue by violent means.
Like, for example, attempted political assassinations of a candidate when you fear you might lose through the process of reason at the ballot box.
Let me point something out to those who are engaged in these events and those who effectively cheer them on such as the current Administration and its spokesperson as well as many in the government itself along with others among their families (e.g. Vindman's wife) who have made quips on social media like "no ears were harmed."
Are you sure you want a war because it sure appears, to this person, that the entire left side of the aisle not only wants one they're deliberately trying to provoke it right here at home!
Do you have any idea what that looks like if you get what you're provoking?
Let me explain it to you since the above principle applies to anyone who possesses a brain: Anyone involved in any way with the promotion, funding or operations of the side aggrieved is a legitimate target in the event of war.
Anyone and everyone.
Yes, you with a campaign sign on your front lawn or a bumper sticker on your car. Your spouse and children who are part and parcel of the reason you labor and produce. Anyone who has donated any amount of money to a political campaign or PAC, even one dollar is enough. Anyone who works for an organization that has funded or is a SuperPac, or benefits from any interest said PACs advocate for. All the businesses, magazines, newspapers, their corporate owners along with every single employee of same who are the reason said corporation earns money and thus can exist and more.
Yeah, that's like damn near the entire American population on one side or another and I, for one would rather not have simply going to the mailbox in the afternoon be a potential "shooting gallery" style event.
Then again I can reason and foresee the logical conclusion to this sort of stupidity and an awful lot of people in this nation apparently cannot.
If you start this crap that is in fact the "solution set" of people who are "fair game" and I'm sure you can figure out that you can either sit at home and try to protect your house and the people in from being destroyed or you can go to work or simply make a run to the store and expose same to destruction. You can't do both because you can't be in two places at once and worse, everyone else is in the same situation at the same time and literally everyone is a potential aggressor with no way to know who will do the "evil" thing. It is obviously impossible to either protect all the potential targets or arrest everyone with the means and potential motive to commit such an act when all it takes is utterly bog-common things everyone has at hand in their homes.
If you think the war in Gaza, Lebanon or Syria is bad you really need a wake-up call or perhaps a history lesson because in places like Rwanda, where they first banned guns, the people there didn't bother shooting anyone -- they used machetes and slaughtered about 20% of the population within a couple month's time. Who doesn't have a steak knife within easy reach and if you think such is not a "big deal" go ask an EMT about whether such an attack is dangerous.
We have a serious problem in this nation -- and indeed worldwide -- in that people have become disconnected from the consequence of war and other forms of "unrest." While a lone nutjob acts alone and with his or her own resources, which are typically quite-limited politically-motivated violence, such as the mobs in 2020 who burned, looted and murdered, "CHAZ" and similar garbage, the money-driven invasion of "migrants" that in fact has been repeatedly shown to be motivated and exploited on the basis of money and said persons allegedly "helped" are nothing more than human farm animals abused for said purpose and more are NOT the acts of singular individuals -- they are acts that require organization, coordination and participation to take place just like Rosie had to rivet that plane together so it could go bomb Germans and Japanese and both Rosie and the entire plant management, along with the suppliers of the metal, rivets and energy conspired together to do so. Without every one of them no plane flies and thus no city gets bombed.
Hundreds of years ago every King understood this. He had to leave his keep and get on his horse to prosecute the war because the war had to be led and the men needed said leadership and motivation. This meant he had to risk being personally killed. His men had to be so-motivated by his personal risk because they had to look the other guy in the eye while running him through with their swords and they knew damn well that the other guy would look them in the eye if he killed them in exactly the same way. There were no "safe spaces", there were no "rules of war", if you lost your kids were frequently slaughtered like dogs and your wife raped so as to produce more of "their" side's genetic material, it was very likely your town would be burnt to ash and everyone knew that every single person in the nearest village and in fact through the entire land was exposed to this risk as soon as war began.
You thus only started and participated in said wars that were worth that deeply personal risk. If directly attacked you had no choice; fight or die. But otherwise, where you had a choice, you thought about it long and hard because there was no escaping the consequences all the way to the top.
Now look at everything post-WWII. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, the bullshit in Ukraine and now Hezbollah/Israel/whatever. Why should we, or those in Europe, think we're free of risk when we want to fund and supply these people? More to the point where do you think these assholes taking potshots and trying to blow up a political candidate get the idea they can do that without every one of their family members, and all of the political party members who have cheered on such acts via rhetoric such as displaying heads cut off in effigy being exposed to a retributive strike by members of the other side?
The old ways, before we had push-button technology, forced you to confront the reality of what you were doing, whether directly or by providing supply, aid and comfort to those engaged in said actions. The "international" political apparatus of course wants to claim this is "illegitimate" through things like the "Geneva Conventions" but their concern is not for the people at large -- it is for their own skin and that of their families which damn well ought to be fully exposed up to and including at the cost of their lives when they wage war, whether directly, by proxy or by supply either through physical material or intelligence and whether domestically or otherwise.
Why? Because only the very real risk of serious personal consequences -- not high-minded bullshit spewed from some ivory tower -- has a proven record of deterring people from being assholes. Even that is not a perfect record by any means but the last 70 years and especially the last decade right here at home with the politically-motivated riots in 2020 none of which were punished make clear that all the high-minded and mealy-mouthed bullshit is worthless. Without deterrence every unpunished crime begats another more-serious one because there is no cost imposed on anyone for committing it and therefore as long as there is benefit to commit the crime the pattern of escalation will continue.
Arson is one of the most-serious felonies that is on the books and in fact a person RAISING BAIL MONEY FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENDERS is running for President and the Governor of one of the focal states of said attacks who sat back AND LET IT HAPPEN, PARTICULARLY CENTERED AMONG BLACK BUSINESSES despite having command and control of the National Guard is her VP candidate. Said candidates have the gall to expect black people's votes today!
