This radical legislation would:
- FEDERALIZE our election system
- FORCE states to adopt national voting standards
- EMPOWER federal agencies to ignore immigration status and eliminate voter ID
It couldn’t be clearer, %%firstname%%. Stacey wants to end state-run elections and replace them with a nationalized system that makes it EASY TO CHEAT!
And:
The Mexicans sent them. They were refugees in Mexico. Apparently, (so this article says) Joe didn't deliver on a promise to the Mexican government. This was designed to get his attention - Good luck with that. Joe is on a Delaware beach getting much needed rest!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Two very important and meaningful op ed's!
In the op about XI, it appears he understands the benefits as well as the failures of capitalism and hopes through government dictates he can smooth out the consequences/contrasts.
That he apparently may fail to understand, as the Chinese embrace capitalism, a subsidiary spill over effect is they will also want more personal freedom and whether he can finesse that issue will be critical in determining his effort to make a successful transition.
As for the emergence of more women graduating schools at all levels versus male declines it will have meaningful implications for the type of nation we will eventually become.
eventually , since it is a yin-yang matter, it is too early to predict which way the tide ebbs and flows.
+++
What Explains Xi’s Pivot to the State?
He’s wagering it will help him achieve his goal of a record third term as paramount leader.
By Kevin Rudd
Something is happening in China that the West doesn’t understand. In recent months Beijing killed the country’s $120 billion private tutoring sector and slapped hefty fines on tech firms Tencent and Alibaba. Chinese executives have been summoned to the capitol to “self-rectify their misconduct” and billionaires have begun donating to charitable causes in what President Xi Jinping calls “tertiary income redistribution.” China’s top six technology stocks have lost more than $1.1 trillion in value in the past six months as investors scramble to figure out what is going on.
Why would China, which has engaged in fierce economic competition with the West in recent years, suddenly turn on its own like this? While many in the U.S. and Europe may see this as a bewildering series of events, there is a common “red thread” linking all of it. Mr. Xi is executing an economic pivot to the party and the state based on three driving forces: ideology, demographics and decoupling.
Despite the market reforms of the past four decades, ideology still matters to the Chinese Communist Party. At the 19th Party Congress in 2017, Mr. Xi declared that China had entered into a “new era” and that the “principal contradiction” facing the party had changed. Marxist-Leninist language seems arcane to foreigners. A “contradiction” is the interaction between progressive forces pushing toward socialism and the resistance to that change. It is therefore the shifting definition of the party’s principal contradiction that ultimately determines the country’s political direction.
In 1982, Deng Xiaoping redefined the party’s principal contradiction away from Maoist class struggle and toward untrammeled economic development. For the next 35 years, this ideological course set the political parameters for what became the period of “reform and opening.” In 2017 Mr. Xi declared the new contradiction was “between unbalanced and inadequate development” and the need to improve people’s lives.
This might seem a subtle change, but its ideological significance is profound. It authorizes a more radical approach to resolving problems of capitalist excess, from income inequality to environmental pollution. It’s also a philosophy that supports broader forms of state intervention in the Chinese economy—a change that has only become fully realized in the past year.
Demographics is also driving Chinese economic policy to the left. The May 2021 census revealed birthrates had fallen sharply to 1.3—lower than in Japan and the U.S. China is aging fast. The working-age population peaked in 2011 and the total population may now be shrinking. For Mr. Xi, this presents the horrifying prospect China may grow old before it grows rich. He may not therefore be able to realize his dream of making China a wealthy, strong, and global great power by the centenary of the formation of the People’s Republic in 2049.
After a long period of engagement, China now seeks selectively to decouple its economy from the West and present itself as a strategic rival. In 2019 Mr. Xi began talking about a period of “protracted struggle” with America that would extend through midcentury. Lately Mr. Xi’s language of struggle has grown more intense. He has called on cadres to “discard wishful thinking, be willing to fight, and refuse to give way” in preserving Chinese interests.
The forces of ideology, demographics and decoupling have come together in what Mr. Xi now calls his “New Development Concept”—the economic mantra combining an emphasis on greater equality through common prosperity, reduced vulnerability to the outside world and greater state intervention in the economy. A “dual circulation economy” seeks to reduce dependency on exports by making Chinese domestic consumer demand the main driver of growth, while leveraging the powerful gravitational pull of China’s domestic market to maintain international influence. Underpinning this logic is the recent resuscitation of an older Maoist notion of national self-reliance. It reflects Mr. Xi’s determination for Beijing to develop firm domestic control over the technologies that are key to future economic and military power, all supported by independent and controllable supply chains.
