Trump’s date with coronavirus proves that He gives shape and meaning to Democrats’ lives?

by philg

Donald Trump has given us additional evidence that the Swedish MD/PhDs were correct when they said, back in March, that nearly everyone in western countries would eventually be exposed to coronavirus and that shutdowns and hiding in bunkers merely delay the inevitable.

Unlike Jair Bolsonaro, however, Trump did not say “I gave the finger to the virus back in March so now I’m just going to recover at home.” Instead, by going to Walter Reed he is apparently hoping to prove that coronavirus is a mild disease from which anyone who has a helicopter, 50 physicians, and four experimental drugs with limited availability can easily recover.

The handful of Republicans with whom I communicate are generally sanguine about the prospect of Donald Trump living only four years beyond his Biblical allotment of 70. They don’t wish Trump any harm, certainly, nor do they hope that he will die, but they recognize that whether a virus decides to kill a human is typically beyond humanity’s control.

Democrats, on the other hand, seem to think of nothing else. Exhibit A: “Get Well, Mr. President,” from the Editorial Board of the New York Times. After four years of cautioning readers that Trump was the new Hitler, the NYT wants Hitler v2.0 to be in the best of health.

Democrat friends on Facebook have been posting obsessively. They are careful to point out that they don’t want Trump dead. They want him to live so that they can then concentrate on prosecuting and imprisoning him for his crimes in a multi-year process that will begin in January 2021. These folks say that every day Trump is in office, Americans die by the thousands because of his poor decisions and bad example to idiots in Red states whom they’ve never met. But they also want him to stay in office at least until January 2021 and then to live for decades beyond.

I wonder if hating Trump has given many Americans a purpose in life for the past four years. Perhaps their lives would be empty and meaningless without Trump and that’s why they are so concerned about his recovery. Yes, they hate Mitch McConnell too, but the guy apparently does not have sufficient personality for hatred against him to give shape and meaning to anyone’s life.

From a neighbor’s house, 2 out of 5 signs on the same theme:

Related:

Full post, including comments

How is Africa doing with COVID-19?

by philg

We’re just coming out of what would be the Southern Hemisphere’s winter. How is Africa doing with coronaplague?

A European friend offered a theory that the countries with the highest death rates from coronavirus are those that were keeping the largest population of frail elderly people alive via high-tech health care. If you’re dependent on machines to live, he reasoned, you’re an easy target for flu or COVID-19 or any other virus.

This kind of analysis was used by some economics professors in “16 Possible Factors for Sweden’s High COVID Death Rate among the Nordics” (PDF download available for free; layperson’s summary by one of the authors). Sweden had been rather fortunate for a few years relative to its neighbors in terms of deaths among its frail and elderly. In addition to its larger low-skill immigrant population, this supersized frail/elderly population provided easy targets for the virus and may have accounted for about half of Sweden’s extra COVID-19 deaths.

Where the analysis would seem to break down is Peru. The country isn’t notable for a huge population of people on advanced life support and yet it has had a very high COVID-19 death rate (also one of the earliest and strictest lockdowns plus universal masks).

The WHO dashboard shows a lot of African countries with low death rates, even lower than one might expect given the low median age within those countries (Nigeria’s median age is 18, for example, compare to about 38 here in the U.S. (varies by ethnicity/race), 41 in Sweden, and 27 in Peru).

From my Africa pictures:

(That’s Cape Town from the sCessna 210 that my friend flew there from North Carolina. Crossing multiple oceans and mountain ranges in a 1970s single-engine piston airplane with a gasoline-filled ferry tank in the back seat is just as safe as ever, but the trip would be illegal today so as to protect everyone from the hazards of coronavirus.)

Full post, including comments

How are Californians doing in restoring their race-based university admissions scheme?

by philg

“A Detailed Look at the Downside of California’s Ban on Affirmative Action” (NYT, August 21):

Twenty-four years ago, California was consumed by debate over affirmative action. A charismatic Black businessman named Ward Connerly led support for Proposition 209, a ballot initiative to ban racial preferences in admission to the state’s world-renowned public universities. The measure passed with 55 percent of the vote and inspired similar changes in nearly a dozen other states.

This November, with an initiative to repeal Proposition 209 on the ballot, California voters will have the opportunity to change their minds.

How are the polls on this one? The New York Times says we need to go back to state-run racism and it will actually be the best thing for the Asian kids who don’t get into the colleges of their choice:

Ending racial preferences in a state university system harmed Black and Hispanic students while doing little to lift whites and Asian-Americans, a study asserts.