The outrageous farming of humans for profit at the cost of their abuse over the last three decades, none of which has been punished even though all of it is a felony under laws on the books since the 1950s continues apace today including in Springfield Ohio. Neither State OR Federal Government when under control of either party over the last two Administrations has brought a single charge under 8 USC 1324 even when citizens have been murdered by illegal aliens.
Further, in the last couple of political cycles the belief that such acts, along with the intentional and illegal obfuscation of timely election results, coupled with a refusal by the judiciary to order actual evidence audits and the toss of any results where the chain of custody required by State Law is not properly maintained makes clear that everyone involved on all sides and in all branches of government believes THERE IS NO PRICE for even the most-hideous abuse and felony.
I rest my case.
I keep getting asked for this -- how is it that thirteen years ago I did this with no drugs and went from a deteriorating glucose tolerance and obesity to completely-normal glucose control, no high blood pressure problems, no unwanted excess body mass and no need for medications of any sort -- and thirteen years later, its the same other than (obviously) being 13 years older.
This began because of Obamacare. That was the last chance to address the medical monopolies without some sort of, for me personally, a catastrophic outcome. Specifically I knew if I didn't get it under control the odds were extremely high that when the system collapsed, and it would as a result of Obamacare being done rather than addressing the monopolists and insane "health care" distortions I'd be fucked. At best I'd be infirm and wishing I was dead, and there were good odds I'd actually be dead.
As it turned out the latter would have occurred with near-certainty had I not made those changes when I got Covid. Had I been insulin compromised and fat the odds of me being dead rather than having a rough time of it are likely near 100%. So there you go; the payoff of "not dead" came but that wasn't the only payoff -- my health and physical fitness is wildly better than it was even at 40 years of age and arguably better than in my late teens. Certainly when it comes to exercise tolerance (e.g. capacity to run a 5k and the time in doing so) it is better now than it was then even though I'm more than 40 years older.
What I changed was what goes in my pie hole, or more-specifically, what doesn't go in my pie hole. When I made the change the rules were this:
- Animal flesh including the fat (no trimming it) of any sort, including any sort of fowl (e.g. chicken, turkey, duck and Cornish hen), beef, pork and fish. Yes, proto-animals (e.g. eggs) are animals.
- Full-fat cheeses.
- All cooking oils were 100% animal oils; butter counts as its from a cow and thus is an animal fat. No exceptions.
- No white carbohydrates of any sort, ever, period. No breads, pasta, rice, potatoes (including sweet potatoes) and similar.
- The only vegetables were green and if oils were used to cook them they had to be animal fats. The one exception was olive oil as part of a salad dressing (e.g. oil and vinegar) but never for cooking.
- No added sugars, period.
- Spices, provided pure spices (no carbohydrate fillers, check the labels!) used liberally, including salt. No salt restriction of any sort.
- Any consumption of alcohol counts toward total carbohydrate, no more than 50g/day total for all sources.
My pants fell off repeatedly.
The first month or so sucked. Carbohydrates are crazily addictive and withdrawal is just that. Yeah, not fun. Tough it out and don't be a pussy. It will break but it may take a month or two. Do not keep any of the prohibited foods in the house; you can't eat what's not there. If it has a seed oil or carbohydrate in it other than green vegetables into the trash it goes. To have something to munch buy some fresh broccoli, a block of cheese you can cut some slices off or similar.
But what has changed now and what do I eat today?
Here's a typical day:
I usually wake up between 0600 and 0700; no alarm required. I do set it on Tuesdays and Fridays so as to make sure I have sufficient time for espresso before SNJ, but otherwise generally do not as I don't need to. I am not hungry when I wake up. At all.
I get myself an espresso, sometimes a glass of water with an electrolyte tablet (which has a gram or so of carb by the label in it) check my email and if I have an interview to do then that gets done. If its a nice day and I feel like it, I will go for a run after that. This is usually 3x/week or more-or-less every other day, usually 3 miles, but its highly weather-dependent. In the winter I do have a dreadmill but I hate the damn things and have it only because it beats no cardio workout at all for a couple of weeks at a time.
Typically around 10 or 11 AM I'm a bit hungry. Not ravenously, but somewhat. I'll make a cheese omelet; usually two eggs, if I have an open package of bacon I'll cook a couple of strips of that and use the grease as the oil for the eggs. Frequently I'll either saute some chopped onions in the pan for flavor, or if I have some chili (no beans) in the fridge I'll put a bit of that in the pan while its heating for its oil and meat content. That is usually consumed with another espresso and a glass of water -- sometimes carbonated, zero-cal/zero-sweetener (usually flavored generic such as from Kroger.)
Dinner, my only other "real meal", is usually around 3 or 4. More animal. Depending on what it is (hamburgers, steak, pork chops, bacon-wrapped meatloaf, ribs, chili, fish of some sort, etc.) the time I start it varies widely. In a few cases (e.g. if I'm smoking a whole pork shoulder or brisket) it went into the machine before I went to bed. I'm not a nazi about BBQ sauces except that I refuse to buy any with seed oils in them. There are several without; yes, they have some sugar in them (e.g. molasses) but choosing wisely keeps the seed oils out and I am relatively sparse in my portions.
I do not meal plan beyond the next two days, typically how long it takes for something frozen to thaw in the refer. The exception is very large things like a whole pork shoulder or turkey for thanksgiving, where you have to figure out thaw times 3-5 days in advance. There is typically something on the refer shelf for the next day or two but that's it.
