Monthly Archives: April 2016

Zerohedge Claims Most Under-30 Adults Reject Capitalism

I view this quote as potentially good news:

The Harvard University survey, which polled young adults between ages 18 and 29, found that 51 percent of respondents do not support capitalism. Just 42 percent said they support it.

It isn’t clear that the young people in the poll would prefer some alternative system, though. Just 33 percent said they supported socialism. The survey had a margin of error of 2.4 percentage points.

To start with, how many, even Harvard students, would give a consistent definition for the term “capitalism”? Most from Harvard might give correct definitions, but their definitions would inevitably vary. And when Hilaire Belloc attacked capitalism in The Servile State, he had to first define capitalism. Note: Belloc was arguing against capitalism’s tendency to bring about socialism. *Libertarian heads explode.*

Secondly, many of the paleos were labeled as “anti-capitalist”, and I’ve never believed in the mythos around the Industrial Revolution. The strength of capitalism exists where economically productive assets within a society are given power. The less economically productive then must focus efforts on more immediate concerns, like finding a job so as to eat. As a result, you have less idleness but also reductions in socially useful assets such as monasteries.

And on this second point, let me note that this is only capitalism as functioning ideally. Also, these less productive assets, such as monasteries, can serve vital functions. So, while ideal capitalism might lead to a dramatic flowering, it isn’t necessarily stable. We see in America today, moneyed-special-interests influencing political campaigns, culture, the media (including bloggers though obviously not this site). There’s almost no place for those who value anything other than money.

Today, nationalism is condemned. Faith is condemned. Our society is becoming more individualistic, secular, transient. What value is left to Americans but pursuit of greed? And we see the results, wars partly fought for profit (also for Israel lobby), mass immigration for profit, free trade for profit (Francis once said free trade is “economic ethnic cleansing”). Greed destroys. (And it’s not a Christian value, but it feels somehow dirty to make such an obvious reference.)

The term for what is lost in present-society used to be called, by a paleo blogger, “social capital”. We could all sense something was amiss with Wall Street speculation and greed, though we certainly didn’t want socialism. “Distributism”, “Third Position”, and other “Third Way” ideas became popular as a result.

Anyway, I’m proudly anti-socialist, and that is why I’m also anti-capitalist. Third solutions are the future, however one defines them, alternatives existing within both the “Left” and the “Right”. And I find many on the “Left” agree with me on many things, so long as I don’t break certain taboo topics, at least not all at once. There is potential there for a movement to draw support from both groups to assault the “moderate” centre.

One thing investors and speculators know well: The market doesn’t move in a straight line. If the march of “history” appears inevitable today, that march will shift.

Advertisements

George Borjas Asks Congress Why No Lawyer Guest Workers

I’m late posting this, but George Borjas is “a person who matters” on immigration. He recently testified in front of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.

Borjas proposes:

[I]nstead of talking about an H-1B program that lets in 65,000 high-tech workers (workers that most people attending those hearings have little in common with), we should instead think about an A-1B program that lets in 65,000 attorneys. These attorneys would have passed some sort of certification exam prepared by the American Bar Association. The test could be very, very hard, but I bet that Kaplan-like test centers would magically spring up all over the world to teach the requisite skills to would-be lawyers and that many potential lawyers would quickly join the queue.

And of course Congress would never pass such a bill – too many lawyers.

Borjas adds:

In fact, why not attach the proposal to create an A-1B program every time someone introduces legislation to increase the H-1B cap? I would love to hear the reactions from the usual suspects–e.g., the American Immigration Lawyers Association–to the A-1B program. Would it shock anyone if this was the first “more immigrants, please” proposal that they would reject outright? Maybe then we could have a real debate about the costs and benefits of the H-1B program.

This is an excellent tongue-in-cheek proposal, and it should be creating more talk.

New Bill Would Require Minimum Wage for H-1B Workers

From PoliZette:

Chmielenski said a bill sponsored by Sens. Ted Cruz and Jeff Sessions that would set a minimum wage of $110,000 for H-1B workers would remove the financial incentive for companies trying to cut labor costs with foreign workers. Currently, there is a four-tier wage system; a majority of H-1B workers are paid at the lowest “prevailing wage,” which is in the 17th percentile for the industry.

This is genius and would work. Currently the incentive for immigration is largely profit. Our side has focused too much on Marxists, but at least part of the problem is this profit incentive.

I’d like to believe this bill proposal is an improvement upon Ron Unz’s minimum wage idea, which was also very good even if we don’t ideally want a minimum wage. The primary goal is reducing mass immigration, legal and otherwise.

Source: NumbersUSA

Trump Produces Brilliant Foreign Policy Speech

The text can be found here at Trump’s website. The actual speech is slightly different, because as always Trump improvised. No more Obama teleprompter reliance if Trump is president!

The speech is brilliant and something supporters can rally around. Previously we had been forced to cobble together our favourite statements, but that made for a rough advocacy of the candidate. Because it was said Trump says many things. With this speech, we have a solid, professional outline of Trump’s worldview and strategy.

My favourite parts:

“We left Christians subject to intense persecution and even genocide.”

Who would expect a president to dare defend Christians like that? How unPC; Trump is essentially saying Christians also matter!

Trump also focuses criticism on Obama-Clinton, not Bush. That is significant and highlights how he will go after Clinton in the main election.

“Many Americans must wonder why our politicians seem more interested in defending the borders of foreign countries than their own.

Americans must know that we are putting the American people first again. On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy – the jobs, incomes and security of the American worker will always be my first priority.”

Wow! And Americans also matter. How unPC!