Much of the party’s recent crackdown against the Chinese private sector can be understood through this wider lens of Mr. Xi’s “new development concept.” When regulators cracked down on private tutoring it was because many Chinese feel the current economic burden of having even one child is simply too high. When regulators scrutinized data practices, or suspended initial public offerings abroad, it was out of concern about China’s susceptibility to outside pressure. And when cultural regulators banned “effeminate sissies” from television, told Chinese boys to start manning up instead of playing videogames, and issued new school textbooks snappily titled “Happiness Only Comes Through Struggle,” it was all in service of Mr. Xi’s desire to win a generational contest against cultural dependency on the West.
In his overriding quest for re-election to a record third term at the 20th Party Congress in fall 2022, Mr. Xi has apparently chosen to put the solidification of his own domestic political standing ahead of China’s unfinished economic reform project. While the politics of his pivot to the state may make sense internally, if Chinese growth begins to stall Mr. Xi may discover he had the underlying economics very wrong. And in China, as with all countries, ultimate political legitimacy and sustainability will depend on the economy.
Mr. Rudd is a former prime minister of Australia and the global president of the Asia Society.
And:
Why Men Are Disappearing on Campus
About half of women entering four-year colleges graduate on time, but only 40% of men do.
By and
Some 79% more men than women attended America’s colleges and universities when one of us (Mr. Vedder) was an undergraduate in 1959. Women now greatly outnumber men on campuses. The Journal reported recently that men now make up only about 40% of college students. From spring 2019 to spring 2021, the number of collegiate male students fell by more than 535,000, well over triple the modest 154,000 decline observed for women, according to National Student Clearinghouse data.
Between 1959 and 2021, the number of male students for every 100 women fell by an extraordinary 62%. The decline in the 1960s and 1970s can be explained as women simply catching up with men. But the decline in men on campus continued in the late 20th century, long after parity had been reached and gender equality had improved.
Why has this been happening? Here are four reasons. First, the initial surge in female enrollment is explainable by a rapid rise in female labor-force participation. Women realized that a successful career would be enhanced by a college education. Meanwhile, women are marrying later—at age 28 on average in 2020, up from 20.3 in 1960.
A dramatic drop in fertility has accompanied this trend. The birthrate today is slightly below 12 for every 1,000 people, about half the 23.7 in 1960. Labor-saving innovations in household management and child care—automatic washing machines, disposable diapers, inexpensive takeout restaurants—as well as new forms of birth control helped women pursue college degrees and achieve new vocational ambitions.
Second, labor-market shifts have played to women’s interests and strengths. Even in 1960, women played a large role in healthcare and education. Demand for workers in these service industries has increased far more than in historically male-dominated fields such as automobile and steel manufacturing or coal mining. In general, the importance of physical strength has declined as a credential for employment.
Third, women have, on balance, outperformed men academically. There are more men failing to graduate from high school than women. About half of women entering a four-year college graduate in four years, compared with only about 40% of men. The average collegiate grade-point average isn’t tracked regularly but, according to data from 2009, it’s about 3.10 for women, versus 2.90 for men. Men are also more likely to have disciplinary problems in college from things like bar fights or fraternity hazing.
Fourth, there are about 1.24 million more men who are incarcerated than women, largely preventing them from attending traditional college. Scholars such as Charles Murray have long demonstrated that expanded government entitlements following the Great Society era have reduced traditional family formation, reduced incentives to excel both in school and on the job, and increased crime.
America today is still largely led by college educated males. We looked at 200 corporate and political leaders—CEOs of the largest 100 companies in the Fortune 500 and the 100 U.S. senators. About 71.5% of them are men with a college education. Throughout history mostly educated men have run America—the last U.S. president without a college degree, Harry Truman, left office 60 years ago.
It’s great news that more women are going to college and entering positions of leadership in business, politics—including the vice presidency—and every imaginable corner of the culture. A woman will one day be elected president. That milestone, when it happens, should be celebrated. But men adrift—not keeping up in school, struggling to form families and succeed—will eventually have profound consequences on the nation’s economic prospects and political leadership.
Mr. Vedder is a senior fellow at the Independent Institute and teaches at Ohio University, where Mr. Colegrove is an undergraduate economics major.
+++++++++
Bob Livingston is no fool. He is a real conservative, often an alarmist but his concerns are rooted in reality.
He believes entitlements have become so engrained that it has resulted in a massive army which will cause destruction when and if their "entitlements" are no longer available.
Food will be the most critical element and he urges one to stock up a supply of "caloric" items for a lengthy period as the revolution plays itself out.
+++
Bob Livingston Alerts
An invasion from a foreign army is about the last thing that we would expect, simply because the United States has a large, specialized defense force with the most sophisticated weapons in the world.
But where is that other army, almost 50 million strong, waiting to be motivated and triggered? This is truly a silent army. No one knows. It's anything but public knowledge. When this army erupts, it will be well armed; and it will spread across America like locusts. Few people will be prepared for such totally unexpected terror because there has never been anything like it in American history.