If I desire a snack later on it follows the same rules. If I'm home brussels sprouts with a slice of cut-up bacon for the cooking fat (and bacon itself) are one of my favorites to do in the cast-iron skillet; cut up and cook the bacon, cut the sprouts in half the put them in the skillet, add a quarter to half-cup of water and put a lid on it, steaming them in the boiling water, then when that's evaporated off add seasoning (e.g. Lawrey Seasoned Salt) and eat. Pork rinds are one of the few indulgences that might have seed oils in them -- its hard to know and I do pay attention to my Garmin HRV that night if sampling a new brand because it will show up. That overnight HRV is extremely sensitive and if you misbehave you will not get away with it. It will absolutely call out the first beer, the second and beyond that you may as well get shitfaced in terms of the metabolic impact - its that bad. Straight liquor is a bit less evil in that the carbs aren't there but if you do mixed drinks forget it -- same thing. Booze in any form is conducive to eating things you shouldn't either in type or quantity -- always -- and the damage metabolically is multiplied if you do, so if you are actively trying to ditch excess weight just don't at all.
Can (and do) I sometimes break these rules today? Yes. I now have a normal glucose response where I did not before. But if I go back to what I used to eat the damage will return, so I can't do it other than very occasionally and if yours is damaged now you can't do it at all for quite some time, likely many months to even a few years.
How do you know you've reversed the damage? When you misbehave for a couple of days your metabolism will shift back and 3-5lbs will immediately reappear (along with feeling like crap.) But -- within 48 hours of stopping that it will shift back immediately, you will piss out the excess water (which is what it was) and you will be back to your former mass. If you lose ground and it takes a week or two to recover from it you are still metabolically compromised and thus the misbehavior was stupid rather than an indulgence that almost-certainly did you no real harm.
When you resolve metabolic dysfunction you are automatically "fasting" 18 hours of the day without attempting to. My usual practice, entirely by when I'm hungry, is to eat something around 10 or 11 and again around 4. That's 18 hours of the day "fasting" yet I made no attempt to do that; its just a function of eating when hungry, and not when you aren't.
It will take months to years to regain reasonable metabolic health. You didn't destroy it in a week and you won't fix it in a week either but the differences will be noticeable immediately and the improvement starts immediately as well.
It is absolutely true that to ditch body mass you must consume and absorb fewer calories than you expend. There is no such thing as magic food or magic anything else and no, its not that your metabolism is "special." You are free to lie to yourself but it is still a lie no matter how many times you repeat it. One Cafe Latte at Starbucks is nearly 200 calories, 19 grams of carbs, statistically all of them sugar and if you drink just one per day you have consumed 13% of a non-exercising person's caloric requirement down your pie hole and at the same time suppressed the consumption of body fat for at least two hours assuming you eat nothing else during that time because carbohydrate is always consumed first.
You cannot outrun your mouth, fork or not. A mile of walking or running consumes about 100 calories. It requires two miles of walking or running to balance that Cafe Latte all by itself. If you add a scone, honey bun or donut to that -- forget it. It is trivially easy to stuff a half-marathon's worth of food in your mouth in the form of carbohydrates within minutes.
If you are metabolically dysfunctional you will be hungry in the morning. If you feed yourself with carbohydrate in the morning as soon as that is consumed -- about two hours later -- the excess insulin in your blood will make you ravenously hungry again and you will eat whatever is available favoring more carbohydrate because you have excess insulin in your blood. This cycle will repeat all day long. You get fat because you've fucked up your leptin signaling system which in turn has damaged insulin sensitivity in the cells and thus destroyed the ordinary regulatory function that insulin has in your body. Seed oils, by virtue of their resistance to being broken down by ordinary bacterial (biological) process, which is why they're used in the first place to make something shelf-stable, make it worse.
Drugs cannot reverse or control this.
The only way to stop it is to stop consuming that which is fucking up your system.
The seed oils will take months to even a couple of years to get out of your system because they, as a fat, become incorporated in the cellular structure. All cells are replaced over time in your body and that's what has to happen to completely rid yourself of these. In the tiny amounts you can and will obtain from eating actual green vegetables they are not harmful but in size they are, and there is no safe amount you can consume from modern use as cooking, taste-promoting and stabilizing oils in restaurants and packaged food products. The only way to stop the damage is to stop eating them and allow your body to clear them over time.
If you use drugs to try to overcome these problems you continue to accumulate the damage while suppressing the symptoms via the drugs. This is not only guaranteed to fail it is guaranteed to eventually seriously harm or even kill you and it is not the drugs that kills you it is what you're putting in your mouth that does so because rather than cutting that out you are using the drugs to attempt to hide the negative effect. The damage still happens and you build tolerance to the drug because you are still accumulating the damage, thus you need more and more of the drug! The now-common political trope of "$35 insulin" is one of of the most-obscene and abusive examples of this and everyone involved in it should be executed as they literally are damning you to a million dollars of medical expense and a miserable death rather than explain that you can either greatly decrease said spend or even avoid it entirely, plus ALL of the misery and other medical spending, by simply not eating pizza, seed oils and similar.
Further, and this you must clearly understand: YOUR DOCTOR, EVERY PHARMACEUTICAL AND OTHER MEDICALLY RELATED COMPANY AND ORGANIZATION -- ALL OF THEM -- WANT YOU TO SCREW YOURSELF AND IN FACT ADVOCATE THAT YOU DO SO. Every one of them has a huge financial incentive to get you in a situation where you MUST spend huge amounts of money not only for the temporary relief of symptoms but by deliberately allowing the damage to continue you are GUARANTEED to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars OR MORE with them over the next decades. THEY HAVE A LITERAL MILLION REASONS TO LIE AND THEY DO -- ALL OF THEM -- because absent those lies none of that money gets spent. These people are greedy assholes who are perfectly happy to see you ruin your own health and die a miserable death so their paychecks keep coming and they encourage you to do so rather than make the ZERO COST changes that will immediately stop and in many cases reverse accumulation of that damage.