“Under a Trump Administration, no American citizen will ever again feel that their needs come second to the citizens of foreign countries.”

There’s plenty more to like in that speech. Trump has essentially gone Paleo/Populist and America-First in all the right ways.

On divisive social issues like abortion and “gay” marriage, Trump is for returning them to the states, not dividing over them. And I believe that to be the appropriate position for such a diverse America. On education, Trump again wants the states and localities to direct their futures.

In other news, TrumpASAP has predicted Trump will now win. This is a reversal from before. The South might be Trump territory, but the North is clearly the Trump homeland! We have an odd East-West divide in the GOP, with the West a little more interested in Cruz. If Trump wins Indiana, he’s in.

David Stockman likes Trump better than Hillary. Quoth Stockman:

“So is there any chance at all that Trump will make America Great Again by erecting trade barriers, a Trump Wall on the Rio Grande and an end to America’s imperial beneficence and meddling abroad?

Stayed tuned. There may be more to The Donald than meets the eye.”

And in the comments section there, a conservative supporter of Trump, named Protogonus, makes an appropriate assault on Stockman:

“Stockman is a CLOSET ANARCHIST who believes everyone ought to live quietly in his own bungalow like Bilbo Baggins and IGNORE THE WORLD TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE.”

That is hilarious. Stockman says government is a “necessary evil”, but business is also a “necessary evil”. Man is fallen. In the ideal, we want an appropriate government run by the best and most virtuous in the society. Libertarians call for less government; socialists call for more government; and conservatives call for appropriate government. That’s how it’s always been. Conservatives are just fine with “statism”. We simply want a society that functions well, based on tradition and the tried-and-true. And in Trump, we finally have a conservative hero to rally around, as with Pat Buchanan.

In closing:

Ann Coulter Battles Libertarian Students

This is excellent. I would make mistakes; Coulter makes none.

Coulter says the Libertarians are advocating most strongly for popular but less important positions, not important, controversial positions. She brings up hiring, correctly argues the conservative position on marriage, and she notes that with the loss of family ties one is left with but the individual and the state. And her unstated implication there is that other intermediate ties ideally separate man from the government of such a large polity.

On drugs, Coulter says if the welfare state were removed, then she wouldn’t care about drugs. But currently she has to pay for a pot head’s unemployment, etc. I’m not saying such is the ideal position on drugs, but the point is she’s focusing Libertarians on the important issues.

On marriage, Coulter highlights how government is indeed involved in marriage (child support, alimony). She could have also mentioned adoption. Though she doesn’t speak more, she could have readily added how two men or two women cannot, without a great deal of technology, produce children. Marriage is supposed to be for the children. And couples are supposed to produce children.

Regarding what’s possible with technology, I forget the details. Google brings this up. Will such a child be healthy and happy? Older parentage could also be questioned here.:

The complicated arrangement carried out by the Encino, California-based Center For Surrogate Parenting Inc – a favourite with Hollywood stars – means that little Zachary effectively has two fathers and two mothers.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1342346/Elton-Johns-baby-2-mothers-required-produce-heir.html#ixzz468f6c5Yq
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Ann Coulter has won acclaim for her recent book, Adios, America.

Trump Can Make Mexico Pay for the Wall

James Kirkpatrick explains at VDARE how Trump really could make Mexico pay for the wall. Trump could threaten to block or tax remittance payments, and if necessary, he could use tax money from them to pay for the wall. More likely Mexico would just pay for it directly.

Kirkpatrick notes the US has already banned remittance payments to Somalia, due to concerns the money could end up with extremists within Somalia.

And he notes that Israel has proposed a law to ban remittance payments by “infiltrators” (Israel’s term for illegal aliens), resulting in harsh punishment:

The bill proposes that the penalty for transferring money abroad by infiltrators will be six months imprisonment or a fine of 29,200 shekels. The penalty for a person who will assist an infiltrator in transferring money aboard will be one year`s imprisonment or a fine of 29,200 shekels, or twice the amount he intended to help the infiltrator take out of Israel.

Kirkpatrick adds:

Note also that Trump’s plan to block remittances isn’t just an end in itself. The Republican frontrunner’s strategy was partially crafted by the great patriot Kris Kobach, who accurately noted the purpose of the plan is to give America an advantage in future negotiations with Mexico [Kobach: I helped write Trump’s border wall plan, by Eliza Collins, Politico, April 11, 2016].

Additionally, Ann Coulter recently noted: “– Building a wall: Cruz was against it, and now is for it.” And how will Cruz pay for the wall?

Trump continues to come up with these brilliant solutions, but he gets too little credit for them. Cruz’s BTT is smart, but it’s a regressive tax. Even Hartman’s original BTT was progressive, included rebates. What else has Cruz proposed that is praiseworthy? He otherwise just follows Trump along.

Trump ASAP Website

A new Trump website is up: http://www.trumpasap.com/
It’s full of neat information. These are my favourites.:

Total Delegates Won – Projected*
Trump: 758 1181
Not-Trumps: 891 1291

* based on current polling and state by state rules

TED CRUZ ELIMINATION WATCH
Delegates Until Elimination: 82
Elimination Date: APRIL 26

* Once Trump wins 85 more bound delegates, Cruz will be eliminated from reaching 1237. Cruz needs 738 delegates of 823 remaining, to reach 1237.

It’s clear, however, that both Cruz and Kasich are aiming for a convention.

Trump has hired Paul Manafort to help him with delegates.

Manafort recently accused Cruz’s campaign of using “Gestapo tactics, the scorched-earth tactics” in Colorado, after an important loss there. I don’t know what he’s referring to, but I can agree that the Cruz team is despicable.