There will be little defense against this army and dangerous, mad mass.
Watch the documentary on the Battle of Stalingrad, which took place from 1942 until 1943 — about 23 months. Millions died. Those killed by gunfire by German and Russian army gunfire were the lucky ones. Many others who dead either froze or starved to death. Some were reduced to eating horses and dogs and even their fellow man.
Nothing was mentioned in the film about any of the citizens having food stored for the battle. They must have known that a prolonged battle was about to take place, and they also knew that winter was coming — not just any winter, but a very harsh Russian winter.
Unprepared
Even though all populations have a basic knowledge of food storage, the American people, especially today, have access and the capability to store many months of very highly nutritional food. But I dare say they have very little or none.
Simply stated, most Americans by far believe that just because several generations have escaped war and famine in the American homeland, they will never suffer hunger and cold.
Well, it is a threat in our present world. Just look at those suffering after Hurricane Ida. Millions of people in a half dozen states without power, possibly with contaminated water, surely many without food, since grocery stores are closed and without power as well…
And yet, that's nothing compared to the more than 42 million people enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as of April 2021. That means before any storm, and disruption, and illness, and lockdown, that 1 in 8 Americans are using food stamps to buy groceries.
How far do you have to stretch your imagination to think of these 42 million people as a "food stamp army?"
They certainly will become an army of terror, stealing and pillaging for food within just a few days after their food stamps are stopped for one reason or another. The food stamp program is the only thing holding off revolution and collapse.
Please remember that people in America who are getting free food stamps consider it something that they deserve as a right rather than a privilege because of their financial hardship or unemployment. This attitude will be very bad when the food stamp system fails, as it surely will as the worthless paper money piles up in the streets $3.5 trillion at a time.
With economic downturn comes government oppression. Economic panics, famine and social breakdown come about as a result of depreciation and devaluation of a paper currency. Few get this direct connection, but it is a direct cause just as night follows day. It's happening now!
The populace has been conditioned to have the goal of accumulating a worthless middleman — cash — instead of hard assets and commodities. For now, this middleman can still gain us access to commodities, goods and services, but for how long?
Prepare now
The next step in the plan to control you is happening now. With one hand, they are destroying cash itself. With the other, they are slowly destroying the notion of where your income is derived from, or that it is even yours at all. Witness our high percentage of GDP that now comes from government, the massive growth of entitlements like food stamps and of course the attempted and probably continuing takeover of healthcare by government-regulation and corporatist interests.
The infrastructure bill (or as I like to call it, the "woke-frastructure" bill) may put people to work rebuilding our roads and bridges, yet what the White House will not tell you — because they don't want you to know — is that the more people who go on the dole (unemployment, food stamps, public works and urban renewal projects) the more people go under the thumb of the state.
If you are trained to think your income, your health and your rights come from the government, you are conditioned that you are no longer free to choose anything. How you live, where you live, what you say, what you spend money on can then all be decided by your government.
While a record number of Americans are on food stamps, the top 1 percent of income earners is taking a larger share of total income. President Biden has seized on this and uses it to give emphasis to class warfare. This will degenerate into a hot revolution that will end badly for Biden and his elite handlers. The underground becomes a way of life for survival.
Before the Army strikes, buy three months of food stock
Most people are not averse to the idea of preparedness, but many have trouble taking the first steps in the right direction. Starving people will break into stores and loot food, leaving you with nothing if you are not ready. Yes, this can happen in America. We are mere minutes from the Third World without electricity.
This means food supply is the greatest Achilles' heel of the American populace. Most homes store less than one week's worth of food items at any given time. And grocery stores with their vaunted "supply chains" have maybe a day extra more than they need. That will spoil or be gone quickly.
The average person needs between 2,000 and 3,000 calories per day to maintain sufficient energy for survival. Multiply that out if you will be unable to visit a store, or if you have no power for a week or more.
Start with 2,000 calories per day per person. Bulk foods can be purchased cheaply (for now) and can at the very least provide sustenance during emergencies. A 20-pound bag of rice, for instance, can be had for less than $15 and provides about 30,000 calories, or 2,000 calories per day for 15 days for one person. Supplement with beans, canned vegetables and meats, honey for sugar, or freeze-dried goods, and you will be living more comfortably than 90 percent of the population.
Food stockpiling is one of the easiest and most vital measures a person could take. Yet, sadly, it is one of the last preparations on people's minds.
Yours for the truth,
Bob Livingston
Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter®
++++++++++++++++++++
The radical Muslims and blacks are winning the war of intolerance as they unite in their common cause which is their hatred of America and they have found their common pinata.
No comments:
Post a Comment