This, and only this, is why the US went from spending 4-5% of its economic output on medical care to 21%, a quadrupling as a percentage of the whole, over the last fifty or so years. It is why the Federal Government has posted up $35 trillion in debt and the entire federal deficit, more than $2 trillion thus far with one month left to go, is in fact found in CMS -- Medicare and Medicaid. This is intentional, it is malicious, the people doing it are both in the medical fields and government and it is done for one and only one reason -- profit without regard for the misery and financial destruction you will and do suffer as a result.
This is exactly what someone who is using opiates runs into and the exact same incentives that a drug pusher has to let and even encourage you to get hooked. Opiates get you high but at the same time they suppress respiration. Your body has a tolerance response to both but the dulling of the high is much more-profound than the suppression of respiration. Eventually if you keep using it you die as a result of literally failing to breathe -- so junkies, when this starts to happen (its extremely uncomfortable - think about how uncomfortable it is if you try to not breathe for a couple of minutes!) use methamphetamine to counter that suppression. This is not a solution in other than the very short term because the tolerance continues to build and eventually you give yourself a heart attack or you can't get the meth one day, your addiction compels you to use the opiate anyway and you die. This is exactly what happened to Floyd, incidentally and the toxicology report proved it thus if you assert otherwise I bet you're equally lying to yourself about what you eat.
Good. That means you recognize that whether you believe some sort of "cause" or not you can run basic probabilities in your head and have come to realize that such an event likely gets you, someone you love, or both killed (or worse, you wish you were dead but aren't.)
Now take the next step: Recognize, admit, and make clear you understand to everyone around you that all political power has as its inherent foundation violence.
Oh, you think not? Let's take the lowly speeding ticket. Just try to not receive one when you've earned it and see how fast that "non-violent" police encounter turns into serious violence, and the longer and more-ardently you attempt to refuse the worse the violence will be.
Civilizations delegate such acts to government for a very-valid reason: When undertaken individually they are the judgement of one, there is no check and balance on same, no appeal if errors are made and the outcome is usually not only final it is brutal besides. The exception, in a free society, is that every person maintains the right to defense of self and others because nobody has a duty to submit to being raped, robbed, mugged or murdered and the only means of equalizing the odds and thus forcing negotiation rather than violence when someone decides they're going to summarily relieve you of your life, personal dignity or property is the personal ownership of firearms.
Public courtrooms, judges and juries are imperfect but they're right more often than the summary judgement of one, and that there is a path for appeal means that errors have at least capacity for correction (and compensation.) Again, this is not perfect but it doesn't have to be -- it just has to beat the alternative, which it does.
When this process is corrupted as it has been on a sequential and increasing basis for decades there are few alternatives. Certainly one person deciding to "take on" the legislature or local police in a one-on-one frontal firefight is going to lose. You'll be branded a nutball and irrespective of the legitimacy of your original beef the facts are that you are a nutball if you thought you were going to "win." But if your goal was not to "win" but rather to have the score read something different than 0-1 when its all tallied up then the psyop of the media and government will still be run -- but they're wrong, and thinking people can objectively look at both your clear goal as demonstrated by the result and reach a different conclusion whether the government likes it or not.
For example MLK infamously met with Johnson -- after which Johnson supported and signed the Civil Rights Act. The President had been publicly and heavily-opposed to that law prior to their meeting. What changed? Do you really think King made an impassioned speech in private and convinced Johnson with mere words? Well, perhaps they were words but what words were they? Perhaps they were something like "Those million black men in DC could sack this -- or any other -- city, you know.... and while you can arrest me and/or shoot or arrest some number of them if they do it it wouldn't be the first time I've been thrown in jail since I started this crusade, that obviously hasn't deterred me from my goals as of yet and the all the other times also didn't result in the people out there deciding not to go along and continue the quest, did it? Perhaps this time is the one where that's all you have to do before mass-rage by those million instead of praying, chanting and sign-waving is the result."
Of course today everyone runs around with a tracking device in their pocket and despite the courts ruling that "geofence warrants" are in fact illegal general warrants barred by the Constitution please do note that the government did use them on January 6th, they were not forced to dismiss any of the charges, convictions or investigations resulting from the fruit of that poison tree and people did go to prison in size. Yeah, funny how technology works and how foolish a mob of people can be, but technology is quite-fragile -- much more-so than you think. Indeed without the 100+ IQ people to run said technology it doesn't work and without the 115+ IQ people it cannot be built and expanded.
The data from the BLS makes clear that 20 years ago the more-intelligent (that is, those on the right side of the bell curve) women of child-bearing age began to simply close off the prime reason their uterus exists -- making another generation of humans. That's a non-violent and absolutely effective "long game" response to the government deciding that laws on the books since the early 1900s and 1950s will not be enforced -- specifically, anti-monopoly statutes and those punishing anyone helping illegal immigrants to name two. Said women properly deduced that their children would get fucked -- they'd be fucked out of job opportunities, fucked out of fair housing prices, fucked by DIE initiatives that explicitly penalize their offspring compared with those who are less-intelligent, of some other demographic and particularly illegal immigrants, that prices would be ramped in the economy generally while wages were suppressed to their offspring's gross disadvantage and thus the odds of said child having at least a good a life as she had were too small to be worth the risk.
Of course we've made excuses for this form of General Strike for the last two decades and the biggest lie is to come up with all manner of BS about why said women have decided to shut off their baby factories. Some argue its a "spiritual" problem, others call such women hedonistic and even more simply think its a "sign of the times." These are all lies; the drive to reproduce is primal and thus only intellectual contemplation combined with deep conviction overrides it. But like all General Strikes there is no effective way, by violence or otherwise, to break it. You can only negotiate your way out of it and the only real way to negotiate out of it is to stop doing and reverse the policy actions that caused people to take that step in the first place.
