Murray’s Straw

19 07 2017

Washington, D.C.

Rush:

Today the San Francisco Chronicle: “Why Universal Basic Income is Gaining Support, Critics.” Apparently — and I knew it wasn’t a one-off. I knew when Zuckerberg did this that it wasn’t just something he thought of the night before amd decided to mention the speech. I knew it was a campaign. It’s what the left does. They come up with campaigns. They strategize these things months, years in advance. Zuckerberg was the rollout of it.

The next aspect of the rollout is today in the San Francisco Chronicle, in which many renowned thinkers — including many libertarians — are eager to sign up and support this. The libertarians, one of them is Charles Murray, who is one of the most profound sociologists and political scientists in the country. Many people have assumed that Murray is conservative. He’s actually more libertarian. But he says this is a great idea if the guaranteed universal basic income replaces all welfare, all food stamps.

And I think they’re reading Murray’s support for UBI all wrong, “they” include Murray himself.

The Charles Murray who now advocates UBI, or rather recognizes the inevitability of it, isn’t doing so because of or in spite of his right-libertarian ideology.  The Charles Murray who is doing so is doing so because Charles Murray is the co-author of the most important book about burgeoning and ossifying inequality written in my lifetime, although, since hardly anyone actually read the book in question, hardly anyone actually knows it’s about burgeoning and ossifying inequality.

To put it another way, the straw stirring Murray’s UBI drink is inequality, not libertarianism.

As for Zuckerberg, I think his motivation is far less sincere.  I think he’s trying to paper over burgeoning and ossifying inequality in a superficial sense, so that people don’t notice how unequal the scales are in favor of people like Mark Zuckerberg.





When UBI Meets BCC

4 06 2017

Cairo, Egypt and Tehran, Iran

First off, whoa unto the person who has to key in names like Djavad Salehi-Isfahani and Mohammad H. Mostafavi-Dehzooeifrom.

Now, for the social science at hand:

I tend to agree.  I don’t think the existence of UBI will in se wreck much in the way of peoples’ work ethic.  It might to a relatively small percentage of people.  But I also happen to think that if UBI “seems” to cause people to work less, there are two better explanations:  One, the individuals in question never had much of a work ethic to begin with, and didn’t much work to begin with, or two, the modern cognitively stratifying economy has made them functionally unemployable.  The second explanation is one of the big reasons why UBI is both being considered to begin with and an inevitable feature of our political and economic future.

From there, (uncomfortable and taboo discussion of HBD and racial differences censored).





Wicked Racial Profiling Trick

6 06 2016

Switzerland

H/T Sab.

Sky News headline:

Swiss Vote ‘No’ To Guaranteed Monthly Income

I stopped there.

The way I figure, there’s about a 50-50 chance that race and/or immigration is openly mentioned here.  If it’s not, then bet on that being the main reason why it failed.  An all-white Switzerland would have easily approved this measure.





Push Pull Man

9 05 2016

Brooklyn

NYP:

In expensive ZIP codes, Castro’s plan — which requires no congressional approval — would more than double the standard subsidy, while also covering utilities. At the same time, he intends to reduce subsidies for those who choose to stay in housing in poor urban areas, such as Brooklyn. So Section 8 tenants won’t just be pulled to the suburbs, they’ll be pushed there.

Twenty-first century Negro removal.

Brooklyn won’t be a poor urban area for long.  It will soon be a very expensive urban area.

Dubuque, Iowa, for example, received an influx of voucher holders from projects in Chicago — and it’s had a problem with crime ever since. A recent study linked Dubuque’s crime wave directly to Section 8 housing.

Fewer problems with crime around where the Cabrini-Greens used to be, coincidentally.

Now Dallas has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and recently had to call in state troopers to help police control it. For the first time, violent crime has shifted to the tony bedroom communities north of the city. Three suburbs that have seen the most Section 8 transfers — Frisco, Plano and McKinney — have suffered unprecedented spikes in rapes, assaults and break-ins, including home invasions.

Yeah, so?  Dallas itself is becoming more arty-farty and SWPL-y.

Ironically, Hillary’s own hometown of Chappaqua is fighting Section 8 housing because of links to drugs and crime and other problems.

Why do you think HRC’s national campaign office is in Brooklyn?

The problem with most news and commentary about this matter, even from, (or especially from), mainstream conservatives, is that they don’t see the cui bono aspect, they don’t see who benefits, and therefore they don’t have the ability to finger any suspects.

Oh, and one more thing.  It goes under the “Why I’m #NRx” file — Notice that the plan “requires no Congressional approval.”  Time was not so long ago that anything close to a significant change in domestic policy required Congressional approval.  But, just as power has already accumulated around the Presidential center for military, foreign policy and diplomatic affairs for the purposes of “national security,” so is it also in domestic affairs, because equality and civil rights and social justice.  Far from the success of the Trump campaign knocking me off my #NRx game, it actually proves why #NRx is right for two reasons:  One, he’s an aberration, one of the few billionaires who is concerned about something other than himself and is willing to break with the rigid selfish class discipline of the billionaire class in order to be at least a wee bit patriotic, and two, the fact that he needed to do that proves the long term fool’s errand of democratic republicanism.  For my money, for all I could care, he could win, get in the White House, rip up the Constitution (which, as you can see from reading articles like these, would be redundant), and declare himself king.  (Then set up a King Lear scenario where he has to pick between Junior, Eric and Ivanka to succeed him upon his death or incapacitation.)