Buried in the middle:

Of course, selective university admissions is a zero-sum game. For every Black and Hispanic student excluded by Proposition 209, another student, probably white or Asian-American, took their place. But in focusing on those who got into the most selective U.C. campus at Berkeley, the study found that white and Asian-American students received little concrete benefit from the policy. Mr. Bleemer’s study suggests they would have otherwise enrolled in an equally selective college elsewhere, and had the same chances to graduate and begin successful careers.

The Asian kids weren’t harmed because they earn a lot of money anyway even if they don’t get to attend UC Berkeley at a low cost. But maybe this is just a restatement of what economists have found, i.e., that being smart enough to get into an elite college is a great predictor of income, but attending an elite college isn’t that relevant (summary: what is taught in college is of minimal economic value).

Readers: What’s your prediction about how the California righteous will vote on this one? Will there be a rush to hire Victimhood Studies graduates to restart the sort-by-skin-color system for college applications?

My prediction: Census data show that California is 39.4 percent Hispanic. There’s another roughly 6.5 percent who are Black (and whose lives therefore matter!). Ignoring that these categories may overlap to some extent, my prediction is that 45 percent of Californians vote for to bring back race-based admissions out of self interest (since it is designed to help Black and Hispanic applicants; this number might be off if a lot of the folks in the designated victimhood categories are ineligible to vote due to not being citizens). Then add 15 percent of the remainder. These could be white people who aren’t going to have children, for example. Voting to restore race-based admissions can make them feel good without any personal sacrifice or sacrifice for anyone they care about. That’s 8 percent. So the ballot Proposition passes by 53-47.

Related:

  • “Kamala’s America?”: California today boasts a fabulously rich technology elite; it’s also home to the highest poverty rate among the states, adjusted for costs, according to the U.S. Census. Under its largely one-party regime, notes liberal economist James Galbraith, California has seen inequality grow at among the fastest rates in the country. The state endures the widest gap between middle and upper incomes in the country—72 percent, compared with a national average of 57 percent.
  • “Prop 16 confusion: Affirmative action ballot measure struggling in polls” (NBC): … despite the recent political wave in favor of social justice, the ballot measure isn’t polling particularly well. Why? It may have something to do with the measure’s confusing wording. … “Watching a focus group with Black voters from Los Angeles, they all said no we won’t vote for this as it was read to them,” said Eva Patterson, who co-chairs the Yes on 16 campaign. “Then we explained that it was in favor of affirmative action and equal opportunity, and they all said, ‘Of course we’ll vote for this.'” … The latest polling on Proposition 16 shows 31% of Californians in favor, 47% opposed and 22% unsure. In the Bay Area, the numbers are a bit more in favor of the measure: 40% for, 41% against and 19% not sure. [It is “equal opportunity” because opportunity is based on skin color and anyone who wants to can follow Justin Trudeau’s lead in adjusting skin color?]
Full post, including comments

Melania and Donald testing positive reveals that Americans believe themselves to be firmly in control of the coronavirus

by philg

My Facebook feed is alive with gleeful Democrats posting about (a) their hopes that Donald Trump will die, (b) their satisfaction that Trump’s actions have led to his downfall (i.e., infection), and (c) how events comport with religious beliefs, e.g., in a just God and/or karma.

[Democrat 1] So the fuckface in the White House has Covid. It couldn’t have happened to a bigger piece of human shit. … With any luck–or, as some would have it, any God–the shitbird-in-chief will be confirmed for Hell before the election. Godspeed, you treasonous piece of trash.

[Democrat 2] i just tested asympathetic.

[Democrat 3] I don’t understand how Trump could get Covid. He’s an idiot but the Secret Service is not. Trump probably overrode the SS.

I.e., humans can control whether or not infection occurs. The Great Father in Washington could have protected His children from this virus. The Secret Service, in turn, could protect the Great Orange Father and Slovenian Mother (not a lot of fun compared to the Secret Service lifestyle during the Obama administration).

I’m not sure I believe it. It may be a way for him to avoid the debates, and hide in his twitter bunker for two weeks, and then come out “looking strong” because he beat this thing that only kills the weak. Ya know: “It isn’t so bad.” It knocks his support for white supremacists and his debate performance off the news cycle, and once again he controls the narrative.

Trump is an idiot, except when he is a mastermind!

From an aircraft mechanic:

Trump finally passed a test without cheating

From the bête noire himself:

Responses to the above reproduction of Trump’s tweet:

Finally a Donald Trump tweet that warms the heart.