To those of you who think that high housing, transportation, health care and similar prices are good (because you own stock or profit from it personally) recognize that without new entrants to the workforce who are equally capable with those who leave as they get older or die you eventually have nothing. The 80 IQ person cannot successfully run the power or water plant, say much less expand it, nor do they pay taxes in sufficient amount to support your fantasies for health care and general retirement. Further, you should recognize that you can't fix this in a short period of time either because it takes 20 years, more or less, to decide to have a child, perform the acts that create one and raise said child to adulthood, and you must fix the problem with affordability and forward outlook for the people making said children "on the come" for the entire 20 year period before you get a payoff from it. If you renege (or just plain lie) you'll get caught and the baby-making by those higher-IQ people will stop just as it did the first time.
You think all this illegal immigration, medical monopolistic pricing that makes health care a bankruptcy-inducing event, "offshoring", "H1b"ing, "H2" (seasonal worker visas) and similar does not drive this? Of course it does, along with skyrocketing tuition, fees, room and board costs at colleges and the destruction of academic requirements to actually get the degree that in turn renders them effectively worthless in the marketplace. Thus you have people pulling coffees with college degrees because in fact the credential doesn't mean anything in the workforce! You also have "doctors" who can't think and blindly accept whatever is "standard of care" because their IQ is smaller than their shoe size and they refuse to look at the data themselves, never mind that if some of them do and raise Hell they'll be fired which will instantly bankrupt and ruin them because they're $200,000+ in debt with no way to pay it off other than shut up and screw the patients, even if it screws them dead. If you think that's an abstract problem you really are one of the sub-80 IQ people since over the last four years one million Americans were in fact screwed dead by said monsters in white coats and every one of those "doctors" did or went along with it because they got huge bonuses per body.
Forty years ago I left college about two years into it because I was not only making more than it cost to go -- in field -- but in addition I realized they were trying to train me for specifics within the field that would be extinct within five years and thus would be worthless. I was right, incidentally, that the computer equipment I had in my dorm room was more-relevant to the future of my earnings capacity than all the computers they had at the university combined and in addition I knew more about it at a more-complete level than the professors but unlike today the mistake of attending in the first place didn't come with any debt as I was able to pay for my time there with cash so while I expended both time and money I already had the money and thus it didn't ruin me. If that happens to you now you are ruined because you went into debt to do it, the government in addition passed laws to prohibit you from discharging that debt in bankruptcy and the only way to stop this and return value to the post-secondary educational environment is to collapse the price so once again a young person can pay with cash they earned in summer or other work.
The other problem is that on the supply side when it comes to knowledge unlike then where computers were expensive and the Internet did not exist, thus you had to go where the information you wished to learn was in order to access it you now can learn nearly anything from algebra to astrophysics from literally anywhere on the planet for mere pennies comparatively since its all online and accessible at zero, or near-zero, cost. The only gate standing before you when it comes to knowledge is your own personal level of desire and mental capacity to absorb and use it. Of course this is not how "industry" and "government" see it; they continue to throw up "licensing" barriers that often include an effective collusive extortion element in requiring College degrees.
Witness medicine. The Biden/Harris administration is actively cost-shifting Medicare Part "D" coverage through the inflation reduction act in a short-term bid to prevent wild escalation of premiums that would otherwise occur until after the election by temporarily tripling the government's subsidy of them. The root cause of the wild-eyed price hikes which will occur next year? Its all the "newfangled" and very expensive drugs, of course. What did Trump just tout on his conversation with Musk? More and faster of that. How is anyone going to pay for it? Think Harris would be better? No, she's already presided over this crap and is trying to hide it so you don't vote against her for doing it! Fuck both her and Biden.
I have long pointed out that a General Strike would be capable of resolving this. The Government has no effective means to counter a General Strike other than to stop their bullshit. A general strike collapses GDP and thus tax revenues, and if the market discerns the people mean it then it collapses the funding capacity of Treasury as well because nobody shows up for the auctions until the Government changes policy and the strikers stand down. You can't jail or shoot people (if you're the government) in that situation because not only is a General Strike not illegal shooting the strikers precludes that person from ever contributing to taxes again.
Recognize this folks -- the young intelligent women in this nation have been engaged in a "soft" form of a general strike for the last two decades. Its in the data and is irrefutable; there is a 75% rate of change in that data, an all-on no-bullshit collapse. It is inevitable at this point that within the next five to ten years the non-institutional working population will have a negative rate of change which other than in the World Wars where young fighting-age (and thus working-age) men were killed in size is unprecedented in United States history. None of the social "gimmedats" were there in WWI or WWII and thus the government funding model was not threatened with collapse but today the "gimmedats" are there and unless we reverse these circumstances and prove we mean it said collapse will occur with mathematical certainty.
More than ten years ago I warned people that the most-serious impact, if we didn't force the government to cut this crap out would be the need for "maintenance" medical care for chronic conditions, and that if you needed any of that you would not get it and thus would suffer and likely die. That drew lots of guffaws and snickers but you better not be snickering now because here it is and reality is that CMS is now, on a monthly basis, consuming far more than income taxes are contributing and that spiral toward collapse continues to accelerate. Add to that a negative contribution from new entrants to the workforce and the flat spin will tighten and continue until the fiscal capacity of the government impacts the ground.
There are three things that must be done now on a conclusive and immediate basis -- and not as a gimmick that can be reversed either. They will not prevent the pain, but they can prevent an all-on collapse. We either accept the damage we've accrued or there will be plenty of people willing to try to take what they were promised but can't have by violence, and thus whether you dislike the prospect of the title of this article or not if we do not force the government to do all three that is coming here to the United States.