 





Make Up Your Mind

2 11 2015

Serbia

NYT:

A Mass Migration Crisis, and It May Yet Get Worse

Worse? This is the same paper that claims that this kind of “mass migration,” to both Europe and the United States, is a virtue.

One thing I noticed late last week is that in media articles where the topic is the distribution of “refugees,” it is written about as a burden that must be shared, spread around, dispersed. But when the topic is the mass immigration in general, it is written about as a blessing that will solve the problems of increasing wages skills gap age demographic collapse workers to do the jobs that native born whites won’t do lack of votes for center-left parties, or whatever.

Like I wrote here last week when I broached this same observation, it can’t be both a blessing and a burden at the same time.  However, I have a Ferrari of a mind, so of course I know there’s a way both can be true at the same time.  It’s a blessing for plutocrats and corporations, because it solves the problem of increasing wages and salaries, and at the same time it’s a burden for the same plutocrats and corporations, because the Patterson’s First Axiom effects of the mass migration is making the natives restless, so they have to find a way to arrange the “refugee” resettlement in such a way to diffuse white reactionary anger.  What, you thought I was going to say that it was a burden for the native born whites and for public welfare systems?  Name me the plutocrat or corporation that really honestly cares about either.

In related news, this NR article (parts of which read like they were not written in NR) reminds me of a thought I had a few days ago.  When, for example, Sweden is taking in enough refugees that if scaled up to the United States, it would mean that we’re taking in another whole state of Indiana.  But the numbers don’t interest me quite as much as the precarious situation intra-Hajnal Line European countries and their welfare states are in.  The “refugees” are going where the welfare states are the most generous, but the countries where the welfare states are the most generous and ubiquitous can only have those welfare states because their (until recently almost entirely ethnically homogeneous) people have a high level of social altruism and social trust and social capital.  Throw enough of a critical mass of non-white moochers into the mix, and it’s going to have a far more rapid and drastic negative effect on the financial health of NW Euro welfare states than even a proportional import of people would have on the American welfare state, which is significantly less generous and ubiquitous than, say, Sweden’s.  Our favorite domestic non-white racial group is one big reason why our welfare state never did and never could even rise to British levels, much less Swedish levels.





Only If We Can Have Scandinavian Demographics

3 05 2015

Vermont

DC:

Bernie Sanders: The US Should Be More Like Socialist Scandinavia

Bernie Sanders said socialist policies in nations such as Denmark, Norway and Sweden should be implemented in the U.S. in an interview with “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos Sunday.

The ABC News host told Sanders he could “hear the Republican attack ad…he wants America to look more like Scandinavia.” The Vermont senator responded saying, “That’s right. What’s wrong with that?”

From the interview itself:

SANDERS: That’s right. That’s right. What’s wrong with that? What’s wrong when you have more income and wealth equality. What’s wrong when they have a stronger middle class in many ways than we do, a higher minimum wage than we do, and they’re stronger on the environment than we do? The fact of the matter is that we do a lot in our country, which is good, but we can learn from other countries. We have, George, the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on earth at the same time as we’re seeing a proliferation of millionaires and billionaires. Frankly, I don’t think that’s sustainable. I don’t think that’s what America is about.

Too bad that Bernie Sanders is too dense and too ideologically thrown in to realize that Scandinavian systems and Scandinavian results are a function of Scandinavian peoples and Scandinavian folkways and Scandinavian social altruism designed for Scandinavian countries at Scandinavian latitudes and with Scandinavian winters, and that the whole thing doesn’t scale well to the Congo or Baltimore.  Even the Scandinavian-American diaspora and their very similar systems fall apart when blacks show up to mooch.  And eventually, with Scandinavians opening the doors for blacks/Muslims to flood in, so too will their traditionally generous welfare states fail.

 





Give and Take

13 04 2015

Miami

PowerLine, quoting Rubio’s announcement:

Both of my parents were born to poor families in Cuba. After his mother died when he was nine, my father left school to go work. My mother was one of seven girls raised by a disabled father who struggled to provide for his family.

When they were young, my parents had big dreams for themselves. But because they were not born into wealth or power, their future was destined to be defined by their past. So in 1956 they came here, to the one place on earth where the aspirations of people like them could be more than just dreams.

My father became a bartender. My mother a cashier, a maid and a Kmart stock clerk. They never made it big. But they were successful. Two immigrants with little money or education found stable jobs, owned a home, retired with security and gave all four of their children a life far better than their own.

My parents achieved what came to be known as the American Dream. But now, too many Americans are starting to doubt whether achieving that dream is still possible.

The 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa had one speech after another after another like this.  The speakers, a lot of them non-white, spouted their Horatio Alger stories.  Marco Rubio was one of them, as a matter of fact.  Others like that included New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, and now Congresswoman Mia Love from Utah.

The reason why that convention turned out to be a big flop was that those speeches and those that gave them were appealing to an audience and a class of voters that doesn’t want to work for anything, doesn’t want to pay their dues to be a real success if they ever will be, doesn’t want to climb the ladder slowly and one step at a time.  They want it all, they want it now, and they want it given to them without obligation.  And that’s where Baracka Claus and the Democrats come in.

That’s what tends to happen when you try to be Democrat lite to compete with Democrat classic for the gibsmedat Democrat voter.

Maybe next time they’ll speak to the people that actually do vote for their crummy party or maybe the people who actually might but don’t quite.  Or do I wish for too much?