Tell me this is real. I wish no one to die or be ill… But…

Whoo Hoo!! The Cheeto just tested positive! Maybe now his dumbass followers will believe it!

How did Melania catch it given that she barely looks in his direction? Or maybe she gave it to him. On purpose??

RBG protects us, even from among the shades.

Looks like RBG successfully argued her first case before God

Melania has been an awesome First Lady due to her more or less public acknowledgment of the absurdity of the position and refusal to engage with the U.S. media, so I’m praying to our most recent god (RBG) for Melania’s swift recovery. If 50+ years of fast food haven’t killed The Donald, I’m not going to worry about him.

Readers: Are you seeing the same thing? People who think that Trump and Melania could easily have avoided coronavirus if they’d behaved in some different way? (and therefore the rest of us get to choose whether or not we become infected)

Related:

Full post, including comments

Ancient Spartans wouldn’t have been surprised by our elderly politicians

by philg

In “History of the Ancient World: A Global Perspective”, Gregory Aldrete translates the name for the legislature of Ancient Sparta, the Gerousia, as “the old guys.” Membership was limited to citizens who had attained their 60th birthday (also to those who identified as “men”). A Spartan transported in a time machine to 2020 might say “this looks familiar”!

The description of “democracy” in Ancient Athens, on the other hand, is tough to reconcile with the modern experience. Legislators were selected at random from those with full citizenship (sortition). The typical citizen could expect to be selected once or twice during his lifetime (again, only those Athenians identifying as “male” were eligible).

[Separately, the example of Sparta seems to support the idea that sexual orientation can be taught. From the course notes:

During the last 5 years of school, [teenage boys] were encouraged to form a homosexual relationship that served as a kind of mentoring program.

It seems that sexual relationships were encouraged between the older and younger men in the syssitia [men’s club] on the grounds that if your fellow soldier was also your lover, you would be less likely to run away in battle.

The professor describes male membership in the LGBTQIA+ community as almost universal in Sparta. (See also “Status of homosexuality in ancient Sparta?” and “Teaching 5th graders who vs. whom in an LGBTQ+ world”).]

Full post, including comments

Tesla can’t compete in Norway anymore

by philg

From “Tesla Is Being Overtaken” (Seeking Alpha, written by a guy who is short TSLA), electric car registrations in Norway:

YTD, there have been 51,115 EV registrations in Norway, and Tesla EVs have accounted for about 7% of that total. This compares with Tesla’s worldwide market share of EV unit sales estimated at 16% in 2019. In 2019, Tesla registered 16,738 vehicles through September in Norway. This year, with only a few days left in September, Tesla has registered only 3,613 – a decline of 78%.

How about a lead in battery tech?

For example, when it comes to batteries, easily the largest cost in producing an EV, VW isn’t messing around trying to redesign batteries themselves. They negotiated a massive contract with the large battery suppliers at a big discount, and let them figure out how to cut costs. And so while Tesla will likely get under that key $100/kwh threshold if/when their new battery design is successfully implemented, VW is already there. A VW company executive revealed to The New York Times last year that the company already pays less than $100/kwh for its batteries. GM has also introduced it’s Ultium battery, also reportedly costing less than $100/kwh, with specs similar to Tesla’s current batteries. GM will include the Ultium batteries in it’s upcoming launch of several new EV models.

I don’t like to think that markets are wrong, but how can Tesla continue to be so much more valuable than any other car company? And if the stock market is right, why is the consumer market for EVs in Norway now 93 percent non-Tesla?

Related:

Full post, including comments

Tesla is actually a Swedish company?

by philg

“Elon Musk says he won’t take coronavirus vaccine, calls Bill Gates a ‘knucklehead’” (New York Post) would warm the heart of any Swedish MD/PhD:

SpaceX founder Elon Musk stirred the pot yet again after claiming that neither he nor his family would take a COVID-19 vaccine even if it was readily available.

During the bizarre exchange, the Tesla CEO decried the nationwide lockdown as a “no-win situation” that has “diminished my faith in humanity.” Musk previously called widespread quarantines “unethical” and “de facto house arrest,” RT reports.

Instead of the current sweeping measures, the Boring Company boss suggested a more targeted lockdown where “anyone who is at risk” be “quarantined until the storm passes.”

Swisher criticized his suggestion, adding that humans could potentially die in the process.

“Everybody dies,” quipped Musk.