Here they are:
- All medical monopolies and price-fixing, including differential pricing, must be banhammered right now. Here is, once again, a reasonable plan to do it. Cost will and must collapse by 80% and yes this means some things "promised" today can't be delivered. However, with an 80% collapse in price 90% of what is actually necessary can be delivered. The choice is between getting 90% and an effective zero. Deal with it because the alternative is that you won't get any of it anyway and it will be worse when someone is trying to eat you while you're fighting off whatever condition you have. If you're in the medical/pharmaceutical field and have been exploiting or making excuses for all this bullshit then everyone else needs to tell you to fuck off and get away from them or you will be their food, period, even if you're friends or family. This has to stop now on a "chainsaw", not "dribble" basis. Taking this step will collapse spending on medical care by 80%, immediately and permanently whack the fiscal deficit, stop the debt from expanding and take enormous pressure off consumer budgets. It will also cause a huge employment dislocation (and in fact economic depression) for a short period of time. We must accept this and the short-term economic pain without any attempt to displace or blunt it -- and do it immediately. Yes, immediately -- right now.
- All illegal aliens must be forced out of our economy -- and thus forced to leave. Can we reasonably deport them all? Well, we could, but not easily. But we don't have to physically deport them all because we can enforce 8 USC 1324 which mandates a ten year felony prison term for anyone assisting (and a five year term for employing) illegal immigrants. Lock a few people up and while the first would likely generate shrugs (figuring the person was politically disfavored -- and that'd probably be correct too) as soon as it started to sink in that the cops really meant it and you were were going to go to prison no matter how rich you were every single one of the illegals would be ejected from their housing and fired from their jobs. They'd all leave except for the gangbangers -- those we either jail or (if they refuse to be arrested) shoot. Doing this will collapse the price of housing and transportation, along with boosting wages in construction, domestic and other lower-skill work.
- All offshored employment and sourcing and similar must be subject to wage, environmental and exchange parity tariffs and both H1bs and H2s must be banned entirely unless they are paid at a penalty rate of not less than 200% of the prevailing US wage with violations carrying 10 year hard prison time, serve every day. Most sourcing of production that actually occurs Europe would not be charged anything under this since they're reasonably comparable but everything coming out of China, Taiwan, India and similar would with many of these products and offshored labor being assessed at 100% or more. Philippine and Indian labor, for example, would be hit with tariffs of three to five hundred percent. Any company selling a good or service into the United States must be subject to this no matter where it is domiciled; if you want access to our markets you either do the work here or pay -- period. This work will return here to the US since the "advantage" of cheaper price will be foreclosed.
Yes, this will collapse asset prices and yes, there will be a lot of bankruptcies. That's fine; buying things you can produce with at 10 cents on the dollar makes for cheaper goods and services for consumers and while its bad for the guy who goes bankrupt it is really good for everyone else!
It would also bring into parity blue collar labor for a single member of a household of four and the cost of housing, food, insurance, transportation and other necessary services (e.g. energy) so a single-earner family of four with a reasonable blue-collar production income or better could afford to create and raise a family of at least two children with one of the two adults being home to raise them and keep the household operating.
We could do this all the way through the 1960s and into the 1970s and we must return to that capacity and put in place policies so young women are convinced it will remain that way or those who can think will keep their uterus barren because (1) they refuse to be one small misadventure through no fault of their own, all of which befall us from time to time, from disaster and (2) they must be convinced that their children will have at least as good a life as they do.
We've fiddle-fucked around with "I got mine, fuck you!", laying off that cost on those not yet born for more than two decades beyond the point where young women have figured it out and since technology, which we cannot stuff back in the bottle, does not require a women to submit to pregnancy to have an adult sexual life you can't coerce her and must now convince the intelligent women that it makes sense to have kids.
The consequences of what we've done cannot be avoided but collapse can still, if we act now and not defer further, be prevented.
Within the next four-year term that option will expire so if you think we can play politics with this the math says you're wrong; once that BLS table goes negative, and it inevitably will at this point, if we have not yet fixed the incentives -- all of them in a durable, visible and provable way, this nation is fucked.
Have a look at this tweet:
htps://x.com/HalSnarr/status/1805571973612716109
Humphrey–Hawkins Full Employment Law stipulates that inflation should be 0% but the @federalreserve has set its inflation target at 2%.
Humphrey-Hawkins was passed in 1978. It amended The Federal Reserve Act to require semi-annual reports to Congress and explicitly calls out stable prices as part of The Fed's mandate.
Stable is not 2% inflation, it is zero inflation. That is the legal mandate passed into law by Congress more than four decades ago.
Not only has it never been enforced The Fed explicitly brags that it intentionally violates said law each and every time they release a statement and have a press conference in which they tout their "intent" to target 2% inflation. They literally have stuck the middle finger up in the face of the American people and Congress at every single meeting and press conference in the modern era without a single scintilla of punishment being leveled against any of the Fed Governors or the chair.
When I was on the Florida EC for the Libertarian Party we had a state party chairman who was very upset with the "Real ID" law. He went on the radio and literally told everyone he considered the law unconstitutional and essentially dared the cops to cite him for refusing to renew his driver license. While it is certainly true that many people drive without a license and if you're never stopped and checked you probably won't get caught announcing in public your intent to break the law usually draws a response. It did, the local gendarme laid in wait for and stopped him with him ultimately abandoning his challenge (I presume he paid the fine and other costs associated) rather than appeal when he lost the original attempt in court. (At the time I advised that I believed the argument he was raising to be fatally-flawed in that once you cede that driving is a privilege then the government has a reasonable argument in the necessity of forcing you to prove your identity but in fact there was a clear argument and case law that licensing drivers of non-commercial vehicles used for personal purpose was unconstitutional on its face as personal travel via means and methods common to people in a given time is in fact a protected right. The case law establishing this was old but had stood unchallenged since but he decided to go the other way with his line of argument and lost. Oh well.)
Note the difference; one is a law that might impact one or two people other than yourself if you, as an unlicensed driver, cause a wreck. The other screws 99% of the public each and every day, with absolute certainty, with only a handful of people at the top of corporations and other "important" folks getting the benefits while you get hosed. One was and is punished, the other ignored.
The recent Supreme Court decision to dismiss a lawsuit by state AGs over the Biden administration censorship drive during Covid, claiming that the states lacked standing, may be technically correct. Standing has long held that individual and particularized injury and its connection to the conduct sued over (that is, the party sued must have done it) must be shown. This isn't a new thing; it in fact underlies basically all of civil law. If you fail there the actual conduct is never addressed because you haven't proved the entity you sued was the cause of the insult. We can argue whether such should be an absolute requirement or not when it comes to the Constitution or whether, in the context of the government, intent is the point. I'd argue it should be but that's not only not the world we live in today its not a recent change either. This belies the limits of "sue sue sue" when it comes to going after the government, where injunctive relief (e.g. "stop doing that") rather than money (which is usually the goal of a lawsuit) is the point. This decision ought to underline the limits of suing and make clear that other means of redress, which the courts can neither enforce OR ENJOIN, are the ONLY way you will get results in such cases.
Similarly enforcing 8 USC 1324 against all who aid, harbor or employ illegal immigrants will end illegal immigration and force those who are here to leave with those outcomes beginning in literally one day. Within a very short period of time -- weeks to months -- there will be no illegal immigration or problem with it other than those who come with the express intent to break the law and those people we can easily deal with since by definition that's all who will be left. Why? Because nobody is going to do 10 years in federal prison to assuage their "feelings" about illegal immigrants or to assist them. Not one farmer will spend 10 years in the pokey so he can have cheaper labor, nor will one roofing company. They'll either hire Americans or legal immigrants because the alternative is that they do 10 years in the Graybar Motel and their business is destroyed. Likewise every US based entity or person of a foreign entity who is here in the US will stop aiding these people with clothing, food and shelter because none of them are going to willing do 10 years in the slammer either, nor will they risk that becoming a life sentence if they choose poorly on who they help and that person kills an American. These penalties, by the way, have been on the books since the 1950s and as such enforcement is all that is required to absolutely resolve the illegal immigration problem and remove every person who is here illegally as virtually all will, if this occurs, leave on their own. Doing this would also instantly resolve the housing cost problem because it will put five years worth of housing supply into the market immediately.
Finally, enforcing 15 USC Chapter 1 will absolutely resolve the entire budget problem within months. Why? Because CMS, Medicare and Medicaid, are the entire problem and its not just a federal issue either as Medicaid is partially state-funded so the impact reaches into State budgets as well. If you enforce that law then all disparate pricing between consumers of like kind and quantity and all insurance schemes that lead to 2x, 5x, 10x or more discrepancies in pricing and paid costs for one person .vs. another including drugs that are sold across national boundaries and are priced in some cases at 100x the price in other nations here in the US ends in an afternoon because all of it is illegal under that law and for those who claim there's an exemption due to insurance no there's not as that was decided in the late 1970s and early 1980s at the Supreme Court, twice in both Royal Drug and Maricopa County. For those medical entities that have been buying up practices and then "consolidating" them, resulting in constrained supply and higher prices it will be reversed in one day because if they don't everyone involved, including the physicians themselves, does 10 years in the slammer. The cost of medical care, all-in, will drop by 80% and the budget deficit will, as a result, be nearly zero. (Yes, it will also be true that some "new and marvelous" things won't be offered unless you're very wealthy; but let's be frank here: The facts are that in nearly every case they don't work all that well in the first place and, if they do when the patent(s) expire they'll be cheap and available to everyone by which time there will be enough evidence to prove that.)
Now how about if we were to enforce the point of Hal's complaint, that is, that black-letter law requires The Fed to set policy that targets zero inflation and demand they unwind their abuses of the last, oh, 25 years? What would that do?
Well, for one thing it would collapse all the various asset-stripping schemes at both the state and federal levels run by private parties. If you couldn't get a cheap car loan or capitalize a cheap lease cars would have to dramatically come down in price which means all the expensive nanny crap would have to be an option that 1 or 2% of the population who could afford to pay for them in cash would have. In fact that might not be enough market share for anyone but Porsche, for example, to offer it at all. The price for the rest of us would plummet because we'd take a literal $5,000 off the price of a car simply by going back to halogen headlights and ordinary tail-lamp bulbs instead of $1,000 for each of the four assemblies!
All of the "roll-up" schemes in various parts of the economy such as AirBNB, PE buying up veterinary practices and housing along with the insane ramp in the cost of college (all caused by constraining supply and being able to wildly increase prices due to uneconomic "financing") would become instantly uneconomic, loss-making acts and thus would stop. Prices would go back to where the market clears them in all those areas of business along with many more. Those who have feasted on these schemes would be damaged or even bankrupted but you, the common consumer, would no longer pay 3x as much for Fido to get his annual inspection at the vet and the peddling of "add-ons" you don't really need but are sold as "required" would cease. So would the entire justification for so-called "pet health insurance" which is being driven by this illegal collusive practice. Your kid's college education would cost one fifth of what it now costs and so would your doctor, hospital bills and medications, all of which you could buy for cash. If you needed or wanted a house it would be one third of today's price as well and if you already own one no, you don't get "screwed" because while your current one is 1/3rd of its present value so is the new one when you move. The younger generation, which currently does not own one, can buy and thus they can form families and between all this they can also afford to have and raise children. All of this is wildly good for the vast majority but yes, it does force those who have been screwing you for decades to eat a big steaming pile of shit and will bankrupt many of them.