When you add the above to Dog Mode, it might be time for us to break down and buy a Tesla (a financially irrational decision in Maskachusetts where electricity per mile in a Tesla actually costs more than gasoline per mile in a Camry or Accord).

Related:

Full post, including comments

Increasing percentage of American political funding from those who didn’t earn the money?

by philg

The folks who are the most irredeemably Republican are small business owners. The folks who embrace the new Democratic Socialism and the general concept of bigger government are a mixture, but one of the wealthiest components of that mixture has been people who inherited money. People who didn’t have to work for the money don’t seem nearly as worried about the negative effects of government restrictions on the market, e.g., minimum wage (make it illegal for those with low skill levels to work), more lavish welfare handouts (make it irrational for those with low/medium skill levels to work), and higher taxes (make it less attractive for anyone to work additional hours).

A classic example of inherited wealth is Laurene Powell Jobs. The person who made the money is Steve Jobs, not noted for his charitable inclinations or support for politicians. The woman who inherited the money, however, is all-in on one of the Democrats’ big goals. Her Emerson Collective‘s #1 “Priority” is increasing low-skill immigration the U.S. Steve Jobs might have been concerned that higher taxes to fund welfare benefits for low-skill migrants and their children would make it tougher for Apple to compete with rivals in China, for example. Laurene Powell Jobs, however, won’t be similarly constrained.

[Promoting low-skill immigration makes sense from her personal perspective (as it does for most elite Americans). She’s spending the wealth that her late husband accumulated through a charity and therefore won’t have to pay any taxes, regardless of what the rates might be. Regardless of the level of low-skill migration, her own lifestyle won’t change too much. How likely are the new arrivals to be able to afford a home anywhere near one of hers? Is it conceivable that she’ll have to wait for health care if the resulting larger population clogs up the health care system? How many in the next caravan of Hondurans to cross the border earn enough to compete with her for private jet transport and hangar space?]

The U.S. has always had citizens who were rich via inheritance and politically active. What’s relatively new, however, is the phenomenon of people who are rich via divorce litigation. Due to the no-fault divorce revolution of the 1970s, there are now a huge number of people who can spend money that a spouse-turned-defendant earned. Like folks who inherited money, therefore, they have zero personal experience with what it takes to build and run a successful business.

What’s an example of this new force in politics? Karla Jurvetson obtained financial independence by suing her husband Steve Jurvetson, a venture capitalist also known for having sex with a variety of cash-hungry young women. And in the 2020 election… “Mystery Warren super PAC funder revealed; Karla Jurvetson, a California physician, gave $14.6 million to Persist PAC in February.” (Politico):

In the last weeks of Warren’s struggling presidential bid, a super PAC called Persist PAC hastily formed and then swooped into Nevada, South Carolina and Super Tuesday states to run over $14 million in ads trying to resuscitate Warren’s campaign. Warren was in trouble after third and fourth place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire.\Jurvetson is one of the biggest donors in the Democratic Party and has spoken openly about what she feels is her obligation to support female candidates. “I feel like it’s our moral duty, if we’re not going to run ourselves, to support the women who are brave enough to put their name on the ballot,” she told the Mercury News in 2018. Jurvetson also hosted a fundraising luncheon for Warren in 2018 — before the Massachusetts senator disavowed in-person fundraising events altogether during her presidential run.

Through a spokesperson, Jurvetson declined to comment on her involvement in Persist PAC, which only collected a half-million dollars from other sources in February, according to a new campaign finance filing. Warren did not respond to a request for comment.

In other words, this single divorce plaintiff was the source of 96 percent of Warren’s PAC money.

Maybe the age of enthusiasm for the Bernie Sanders platform (even if ultimately delivered by Joe Biden and other Democrats) is partly due to the fact that an increasing portion of the money in politics is coming from people who didn’t earn it?

Very loosely related, from the BBC:

Full post, including comments

Did Joe Biden do well enough in the debate that companies might start hiring older workers?

by philg

Workers older than 40 are inferior, according to the Federal government, which is why employers need to be bludgeoned into hiring them. From the EEOC:

Age discrimination involves treating an applicant or employee less favorably because of his or her age.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older. It does not protect workers under the age of 40, although some states have laws that protect younger workers from age discrimination. It is not illegal for an employer or other covered entity to favor an older worker over a younger one, even if both workers are age 40 or older.

Discrimination can occur when the victim and the person who inflicted the discrimination are both over 40.