Contemplate this tweet for a minute or two that I aimed at Thomas Massie:
htps://x.com/tickerguy/status/1805942742024933850
So when do you demand that if the government wishes to continue to operate it actually enforce laws against everyone equally? You know, like 8 USC 1324 (ends illegal immigration in an hour) and 15 USC Ch 1 (ends the budget problem in a week.) Never, right Thomas?
Do remember that Obama famously said when he signed the DACA E/O that he knew what he was doing was illegal as there was no governing law to permit it and Congress would have never passed it, which is why he didn't go that route. His justification was that the number of people would be large enough that nobody would impose the penalty of deportation on them down the road. Biden got told by the Supreme Court that he had no authority to force the taxpayer to eat college loans and he has now ignored that ruling and did it again anyway with the expectation that telling a couple million people that "oh, that notice you got that your debt was canceled - it was illegal and you still owe the money, pay up!" would generate such an outrage that nobody will do it, even though the act was blatantly against settled law. This equivalent to saying that because lots of gang-bangers shoot people in Chicago we won't bother enforcing the law against murder by gun in Chicago as we'd have to jail too many people and throwing them all in jail would generate outrage!
Once that sort of decision is taken by the government on a serial basis and neither the DOJ or Congress will put a stop to it how do you change it as a citizen?
You can't vote to change this because, as you can plainly see, we've tried that for decades and no matter who we elect, even those claiming to be "absolutely conservative" don't do anything other than fund-raise on it and then screw you themselves. Note that Congress can always stop any agency from refusing to act in accordance with law by zeroing their appropriation and thus shutting them down, forcing all their employees to go unpaid until they comply and preventing them from doing literally anything including turning on the lights in their buildings. There is no means within our Constitutional system for such an act of enforcement to be overridden yet Congress NEVER does it.
The government, in these cases, has told you in advance they don't believe they can take a given action by changing the law or they'd have done that and yet here we are four, five even ten decades later and the law has not been changed or repealed. Therefore they know, by definition, that there is no stomach in the population nor among their colleagues to repeal or change said law.
Such rampant and malicious lawlessness has no answer within the boundaries of being "nice" nor is there a political answer any more than you can solve a problem with drug gangs shooting up neighborhoods by asking them nicely to stop -- or voting.
If there was never an arrest, by policy, of someone robbing a bank the only reasonable and immediately-effective way your local bank could defend against being robbed would be to shoot the first person who comes in the door and tries it. If the cops unwisely attempt to detain the person who shoots the robber you make clear that the price of doing that is the cop will get shot too and his or her house will be burnt. The first time around robbers and DAs might not take that too seriously (especially when you've made a lot of noise for 50 years but never followed through) but after a few dead bodies minus the back half of their heads are dragged out onto the hot summer sidewalk to rot, and a plastic sheet is placed over the carpet in the bank to make cleanup easy so anyone in the vicinity knows what the price of trying to rob the bank is word would get around and your bank would not be robbed. Soon public outrage would get to the point that the government would have to lock up bank robbers in accordance with said long-standing law because every other bank would start arming their tellers and inviting armed citizens into the bank to stand guard, since if they didn't they'd get robbed instead of yours and the ones that did so wouldn't, never mind the mess on the sidewalk and outrage not acting to stop it would generate for the local cops and DA. You might get a few municipalities that would try to stop the dead-robber parade by arresting a teller but after the first two cops got added to the pile of bodies along with two smoking holes where their homes stood that strategy would be abandoned since there are always far more citizens than cops.
You might not like facts but it is a fact that the only way to stop someone intent on robbery, rape, murder or for that matter any other crime is to either instill in said person a legitimate fear of punishment that is both severe and certain enough that they judge the crime to not be worth the punishment risk and severity and, for those who are psychotic and don't care about being punished (yes, there are people who are that insane) stop them using whatever force is necessary, including permanently disabling their CPU, as soon as their intent and the fact that they don't give a crap if you jail them and will commit the offense anyway becomes clear.
Well?
Does this means there's no other option than violence? Not at all. There is another option I have advocated for years and as I pointed out up top there's no way for the courts to either reverse or enjoin it either. You can eject anyone who is involved in, benefits from or promotes the conditions that lead to these problems from polite society. Yeah, that includes your kids, your parents, your so-called friends and others. If they got a "college loan" forgiveness slam the door in their face. If they work in the medical system and take insurance at their employer write 'em out of your will and slam the door in their face and so on. If you openly and freely associate with those who support or even worse are involved in or benefit from repeatedly fucking you in the ass you have little room to complain when your butthole is full of bleeding hemorrhoids.
You do not have to follow the Supreme Court's rules on "standing"; if someone is contributing to your buttfucking in a diffuse and indistinct manner, but clearly is involved in the various rackets and abusive schemes since association is a voluntary act you can choose not to, and, I remind you, you don't have to be quiet about it either. Blackball them in all respects, blackball their family members and yes, this includes their children. It is their choice to screw you so why would you associate with someone who has clearly demonstrated that they hate you and wish to, will and have, repeatedly screw you?
The only difference between sex and rape is consent and since petitioning our government has proved to be of no use our choices are to either re-instill the fear of consequence in all involved in these unlawful schemes and those in the various organs of government who deliberately stand aside despite long-standing laws and thus directly enable and in fact both solicit and profit from such conduct or accept that we are consenting and thus there is no offense to be pissed off about in the first place since you can't rape, rob or murder those consenting to said event.
Which shall it be, America?