Joe Biden will turn 78 in November (unless IHME is correct and COVID-19 kills most Americans before then) and is therefore the oldest person ever to run in a U.S. presidential election. If he impresses viewers with his keen mind and quick wit, might that be enough to get American employers to question the official government position that older = inferior?

Second question: If your opinion, did Biden impress in this first debate?

Also, does at least one candidate get the questions in advance? The debates are moderated by TV journalists. One thing that we’ve learned since 2016 is that people whose job is to report the “news” actually yearn to editorialize regarding how Americans should vote. If they’re not afraid to present facts selectively, twist facts, and otherwise mislead readers/viewers, why wouldn’t at least one person within a news organization that is moderating a debate leak the questions to the candidate whom he/she/ze/they favors?

(A Democrat affiliated with CNN leaked “town hall” questions to Hillary Clinton in advance back in 2016 (Snopes).)

Multiple perspectives from Facebook:

  • I can’t believe the s**t that Trump is having to put up with tonight. Wallace lets Biden talk over him all the time. Nauseating.
  • Chris Wallace did an abysmally awful job. He’s more left-wing than I previously thought. His lack of knowledge is shocking. Wallace doesn’t know the basics.
  • Biden was such a terrible moderator of the Trump-Wallace debate
  • The debate. Trump hit a new low. Biden hit a triple: he acted like an adult, he didn’t get flustered, and he reached out to families around the country. I would not have been able to keep my temper that well. Oh, and Chris Wallace shamed himself.
  • (from a socialist Democrat) TBH, I think Trump did better than Biden in this debate. He was more cogent and concrete, Biden was too much “c’mon man” and just not hitting his target.
  • (from a cower-at-home schoolteacher who otherwise posts on the dangers of COVID-19, the hazards of school reopening, the merits of RBG, the stupidity of the unmasked, etc.) This is an absolute disgrace. How could we possibly expect our children to respect this President? Politics aside, the teacher in me would like to park his bully self in our class Think Tank to fill out a Reflection Sheet regarding his behavior. He is a bully, he is flagrantly ignorant of the facts, and he’s disrespectful in every way possible. HOW can we not be embarrassed and WHY are we tolerating it.

Related:

Full post, including comments

Under a fair tax code, Trump should have paid $0 in income tax…

by philg

… because he would have paid all of his taxes via a land value tax.

My Facebook feed is alive with people complaining that Trump hasn’t paid sufficient taxes over the past decades for which the NYT has obtained his personal tax returns (see Holy Grail attained: NYT gets hold of Trump’s tax returns). Essentially they are complaining that the real estate industry is not taxed properly. For the first 39 years, for example, depreciation may cancel out much of the rental revenue (and this clock can be accelerated by the sophisticated, as I learned from a friend who owns a huge office building and will pay no taxes for the first 15 years). As with Warren Buffet’s fortune, as long as assets aren’t totally cashed out, any tax on capital gains can be deferred for decades or perhaps centuries.

Maybe this is the nudge that the U.S. needs to move to what might be a much better and fairer tax, i.e., one on the value of land. This won’t discourage investment in nice buildings because the value of the building isn’t taxed. As the U.S. gets bulked up via immigration to a Chinese level of population density, land per person should become more scarce and valuable. Already we’ve seen that much of the fruits of economic growth in the U.S. have ended up accruing primarily to property owners (i.e., as soon as wages rise in a city, rents rise so that landlords soak up most of the increase and leave the workers with little additional spending power).

An advantage of the land value tax is that the U.S. could shut down its income taxation scheme, thus encouraging people to work more. Note that everyone who isn’t homeless, unhoused, or living in a car would end up paying the land value tax directly (homeowner) or indirectly (renter). It is also easy for governments to collect property-based taxes. The government knows where all of the land is and who owns it. In the hysteria around Trump and his taxes, one thing that I haven’t seen mentioned is the extent to which the hated dictator has paid 50+ years of property tax on the various properties that he owns. According to the NYT, Trump is an arch criminal and a mastermind at tax evasion (so much so that the IRS hasn’t actually changed his tax liability, though supposedly such as finding by the IRS will come any day now). Yet there is no indication that Trump or his companies have managed to escape paying property tax every year.

What’s not to love about a tax that even Donald Trump is not smart enough to avoid?

(A federal land value tax might be awesome for redressing income inequality. Wealthy coastal elite states have a lot of valuable land so they would pay more than states where median incomes are low. Uber rich Californians who may be paying almost nothing in property due to Proposition 13 could finally be taxed on the rise in land value to which they contributed nothing.)

Related:

Full post, including comments